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 inter-State sales taxable under the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 could claim exemption or the benefit of a single-point levy available under the Mysore Sales Tax Act, 1957 when tax was to be calculated at the same rates and in the same manner as if the sale had taken place inside the appropriate State.
Analysis: Section 6 created the charge on all inter-State sales, while section 8(2) dealt only with the rate and manner of calculation of tax. The expression "in the same manner" in section 8(2), read with section 9(1) and 9(2), did not incorporate the whole substantive State sales tax law so as to import exemptions or the point of levy fixed by the State Act. The machinery provisions of the State law were attracted only for assessment, collection and enforcement, and the Central Act did not yield to the State law in a way that would cut down the charging provision or convert inter-State sales into intra-State sales for exemption purposes.
Conclusion: The dealer was not entitled to exclude inter-State sales from tax on the ground that, under the State Act, the goods were taxable only at the first or earliest sale. The appeal failed.
Ratio Decidendi: The words "in the same manner" in the Central Sales Tax Act relate to the method of calculation and the assessment machinery, not to the substantive exemptions or point-of-tax rules under the State sales tax law.