https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99539 Taxing statutes may classify goods differently if there is a real and substantial distinction between the classes taxed, and the levy was upheld because Virginia tobacco and country tobacco differed in nature, process, market, price and use, so the classification did not offend Article 14. Article 286(1)(b) protects only the sale that directly occasions export, and prior purchases made for export are merely preparatory, so the levy was not unconstitutional as a tax on sales in the course of export. The constitutional challenges therefore failed, and the tax was sustained. en-us Fri, 06 Apr 1962 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 15 Jan 2014 15:56:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99539 Taxing statutes may classify goods differently if there is a real and substantial distinction between the classes taxed, and the levy was upheld because Virginia tobacco and country tobacco differed in nature, process, market, price and use, so the classification did not offend Article 14. Article 286(1)(b) protects only the sale that directly occasions export, and prior purchases made for export are merely preparatory, so the levy was not unconstitutional as a tax on sales in the course of export. The constitutional challenges therefore failed, and the tax was sustained. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 06 Apr 1962 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=99539