https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763653 Movement of beer from Rajasthan to depots in Bihar and Jharkhand was held not to be occasioned by a contract of sale. The arrangement under the liquor policy, master agreement and OFS mechanism created no binding obligation on the buyer to purchase any minimum quantity; it only allowed supply from stock against later indents or orders. Clause 10.1 treated supply against OFS as an agreement to sell, but the transfers remained stock transfers maintained for depot requirements. On that basis, the inter-State sales tax demand could not be sustained. en-us Fri, 06 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 24 Dec 2024 17:24:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763653 Movement of beer from Rajasthan to depots in Bihar and Jharkhand was held not to be occasioned by a contract of sale. The arrangement under the liquor policy, master agreement and OFS mechanism created no binding obligation on the buyer to purchase any minimum quantity; it only allowed supply from stock against later indents or orders. Clause 10.1 treated supply against OFS as an agreement to sell, but the transfers remained stock transfers maintained for depot requirements. On that basis, the inter-State sales tax demand could not be sustained. Case-Laws VAT / Sales Tax Fri, 06 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763653