A.M. Mohammed Ishok vs The State Of Madras, Represented By The ... on 2 March, 1955
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.