Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the movement of goods from the manufacturing unit to the branches was a stock transfer exempt under section 6A of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, or an inter-State sale taxable under section 3(a) of that Act.
Analysis: The goods were manufactured against specific customer orders communicated through the branches, with invoices raised on the customers and dispatches made pursuant to the pre-existing work orders. The branches functioned only as conduits between the manufacturer and the customers, and the movement of goods was occasioned by the contract of sale. In such a situation, the fact that the goods passed through branches did not convert the transaction into a mere stock transfer.
Conclusion: The movement of goods was held to be an inter-State sale and not a stock transfer; exemption under section 6A was unavailable.
Final Conclusion: The writ challenge to the revisional assessment failed, and the assessment treating the turnover as inter-State sales was sustained.
Ratio Decidendi: Where goods are dispatched pursuant to specific customer orders and the branch office acts only as a conduit, the movement of goods from one State to another is occasioned by the contract of sale and is taxable as an inter-State sale, not as a mere stock transfer.