1993 (1) TMI 275

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lli and in Pondicherry. The assessee-firm is a registered dealer both in Kerala and in Tamil Nadu. The assessee-firm claimed exemption for a turnover of Rs. 52,16,040 for the year 1984-85. Similarly, it claimed exemption for a turnover of Rs. 41,45,710 for the year 1985-86. Exemption was claimed stating that the turnover represents goods transferred to its depots in Tamil Nadu and Pondicherry. The assessing authority rejected the said plea of branch transfer. The said turnovers were assessed at 10 per cent under the Central Sales Tax Act treating them as inter-State sales. The appeals filed by the assessee-firm before the first appellate authority did not meet with success. The above turnovers were treated as inter-State sales. In second ap....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... (1) The despatches were made to the places of actual purchasers in Tamil Nadu and Pondicherry and not to the sales depots; (2) Every stock transfer statement was followed by an invoice for local sale in the State to which the goods were despatched. The invoices were raised with the very same date for the very same value and of the same quantity as in the stock transfer invoice; (3) The freight charged in the way bills from the head office at Eramalloor was the actual freight up to the purchaser's place and not to the assessee's sales depot; (4) The assessee's goods in a lorry was intercepted in the check-post near Coimbatore and the three C.C. notes accompanying the goods in the vehicle disclosed that the goods were meant for three differe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... was occasioned by the order placed by the buyer or is an incident of the contract. It was further held that the fact that in certain cases the goods were first sent to the depot at Coimbatore, is immaterial. The branch office merely acted as a conduit. 6.. In the light of the various aspects stressed by the assessing authority and affirmed by the first appellate authority and the Appellate Tribunal, we have no doubt in our mind that the movement of the goods from Kerala State to the various places in Tamil Nadu and Pondicherry was occasioned by the order placed by the buyer or as an incident or covenant in the contract or at least as a result of the understanding between the parties to that effect. The Appellate Tribunal, as the final f....