TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1993 (8) TMI 286
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....considered the facts as stated in the orders of the authorities below. The dealer-respondent has a factory located at Modinagar, U.P., in which it manufactures nylon and polyester yarn of different kinds. For the year under consideration, i.e., 1973-74 it declared a turnover of Rs. 9,81,707 as inter-State sales liable to Central sales tax. The dispute in the present revision relates to goods worth Rs. 20,68,75,502 which, as claimed by the dealer, were despatched by it to its various branches situate outside U.P. and this transfer of stock was not sale and hence was not liable to sales tax. This contention was not accepted by the assessing officer, who treated the same as inter-State sales and levied the Central sales tax accordingly. The....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....any had its registered office at Calcutta and branches at Bombay, Delhi, Madras and Lucknow. It had its main factory at Madras where it manufactured certain goods. A Bombay buyer contacted the Bombay branch of the appellant-company for purchase of certain goods. The Bombay branch wrote to the Madras factory and ultimately the Madras factory despatched the goods to Bombay. The goods were delivered to the Bombay buyer through clearing agents. The appellant's contention was that it was not an inter-State sale and the sale took place only at Bombay. This contention was not accepted. It was held that the contract of sale was between the appellant and the Bombay buyer. The inter-State movement of goods from Madras to Bombay was the result of t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... even assuming that any firm orders had been received by the appellant they could not be regarded as anything but mere offers. On behalf of the respondent, reliance was also placed on Kelvinator of India Ltd. v. State of Haryana [1973] 32 STC 629. The honourable Supreme Court held that a sale in the course of inter-State trade has three essentials: (i) there must be a sale, (ii) the goods must actually be moved from one State to another, and (iii) the sale and movement of the goods must be part of the same transaction. In that case the dealer had its factory at Faridabad in Haryana. It had its registered office at Delhi. The dealer brought the goods manufactured at Faridabad to Delhi. During the transport of the goods the octroi was paid....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....from the aforesaid judgments rendered by the honourable Supreme Court, it is clear that in order that an inter-State sale comes into being within the meaning of the Central Sales Tax Act, the goods must actually move from one State to another in pursuance of a contract of sale and the sale and movement of the goods must be part of the same transaction. It is in this light that it is to be seen whether on the facts of the present case the Tribunal was right in holding that the despatch of goods by the dealer-respondent to its branches outside U.P. was not in pursuance of any contract of sale and, therefore, such despatches did not result in any inter-State sale. The dealer has admittedly maintained sales depots outside U.P. and such depot....