Just a moment...
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 respondent's endorsements of delivery orders, followed by delivery of gunny bags to the ultimate holders, constituted sales of goods liable to tax under the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1939.
Analysis: The turnover became taxable if the transaction, viewed in substance, resulted in transfer of property in goods by the respondent in the course of business. The goods were unascertained at the time of the initial contract, but they existed and were capable of appropriation when the delivery orders were issued. By endorsing the delivery orders, the respondent enabled the ultimate holder to obtain delivery from the mills, and the legal effect was not a mere transfer of a piece of paper. The endorsement and the ensuing delivery completed a sale in the chain of transactions, and the title acquired on delivery fed the prior defective title of the intermediate transfers. The bar under section 18A and the constitutional objections were not decided because the appeal was disposed of on the merits.
Conclusion: The transactions amounted to sales of goods by the respondent and were chargeable to tax under section 3 of the Act; the liability was upheld in favour of the Revenue.
Ratio Decidendi: Where delivery orders representing goods are endorsed in the course of business and the ultimate endorsee obtains delivery of the goods, the transaction is a sale of goods if it results in transfer of property in the goods, even though the intermediate holder did not personally take delivery.