https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154257 Sections 2(t) and 6 of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act were treated as within legislative competence, with the challenge based on the Coffee Act and Articles 265 and 300-A rejected because the levy was authorised by law and taxation was not barred by Article 300-A. Coffee delivered by growers to the Coffee Board under the Coffee Act was analysed as a statutory sale rather than compulsory acquisition, since the scheme retained price, transfer of title, and limited rejection rights, and therefore attracted purchase tax. The Board's direct export sales were not treated as sales in the course of export, so the constitutional exemption did not apply. The rate of purchase tax, together with additional tax and surcharge, was upheld. en-us Fri, 16 Aug 1985 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Aug 2013 18:14:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154257 Sections 2(t) and 6 of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act were treated as within legislative competence, with the challenge based on the Coffee Act and Articles 265 and 300-A rejected because the levy was authorised by law and taxation was not barred by Article 300-A. Coffee delivered by growers to the Coffee Board under the Coffee Act was analysed as a statutory sale rather than compulsory acquisition, since the scheme retained price, transfer of title, and limited rejection rights, and therefore attracted purchase tax. The Board's direct export sales were not treated as sales in the course of export, so the constitutional exemption did not apply. The rate of purchase tax, together with additional tax and surcharge, was upheld. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 16 Aug 1985 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=154257