https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151162 For applying Article 286(1)(a) of the Constitution, the decisive question was whether the contractual sale was completed outside Bombay or within the State. The contract required only preliminary inspection in Bombay, but the despatch instructions, the contractor's continuing responsibility until receipt and acceptance at Ajmer, and the consignee's right of final rejection showed that movement to Ajmer was part of the bargain. On that basis, the actual delivery under the contract was at Ajmer, not at the Bombay inspection point, so the sales were outside Bombay and not liable to Bombay sales tax. en-us Mon, 17 Feb 1975 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 31 May 2013 17:26:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151162 For applying Article 286(1)(a) of the Constitution, the decisive question was whether the contractual sale was completed outside Bombay or within the State. The contract required only preliminary inspection in Bombay, but the despatch instructions, the contractor's continuing responsibility until receipt and acceptance at Ajmer, and the consignee's right of final rejection showed that movement to Ajmer was part of the bargain. On that basis, the actual delivery under the contract was at Ajmer, not at the Bombay inspection point, so the sales were outside Bombay and not liable to Bombay sales tax. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Mon, 17 Feb 1975 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151162