https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156261 Where subsequent sales were made during movement of goods and did not fall within section 6(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, the proviso to section 9(1) governed territorial jurisdiction for levy and collection. As the registered dealer had obtained the prescribed C forms in Maharashtra in connection with the relevant purchases, Gujarat had no authority to assess the disputed turnover under that proviso. The tax levy on the subsequent sales was therefore without jurisdiction, and the penalty founded on that levy was equally unsustainable. en-us Thu, 28 Feb 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 17 Sep 2013 14:05:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156261 Where subsequent sales were made during movement of goods and did not fall within section 6(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, the proviso to section 9(1) governed territorial jurisdiction for levy and collection. As the registered dealer had obtained the prescribed C forms in Maharashtra in connection with the relevant purchases, Gujarat had no authority to assess the disputed turnover under that proviso. The tax levy on the subsequent sales was therefore without jurisdiction, and the penalty founded on that levy was equally unsustainable. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 28 Feb 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156261