https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157761 Movement of goods from one State to another pursuant to the sale transaction remained the ative test for an inter-State sale, and the Tribunal's finding was sustained because the sale bills and endorsements did not displace the conclusion that the goods crossed State borders as part of the sale. Central sales tax could not be denied by reliance on a 1966 notification that had already been rescinded with retrospective effect, because a later judicial declaration upholding its validity did not revive a notification that had ceased to operate. The reference was answered in favour of the revenue. en-us Wed, 17 May 1995 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 10 Oct 2013 14:49:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157761 Movement of goods from one State to another pursuant to the sale transaction remained the ative test for an inter-State sale, and the Tribunal's finding was sustained because the sale bills and endorsements did not displace the conclusion that the goods crossed State borders as part of the sale. Central sales tax could not be denied by reliance on a 1966 notification that had already been rescinded with retrospective effect, because a later judicial declaration upholding its validity did not revive a notification that had ceased to operate. The reference was answered in favour of the revenue. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 17 May 1995 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=157761