TMI Blog1961 (10) TMI 46X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of selling or supplying goods in the State of Bombay. - Civil Appeal No. 495, 496 of 1960, - - - Dated:- 4-10-1961 - KAPUR J.L. AND HIDAYATULLAH M. JJ. H.R. Khanna and P.D. Menon, Advocates, for the respondent. J.M. Thakar, Advocate, and M/s. S.N. Andley, Rameshwar Nath and P.L. Vohra, Advocates of M/s. Rajinder Narain Co., for the appellants. -------------------------------------------------- The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KAPUR, J. -These appeals by special leave against the judgment and order of the Bombay High Court have been brought by the assessee and relate to sales tax assessments. The respondent is the State of Bombay, now the State of Maharashtra. The appellant-the assessee is a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he appellant had a clearing agent at Bombay and its case was that the clearing agent, after clearing the goods imported, delivered them to the customers of the appellant in the State of Bombay including the city of Bombay or despatched them to other persons residing outside the State of Bombay according to the instructions of the appellant. The Board of Revenue of the State of Madhya Pradesh had held that in that State the appellant was not liable to sales tax on goods which were delivered directly to the customers in Bombay as they were sales in Bombay and that those sales had to be excluded from the turnover of the appellant in Madhya Pradesh. The respondent's case therefore was that those sales had been held to be not taxable in the Stat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... agent for the purpose of clearing the goods, the appellant did not fall within the definition of the word "dealer" and the transactions did not fall within the word "sale". The High Court on the reference made to it by the Tribunal treated the finding of the Sales Tax Authorities above referred to as one of fact and taking that finding it held that the appellant was a dealer within section 2(c) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1946. In this Court a great deal of argument was addressed to us on the question whether the appellant was carrying on business of selling or supplying goods within the State of Bombay and was therefore within section 2(c) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1946. The appellant relied upon certain English and Indian cases w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
