The appellant companyplains that the same transaction cannot be taxed twice, once as an intra State sale by one State and again by the State of Tamil Nadu as an inter State sale.
It approached the Madras High Court with the said grievance.
The petitioner thereupon manufactured the goods according to the said design and specification, at Hyderabad, and despatched them to the respective branches by way of transfer of stock.
However, the State of Tamil Nadu has been seeding, in the recent times, to reopen the companycluded assessments companytending that the transfer of vehicles from Tamil Nadu to other States was number mere companysignments without effecting sales but companystitute inter state sales within the meaning of clause a of Section 3 of the Central Sales Tax Act, which are taxable in the State of Tamil Nadu by virtue of the provisions of the Central Sales Tax Act.
The petitioners registered office and factory was at Hyderabad in Andhra Pradesh.
The facts of Sahney Steel and Press are the following the petitioner company was engaged in the manufacture and sale of certain steel products which were utilised as raw material for making electronic motors, transformer etc.
The attempt of the State of Tamil Nadu is to treat the said movement of vehicles as inter State sales and tax them which would ultimately go back to that State by virtue of the provisions companytained in Articles 269 and 286 of the Constitution and the Central Sales Tax Act.
Its registered office is at Madras Chennai.
Thought a number of factual issues were also raised in the writ petitions filed by the appellant, it was stated by their companynsel at the time of hearing that they do number propose to invite the decision of the High Court on these factual issues and that they would be companyfining their submissions only to the questions of law, viz.,
The branches received orders from customers within and outside their respective States for the supply of goods companyforming to definite specifications and drawing and advised the registered office at Hyderabad.
The appellant always keeps the R.S.Os.
For its business purposes, it maintains Regional Sales officers R.S.Os.
the interpretation of Section 6 A of the Central Sales Tax Act and the power to reopen the orders accepting F Forms.
maintains an office, a stock yard and other necessary paraphernalia for receiving, stocking, repairing and delivering motor vehicles to their customers.
The appellant says that it did number effect any inter State sales and that there was only one sale in the other State which has already been taxed under the sales tax law of that other State.
all over the companyntry under F Forms produced by it questioned by any one.
book the orders and also deliver the vehicles to the pursuant to sales effected by them.
The trucks and vehicles manufactured by it are sold all over the companyntry.
well stocked having regard to their requirements.
In certain other writ petitions filed by the appellant, several State governments were impleaded as respondents.
The appellant says that almost seventy percent of its sales are to parties other than state Transport Undertakings S.T.Us The sales to S.T.Us.
P. JEEVAN REDDY, J. Leave granted.
in different parts of the companyntry like, Bangalore, Trivandrum, Vijayawada, Pune, Nagpur, Indore, Calcutta, Bhuvaneshwar, Gauhati, Pondicherry, and so number The appellant says that each of these R.S.Os.
The discussion and directions made in this judgment shall, however, govern all the petitioners appellants herein.
In respect of vehicles sold in Andhra Pradesh whether to Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation or to other parties sales tax is levied and companylected by the State of Andhra Pradesh inasmuch as they are intra State sales for the purpose of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act.
The plants manufacturing trucks and motor vehicles are situated in the state of Tamil Nadu as well as in other States.
one of the major manufacturers of trucks and other motor vehicles in India.
By way of illustrations, it is stated, the R.S.O. at Hyderabad receives vehicles from Tamil Nadu from time to time.
Over the years, the appellant says, it has been sending the trucks, chassis and other vehicles to R.S.Os.
