https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127704 Statutory classification between licensed and unlicensed dealers under the sales tax scheme was treated as a valid, reasonable distinction and the Article 14 challenge failed. Purchases made for export were not, by that fact alone, protected as transactions in the course of export under Article 286(1)(b), so export immunity was denied. Liability for sales to agents of non-residents was also upheld because the governing rule fastened assessment on the last dealer not exempt from tax, and the petitioner remained the assessable dealer on the admitted facts. The assessment notices and proposed levy were therefore sustained. en-us Fri, 04 Oct 1957 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 14 Mar 2013 15:55:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127704 Statutory classification between licensed and unlicensed dealers under the sales tax scheme was treated as a valid, reasonable distinction and the Article 14 challenge failed. Purchases made for export were not, by that fact alone, protected as transactions in the course of export under Article 286(1)(b), so export immunity was denied. Liability for sales to agents of non-residents was also upheld because the governing rule fastened assessment on the last dealer not exempt from tax, and the petitioner remained the assessable dealer on the admitted facts. The assessment notices and proposed levy were therefore sustained. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 04 Oct 1957 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127704