TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1993 (4) TMI 280
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....No. 68, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1489 of 1986, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1065 of 1987 Lakshmi Chandra Goyal, B.B. Sahni and Sarva Mitter, Advocates, for the petitioners. D.P. Gupta, Solicitor-General (Ms. Indu Malhotra, Ms. Aysha Khatri, Ms. V. Mohana and Ms. Nisha Bagchi, Advocate, with him), for the respondents. -------------------------------------------------- The judgment of the Court was delivered by. B.P. JEEVAN REDDY, J.-A common question arises in this batch of writ petitions. We may take the facts in Writ Petition (C) No. 9835 of 1983, filed by M/s. K.B. Handicrafts Emporium and others, as representative of the facts in all the cases. The petitioners are firms engaged in the manufacture and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ence to the purchase value of the goods exported against form H. The petitioners did not choose to file an appeal but directly approached this Court by way of this writ petition on the ground that in view of the decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Murli Manohar (Civil Writ Petition No. 1227 of 1980) there was no point in their pursuing the remedies under the Act in that State. Appeals were preferred in this Court against the decision of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Murli Manohar (Civil Writ Petition No. 1227 of 1980) which have been disposed of by this Court on October 25, 1990 (reported in [1991] 80 STC 79; (1991) 1 SCC 377). This Court allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment of the High Court. When these writ ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of inter-State trade and commerce or were sold in the course of export within the meaning of section 5(1) of the Central Sales Tax Act. Murli Manohar [1991] 80 STC 79 (SC); (1991) 1 SCC 377 was decided in the light of the law declared in Goodyear [1990] 76 STC 71 (SC); (1990) 2 SCC 71. Later, however, a Bench of three Judges comprising S. Ranganathan, V. Ramaswami, JJ. and one of us (B.P. Jeevan Reddy, J.) held that Goodyear [1990] 76 STC 71 (SC); (1990) 2 SCC 71 does not lay down the correct law-vide Hotel Balaji v. State of Andhra Pradesh [1993] 88 STC 98 (SC); JT (1992) 6 SC 182. It was held in Hotel Balaji [1993] 88 STC 98 (SC); JT (1992) 6 SC 182 that having regard to the scheme of and the objective underlying section 9 it was compet....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ale falling under section 5(3) but exempted only a sale falling under section 5(1). Even so, the appeal was allowed on the following reasoning: "the sales made by the assessees can only fall within one of the three categories. They are either local sales or inter-State sales or export sales..........We are unable to conceive of a fourth category of sale which could be neither a local sale nor an inter-State sale nor an export sale". In other words, the decision says that there can be only three types of sales, namely, intra-State sales, inter-State sales and export sales and no other. A sale to an exporter would be either an intra- State sale or an inter-State sale; in either case, it does not attract the purchase tax (on raw material) unde....