Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.42 seconds)
Documents citing A.M. Mohammed Ishok vs The State Of Madras, Represented By The ... on 2 March, 1955

S.K. Roy vs Addl. Member, Board Of Revenue on 25 April, 1966

54. Dr. Pal, however, contends that there was a delivery to the B. N. Ry., the purchaser, as soon as the goods were loaded in Railway wagons at the colliery sheds of the Assessee at Bhowrah in Bihar, inasmuch as delivery to a common carrier is delivery to the buyer. In support of this contention. Dr. Pal relies on decisions of the Madras and Andhra High Courts, such as Md. Ishok v. State of Madras, and Associated Cement Co. v. State of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1962 Andh-Pra 522, which, again, are founded on the provision in Section 39(1) of the Sale of Goods Act, 1930. We are, however, unable to agree with these decisions for a number of reasons and it would suffice to indicate these reasons in brief:
Calcutta High Court Cites 42 - Cited by 15 - Full Document

Berar Oil Industries And Anr. vs Deputy Commissioner Of Commercial ... on 7 October, 1958

14. It was argued by the counsel for the petitioner that even so these transactions are governed by the Explanation to Article 286 of the Constitution for the reason that transport of goods is an integral part of the sale. We do not think we can give any weight to this argument. The Explanation is concerned only with the delivery to the buyer and not with the transport of the goods by his agent across the border and handing them over to his principal in another State. It is only in cases where the delivery is made by the seller himself to the buyer in another State that the Explanation is attracted and the right to levy tax thereon is vested in the State where delivery is effected. See Mohammed Ishok v. State of Madras (1955 6 S.T.C. 230 at 236).
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 15 - Cited by 6 - Full Document

India Coffee And Tea Distributing Co. ... vs State Of Madras on 4 April, 1958

The decision reported in Mohammad Ishok v. State of Madras (1955) 2 M.L.J. 319 was next relied on. That case was concerned with the interpretation of Article 286 of the Constitution under which a sale shall be deemed to have taken place in the State in which the goods were actually delivered as a result of such sale for purposes of consumption in that State notwithstanding the general law relating to the passing of property in the goods. There was a contract for the sale of oil which was to be filled in drums supplied by the foreign buyer. The goods were delivered to the carrier within the State of Madras with railway receipts in the name of the buyers as consignees. Though ultimately the goods were sent to Cochin State the passing of the property in the goods was complete within the State of Madras. The learned Judges held that actual delivery of the goods to the buyer was within the State of Madras and the consumption in the Cochin State cannot imply a second delivery there and that therefore the sales were liable to tax. In this case the goods were actually delivered within the State of Madras and we are not able to appreciate how it can advance the case of the respondent. It has been said that a c.i.f. contract is an agreement for the sale of goods to be performed by the delivery of documents and not a mere sale of documents.
Madras High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

India Coffee And Tea Distributing ... vs The State Of Madras By Collector Of ... on 4 April, 1958

The decision reported in Mohammad Ishak v. State of Madras , was next relied on. That case was concerned with the interpretation of Article 286 of the Constitution under which a sale shall be deemed to have taken place in the State in which the goods were actually delivered as a result of such sale for purposes of consumption in that State notwithstanding the general law relating to the passing of property in the goods. There was a contract for the sale of oil which was to be filled in drums supplied by the foreign buyer. The goods were delivered to the carrier within the State of Madras with railway receipts in the name of the buyers as consignees. Though ultimately the goods were sent to Cochin State the passing of the property in the goods was complete within the State of Madras. The learned Judges held that actual delivery of the goods to the buyer was within the State of Madras and the consumption in the Cochin State cannot imply a second delivery there and that therefore the sales were liable to tax. In this case the goods were actually delivered within the State of Madras and we are not able to appreciate how it can advance the case of the respondent. It has been said that a C.I.F. contract is an agreement for the sale of goods to be performed by the delivery of documents and not a mere sale of documents.
Madras High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Nokia India Private Limited vs Deputy Commissioner (Ct) on 29 April, 2014

38. The learned Senior counsel for the petitioner further relied on the decision of this Court in the case of (M/s. M.M. Engineering (P) Ltd., vs. Commercial Tax Officer, Coimbatore) reported in (2013) 62 VST 306 (Madras) wherein the assessee sought time for filing objections to the revision of assessment under Section 27 and inspite of extension of time, the assessee did not file objections. However, this Court, in the interest of justice, directed the respondents therein to give one more opportunity to the petitioner to putforth his objections and thereafter to pass orders after affording an opportunity of personal hearing to the assessee
Madras High Court Cites 35 - Cited by 0 - B Rajendran - Full Document

Capco Ltd. vs The Sales Tax Officer And Anr. on 30 April, 1959

7. It is convenient first to consider the position with regard to sales falling within group II. There is no doubt that the property in the goods passed to the buyer upon the goods being delivered to the railway authorities; and this is not in dispute. The petitioner's argument is that the goods having been so delivered to the buyer outside Uttar Pradesh there could be no actual delivery within the Uttar Pradesh and the Explanation has no application; and he relies on Mohammed Ishok v. State of Madras, 1955-6 STC 230 : ((S) AIR 1955 Mad 502).
Allahabad High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 4 - R Dayal - Full Document

Ramakrishna Rice Working Company, ... vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 17 January, 1962

8. This is the principle enunciated in Sri Ramakrishna Commercial Society v. State of Andhra, and Mahomed Ishok v. State of Madras . The ruling of this Court in T. R. C. No. 98 of 1957 called in aid by the appellant has no analogy here. In that case, the assessee put the goods on boat or rail, as the case may be, incurred incidental expenses, obtained bills of lading or railway receipts, prepared the bills in the names of the foreign buyers and handed over the bills and the bills of lading or railway receipts to the forwarding agents. The forwarding agents raised money in the bank on hundies on the basis of the bills of lading or railway receipts, as the case may be, and paid the money to the assessees. On these facts, it was found by a Bench of this Court, to which one of us was a party, that the transactions partook inter-State character and consequently they fell within the protection afforded by Article 286 of the Constitution. It is seen from the facts stated therein that the shipping agents acted as agents of the seller and not of the buyer. The mere fact that the forwarding agents raised monies on the strength of the shipping bills did not make any difference in regard to the character of interstate sales. That is not the situation here. In this case, as already stated, the Commission agents purchased on behalf of their principals residing in other States and they are not the agents of the sellers. Therefore, the rule stated in this case has no application here.
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 3 - Cited by 2 - Full Document
1