9911796707
TMI Blog1983 (8) TMI 238X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... chased batteries from Lucas Indian Service Ltd., Calcutta, which it later sold the same in entirety to Lucas Indian Service Limited, Madras, before the goods were delivered by the carrier after transporting the goods from Calcutta to Madras. In respect of this turnover, the assessee claimed exemption from tax under section 6(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act. As regards this claim the assessing authority held that the assessee and Lucas Indian Service Limited, Calcutta, are sister concerns situate in adjacent premises, and therefore, there in no reason as to why the assessee went through the formality of purchasing the goods from Calcutta and selling the same to Lucas Indian Service Limited, Madras. He also took the view that since the carrier had agreed to effect door delivery, there was no practical significance in endorsing the lorry way bill, and therefore, it should not be treated as an inter-State sale but an intra-State sale liable to be taxed under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act. On appeal, the Appellate Assistant Commissioner agreed with the view of the assessing authority. When the matter reached the Tribunal, it was contended on behalf of the assessee that as the goo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fact, the goods were actually delivered to the buyer on 9th January, 1975, as seen from the invoice issued by the carrier for freight charges, which contains an endorsement of the delivery of the goods to the buyer. This delivery was in pursuance of the sale bill admittedly issued by the assessee on 7th January, 1975, with a covering letter to the carrier that the goods are to be delivered to the buyer. In this case the revenue has not challenged the genuineness of the assessee's sale bill issued to the purchaser on 7th January, 1975. It is also not disputed that on the basis of the said bill dated 7th January, 1975, the buyer has taken delivery of the goods from the public carrier on 9th January, 1975. Inter-State movement from Calcutta to Madras stood terminated only on the delivery of the goods and long before the termination of the inter-State movement, the goods had been sold by the assessee to the buyer on 7th January, 1975. Section 3 of the Central Sales Tax Act says that a sale or purchase of goods shall be deemed to take place in the course of inter-State trade or commerce if the sale or purchase occasions the movement of goods from one State to another or is effected by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nor will the sale in which the property in the goods passes after the movement from one State to another has ceased to be covered by the clause. Accordingly a sale effected by transfer of documents of title after the commencement of movement and before its conclusion as defined by the two termini set out in explanation (1) and no other sale will be regarded as an inter-State sale under section 3(b)." We cannot, therefore, agree with the view taken by the Tribunal in this case. We are of the view that the turnover of Rs. 1,34,029.98 is liable to be exempted under section 6(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, as claimed by the assessee. Coming to the second item of turnover which represents the import transactions of goods by post parcel from England, the facts as found by the Tribunal are these: The assessee purchased certain goods from Lucas Service Overseas Ltd., England, in several consignments and all these consignments were received by post parcel. After the case arrived in Madras General Post Office, the Assistant Collector of Customs, Postal Appraising Department, has sent an intimation for production of the foreign seller's invoice, import licence, etc. Simultaneousl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing to authorise, either by endorsement or by delivery, the possessor of the document to transfer or receive goods thereby represented. Though the said definition is an inclusive one and cannot, therefore, be said to be exhaustive, we are not in a position to agree with the learned counsel for the assessee that an intimation of receipt of post parcel by the post office will come within the definition of "document of title to goods". Such an intimation received from the post office by itself cannot enable the assessee to transfer or receive the goods referred to therein. The intimation will not amount to a document of title. It is no doubt true, in this case the buyer took delivery of the goods on the basis of the endorsement made in the intimation sent by the post office. But that is only as an agent of the assessee and not as owner of the goods. Even assuming that there was an agreement of sale of the goods received in the post parcel to the buyer, Lucas Indian Service Ltd., that will not by itself pass title to the goods, nor can it enable the buyer to take delivery of the goods from the post office on their arrival. Though the assessee contended that the import licence itself w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee having expired by then. Though the assessee has in fact transferred the bill of lading in favour of the buyer, that transfer is of no avail and it will not confer any title to the goods on the buyer as the assessee who transferred the bill of lading had no subsisting authority to import and to pass title to the buyer by transferring the bill of lading. Though the assessee got extension of the period of licence subsequently, admittedly he had no valid licence to import on 18th October, 1974, when the bill of lading is said to have been transferred by the assessee to the buyer. The learned counsel for the assessee submits that the subsequent extension of the period of the import licence should relate back to the date of expiry of the period of licence, and therefore, the assessee should be presumed to have the power to transfer the bill of lading on 18th October, 1974. We are not impressed by this argument. Though the subsequent extension of the period of the licence will enable the assessee to clear the goods on the basis of the subsequent order extending the period of licence, the subsequent order extending the period of the licence cannot be taken to confer title to the goods ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
