TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1952 (10) TMI 28
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....structed by P.A. Mehta, Agent, for the State of Madras. for the intherveners. M.C. Setalvad, Attorney-General for India and C.K. Daphtary, Solicitor-General for India (G.N. Joshi, Advocate, with them), instucted by P.A. Mehta, Agent, for the Union of Indian. for the interveners. Pitambar Misra, Advocate-General of Orissa (Jindra Lal, Advocate, with him), instructed by P.A. Mehta, Agent, for the State of Mysore. for the interveners. A.R. Somnath Iyer, Advocate-General of Mysore (R. Ganpathy Iyer, Advocate, with him), instucted by P.A. Mehta, Agent, for the State of Mysore. for the interveners. K.L. Asthana, Advocate-General of Uttar Pradesh (Gopalji Mehrotra and K.B. Asthana, Advocates, with him), instructed by C.P. Lal, Agent, for the State of Uttar Pradesh. V. Raja Ram Iyer, Advocates-General of Hyderabad (B.N. Sastri, Advocate, with him), instructed by P.A. Mehta, Agent,for the State of Hyderabad. for the interveners. T.N. Subramania Iyer, Advocate-General of Travancore-Cochin (T.R. Balakrishna Iyer and M.R. Krishna Pillai, Advocates, with him), instucted by P.A. Mehta, Agent, for the appellants (in all the appeals). for the appellants. The Judgment of the Co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at the material facts relating to the course of dealings in cashew nuts, which were more complex in character, had not been clearly ascertained and consequently the relative appeals were remitted to the High Court for findings on certain points agreed upon by the parties. These three appeals were, however, fully heard as they were found to admit of disposal on the materials on record. Article 286(1), on which the respondents found their claim to exemption, runs thus: "No law of a State shall impose, or authorise the imposition of, a tax on the sale or purchase of goods where such sale or purchase takes place- (a) outside the State; or (b) in the course of the import of the goods into, or export of the goods out of, the territory of India. Explanation.-For the purposes of sub-clause (a), a sale or purchase shall be deemed to have taken place in the State in which the goods have actually been delivered as a direct result of such sale or purchase for the purpose of consumption in that State, notwithstanding the fact that under the general law relating to sale of goods the property in the goods has by reason of such sale or purchase passed in another State." On the scope....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... no question of exemption could therefore arise. He said, however, that no such case had actually arisen. (2) In addition to the sales and purchases of the kind described above, the exemption covers the last purchase by the exporter and the first sale by the importer, if any, so directly and proximately connected with the export sale or import purchase as to form part of the same transaction. This view was sponsored by the Attorney-General who was also inclined to think, as advised at the moment, that sales or purchases made while the goods were on the high seas, would be exempt, but he would prefer not to go into the wider question, because, whatever view was taken, sales such as those involved in the present cases must, in any event, be exempt. (3) The exemption covers only those sales and purchases under which the property in the goods concerned is transferred from the seller to the buyer during the course of the transit, that is, after the goods begin to move and before they reach their foreign destination. This view is supported by the State of Bombay and certain other States. (4) The view which found favour with the learned Judges of the High Court in the passage alr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....with Entry No. 83 of List I of the Seventh Schedule, vests legislative power with respect to "duties of customs including export duties" exclusively in Parliament, and that would be sufficient to preclude State taxation of such transactions. We see no force in this suggestion. It might well be argued, in the absence of a provision like clause (b) prohibiting in terms the levy of tax on the sale or purchase of goods where such sales and purchases are effected through the machinery of export and import, that both the powers of taxation, though exclusively vested in the Union and the States respectively, could be exercised in respect of the same sale by export or purchase by import, the sales tax and the export duty being regarded as essentially of a different character. A similar argument induced the Federal Court to hold in Province of Madras v. Boddu Paidanna and Sons(1), that both central excise duty and provincial sales tax could be validly imposed on the first sale of groundnut oil and cake by the (1) [1942] F.C.R. 90; 1 S.T.C. 104. manufacturer or producer as "the two taxes are economically two separate and distinct imposts". Lest similar reasoning should lead to the imposition....