By its judgment dated April 23, 1962 the Bombay High Court answered both the questions of law in favour of the State and against the appellant.
For the period April 1, 1954 to March 31, 1955, the appellant was assessed to purchase tax by the Sales Tax Officer, Licence Circle, Bombay by his assessment order dated March 31, 1956, under cl.
After the goods were shipped, an invoice was drawn on the appellant in which were printed the following words Shipped per S.S from Cochin to Bombay on account and risk of Messrs Carona Sahu Co. Ltd., 15 A, Elphinstone Circle, Fort, Bombay.
a of s. 10 of the Act The appellant preferred an appeal under s. 30 of the Act to the Assistant Collector of Sales Tax, Appeals 11, Bombay Circle, Bombay but it was dismissed.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated April 23, 1962 of the Bombay High Court in Sales Tax Reference No.
B. Donde, K. Rajendra Chaudhuri and K. R. Chaudhuri, for the appellant.
A revision application to the Additional Collector of Sales Tax was dismissed.
B. Agarwala, R. Ganapathy lyer, B. R. G. K. Achar, and H. Dhebar, for the respondent.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Ramaswami, L This appeal is brought by Special Leave against the judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay dated April 23, 1962 on a reference by the Bombay Sales Tax Tribunal under S. 34 1 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1953.
At the instance of the appellant, the Sales Tax Tribunal referred the following questions of law for decision of the Bombay High Court under s. 34 1 of the Act Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the property in the rubber companysignments passed to the applicant in Cochin i.e. outside the State of Bombay ?
275 of 1964.
18 of 1961.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
In the Bills of Lading the sellers in, Cochin were described as both companysignors and companysignees.
Whether the purchase tax under s. 10 a is leviable in respect of the purchases in dispute ?
The appellant thereafter moved the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal at Bombay for revision of the order passed by the Additional Collector of Sales Tax.
The Cochin sellers had their agents in Bombay who received orders on behalf of the appellant.
By its judgment dated September 4, 1959 the Bombay Sales Tax Tribunal dismissed the revision application and companyfirmed the order made by the Sales Tax authorities.
