Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (1.02 seconds)
The State Of Tamil Nadu vs Cauvery Spinning And Weaving Mills ... on 31 July, 1973 cites

S. Erattamuthu Nadar And Ors. vs Joint Commercial Tax Officer on 9 December, 1970

5. But we find that the facts in this case are not on all fours with the facts in the said case. In that case, the federation had entered into contracts with the foreign importer for the supply of dried chillies and thereafter it entered into contracts with various local buyers for the purpose of export. Further, the contract between the local dealer and the federation provided specifically that the goods should be exported by the local dealers for and on behalf of the federation. It is in view of these facts the court took the view that the export of the goods by the local dealer was not in pursuance of any contract which he has entered into with the foreign buyer but that the export operations were undertaken by the local dealer in pursuance of a term of the contract between himself and the federation and not in pursuance of any contract which it had entered into with the foreign importer. One other important circumstance pointed out in that case was that the full payment for the goods had been effected before the goods were put on board, i. e., long before the goods reached the export stream, and by such payment the property in the goods had passed from the local dealer to the federation. But, in this case, we find that the contract which the assessee had entered into with the local buyer Keshavalal Talakchand provided that the goods are to be packed specially for export, that the same were to be put on board at Madras or Tuticorin and the payment should be against delivery of documents. The bills of lading in respect of the eight transactions show the assessee to be a consignor and the goods are made deliverable at Colombo to the order of the Bank of Baroda. That shows that the goods have been exported as the goods of the assessee. Though the bills of lading show Keshavalal Talakchand as the exporter, it is not in dispute that it is the assessee who had put the goods on board the ship. In addition, the goods have been released under AR-4 forms without payment of Central excise duty and they have been earmarked for the purpose of export and they cannot be diverted to the local market or sold locally. Thus, it is seen that the contract between the assessee and Keshavalal Talakchand does not make the assessee an agent for the purpose of export. But, on the other hand, it is the obligation of the seller to put the goods on board the ship on the instructions of the buyer and receive payment for the goods as against delivery of bill of lading and other documents. The property in the goods sold passes only on delivery of the documents, that is, long after the goods have joined the export stream. In these circumstances, it could be said that the sale by the assessee and the export of the goods are so inter-connected as to justify the inference that the sale and the export were integrally connected. Though the assessee was not concerned with the export contracts entered into by the buyer with the Ceylon importers, the actual exportation of the goods by the assessee was in pursuance of its contracts of sale which would be incomplete without the export.
Madras High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

State Of Tamil Nadu vs M/S Burmah Shell Oil Storage & ... on 10 October, 1972

But subsequent to the decision of the Tribunal, the Supreme Court in State of Tamil Nadu v. Burmah Shell Co. Ltd [1973] 31 S.T.C. 426 (S.C.), had held that the principle of the decision in Thirumagal Mills' case [1967] 20 S.T.C. 287, will not apply to transactions after the amendment of the definition of "business" in Section 2(d) in 1964 and that after the amendment the transactions of sale which are incidental and ancillary to the assessee's trade or commerce can be brought to charge even if there was no profit-motive. In view of the said decision of the Supreme Court, the canteen sales covered by the first item should be held to be taxable.
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 100 - P J Reddy - Full Document

National Carbon Co. vs Commissioner Of Sales Tax, U.P. on 29 April, 1968

In National Carbon Co. v. Commissioner of Sales Tax [1969] 23 S.T.C. 388, the following general principles have been culled out from the above decision of the Supreme Court by a Full Bench of the Allahabad High Court: (1) In order that a sale may qualify for exemption under Article 286(1)(b) of the Constitution as being a sale in the course of export, the sale must occasion the export. In other words, the exportation of the goods must be a part of the contract of sale or must be a necessary incidence thereof. (2) A sale can be said to occasion an export only (a) if there is a common intention of both the seller and the buyer to export, (b) there is an obligation to export and (c) there is an actual export. (3) The obligation to export may arise from statute, from contract or from the nature of the transaction. In other words, the obligation may be implicit or explicit. (4) The bond between the sale and the export should be such as cannot be broken without a breach of the obligation.
Allahabad High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 12 - Full Document

State Of West Bengal vs North Adjai Coal Co. Ltd. on 8 January, 1971

In State of West Bengal v. North Adjai Coal Co. Ltd. [1971] 27 S.T.C 268 (S.C.), the assessee, carrying on business of a colliery, supplied coal for consumption in East Pakistan. The supplies were made through common carrier to the East Pakistan Government at the instance of the Government of India. In respect of those supplies bills were drawn by the assessee in the name of the Government of India. But the price of the coal was realised by the Government of India from the Government of East Pakistan and paid to the assessee. The question arose whether such supplies of coal are in the course of export. It was urged on behalf of the revenue that there was no contract of sale between the assessee and the East Pakistan Government and that there was only a contract between the assessee and the Government of India and, therefore, the supply of coal made by the assessee to the East Pakistan Government cannot be said to be a sale in the course of export. While rejecting that contention the Supreme Court expressed:
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 29 - J C Shah - Full Document

National Tractors, Hubli vs Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes, ... on 15 January, 1971

In National Tractors v. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes [1971] 27 S,T.C. 271 (S.C.), a dealer purchased iron ore from mine-owners and sold it to the State Trading Corporation for export on f. o. b. basis. Under the agreement between the dealer and the corporation the ore was to be transported by rail or to be loaded into ships for transportation to foreign countries. All expenses for transportation up to the stage of loading into the ships were to be borne by the dealer. But in all the documents the ore was shown as consigned by the corporation to itself. The wagons were also arranged by the corporation. All the shipping documents including the export licence were made out in the name of the corporation. The question arose as to whether the sale by the dealer to the corporation was in the course of export. On these facts, the Supreme Court held that in f. o. b. contracts the normal presumption is that the property in the goods passes when they are put on board the ship, unless of course, special circumstances pointing to the passing of property at some other point of time are clearly made out and that though the shipping documents and the export licence stood in the name of the corporation, the property cannot be said to have passed from the dealer to the corporation before the goods were loaded in the ships and that, in any event, these circumstances are quite equivocal and never so firm as to displace the normal presumption attaching to f. o. b. contracts to the effect that the title in the goods covered by such contracts passes to the buyer only when the goods are put on board the ships. It was, therefore, held in that case that notwithstanding the fact that the goods moved from the dealer's place of business to the port and loaded into the ships as the goods of the corporation, the sale by the dealer to the corporation should be taken to be in the course of export as the property in the goods passed to the corporation only after the goods had been loaded on board the ships. The case before us is an a fortiori one in that in the shipping documents the assessee has been shown as the consignor and the goods are deliverable to its order.
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 12 - A N Grover - Full Document
1