https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100749 Purchase tax under sections 3A and 5A of the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1959 was upheld because a tax infringes article 301 only when it directly and immediately impedes trade; the levy on notified goods was not shown to have that effect, so Presidential sanction under article 304(b) was not required. The State provisions were also found consistent with section 15 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, as the purchase tax on declared goods operated at the first point and within the statutory ceiling. However, rule 31B and the December 26, 1967 notification were held unauthorised because they extended transport control to inter-State movement and went beyond the State's power. en-us Fri, 18 Sep 1970 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 18 Sep 2013 11:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100749 Purchase tax under sections 3A and 5A of the Bihar Sales Tax Act, 1959 was upheld because a tax infringes article 301 only when it directly and immediately impedes trade; the levy on notified goods was not shown to have that effect, so Presidential sanction under article 304(b) was not required. The State provisions were also found consistent with section 15 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, as the purchase tax on declared goods operated at the first point and within the statutory ceiling. However, rule 31B and the December 26, 1967 notification were held unauthorised because they extended transport control to inter-State movement and went beyond the State's power. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 18 Sep 1970 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=100749