2009 (10) TMI 871

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....heard Shri Michael Zothankhuma, learned counsel for the petitioner and also heard Mr. N. Sailo, learned Additional Advocate-General, Mizoram. Also perused the rival pleadings and documents filed with the writ petition and State affidavit. The brief facts giving rise to the issuance of the show-cause notice by the Superintendent of Taxes, Aizawl are that respondent No. 2 invited tenders for supply of swaged steel tubular poles on July 3, 2007. In pursuance of the NIT, the writ petitioner submitted its tender which was accepted by the aforesaid respondent and supply order was placed at the writ petitioner's head office at Guwahati under letter No. P-37020/l/07CE(PM)/6 dated November 20, 2007. Two more supply orders for the same item were....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....egistered office of the petitioner at Guwahati (Assam) and since the goods were transported from its factory at Barapani (Meghalaya) and delivered at Aizawl in the State of Mizoram the transaction is covered under section 3(a) of the Central Sales Tax Act. In support of this submission, the learned counsel has relied upon the judgment of the honourable Supreme Court rendered in Union of India v. K.G. Khosla and Co. Ltd. reported in [1979] 43 STC 457; [1979] 2 SCC 242 and the judgment of State of Orissa v. K.B. Saha and Sons Industries Pvt. Ltd. reported in [2007] 7 VST 214 (SC); [2007] 9 SCC 97. Per contra, the learned Additional Advocate-General, Mizoram for the respondents submitted that the goods are taken delivery by the respondents on....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....bad in the State of Haryana. In such a situation, a question was raised whether the State of Haryana or Union Territory of Delhi was competent to levy tax. The honourable Supreme Court held that if there is movement of goods from one State to another it would mean inter-State sale or purchase and section 3(a) of the CST Act would be applicable and as such the State of Haryana was competent to levy tax. The aforesaid authority has been followed in the case of K.B. Saha and Sons Industries Pvt. Ltd. [2007] 7 VST 214 (SC); [2007] 9 SCC 97 and many other judgments. In the case before me while inviting tender, the intending non-tribal tenderers were not asked to furnish registration certificate under the MVAT Act, 2005 or furnish clearance cer....