https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127944 A purchase made after imported cotton had crossed the customs frontier was not a purchase in the course of import and therefore did not attract Article 286(1)(b) protection. The movement of cotton from Cochin to Tirupur constituted inter-State commerce, but State taxation was upheld because delivery to the buyer occurred at Tirupur and the goods were consumed within the State, satisfying the constitutional conditions then applicable. Rule 4-A(iv) of the Turnover and Assessment Rules was held consistent with section 5(ii) of the Sales Tax Act because it preserved a single, ascertainable point of levy on the spinning mill's purchase of cotton. en-us Mon, 28 Sep 1959 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 25 Mar 2013 10:49:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127944 A purchase made after imported cotton had crossed the customs frontier was not a purchase in the course of import and therefore did not attract Article 286(1)(b) protection. The movement of cotton from Cochin to Tirupur constituted inter-State commerce, but State taxation was upheld because delivery to the buyer occurred at Tirupur and the goods were consumed within the State, satisfying the constitutional conditions then applicable. Rule 4-A(iv) of the Turnover and Assessment Rules was held consistent with section 5(ii) of the Sales Tax Act because it preserved a single, ascertainable point of levy on the spinning mill's purchase of cotton. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 28 Sep 1959 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=127944