1986 (12) TMI 340

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....1954 as amended by the Rajasthan Sales Tax (Amendment) Act, 1984. A question of law was referred to this Court by the Tribunal in accordance with the direction given in the order dated October 21, 1976 of this Court in Reference No. 232 of 1975. The question of law referred accordingly for the decision of this Court is the following: "Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the sal....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....uring the assessment year 1968-69 for a sum of Rs. 6,00,000 to M/s. Swan Mills Ltd. of Bombay. After purchase of these generating sets at Jaipur the buyer removed the same at its own expense to Bombay. Question arose of the exigibility of sales tax on this transaction. One of the contentions of the assessee which alone is now relevant was that it amounted to an inter-State sale which was required ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er-State movement of the goods was the result of a covenant, express or implied, in the contract or even an incident of the contract. Unless the inter-State movement is shown to be connected with the contract in such a manner, the mere fact that the buyer was from outside the State and he moved the goods to a place outside the State after completion of the sale transaction without any involvement ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....an end. There is no material to show that under the contract the seller was required to do anything or to be associated with anything connected even with the removal of the goods thereafter from Jaipur. The mere knowledge that the goods had to be removed by the buyer from Jaipur to Bombay cannot be treated as incident of the contract with the assessee. In my opinion, the decisions of the Supreme C....