1972 (6) TMI 59

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....llers and actually imported the goods, and thereafter delivered the same to the assessee. On these facts, the question that was canvassed before the assessing authority was that the purchase turnover of cotton imported through Patel and Co. should be exempted as import purchases. The assessing authority did not accept this contention. But the same contention was accepted by the appellate authority, who held that the turnover in cotton purchased by the assessee through Patel and Co. is liable to be exempted under section 5(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, as sales in the course of import. This view of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner has been set aside by the Board of Revenue in exercise of its suo motu revision. Before the B....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ds reached the customs frontier is accepted, its finding on the first question as to whether the purchases made from Patel and Co. by the assessee is not a purchase in the course of import cannot be correct in view of the decision of the Supreme Court in Khosla and Co. (P.) Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes[1966] 17 S.T.C. 473 (S.C.)., and of this court in Larsen and Toubro Ltd. v. Joint Commercial Tax Officer[1967] 20 S.T.C. 150. The view taken by this court in Rajeswari Mills Ltd. v. The State of Madras[1964] 15 S.T.C. 1.that the movement of the goods should be in pursuance of or incidental to the contract entered into by the assessee, and that there should be a privity between the foreign seller and the assessee so as to br....