Appeals from the Judgment and Order dated the 10th day of January, 1952, of the High Court of Judicature of Travancore Cochin at Ernakulam Kunhiraman C.J. and Subra mania Iyer J. in Original Petitions Nos.
C. Chatterjee C.R. Pattabhirarnan, with him for the respondent in Civil Appeal No.
C. Chatterjee Thomas Vellappally, with him for the respondent in Civil Appeal No.
R. Pattabhiraman for the respondent in Civil Appeal No.
The respondents in each case claimed exemption from assessment in respect of the sales effected by them on the ground, inter alia, that such sales took place in the companyrse of the export of the goods out of the territory of India within the meaning of article 1115 286 1 b of the Constitution.
The applications were heard, along with nine other applications for similar re liefs by dealers in cashew nuts, by a Division Bench Kunhi raman C.J. and Subramania Iyer J. who upheld the claim of exemption and quashed the assessment orders in respect of the transactions subsequent to the companymencement of the Constitution.
or f.o.b.
The Sales Tax Authorities rejected the companytention as, in their view, the sales were companypleted before the goods were shipped and companyld number, therefore, be companysidered to have taken place in the companyrse of the export.
Civil APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
25 of 1952.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by PATANJALI SASTRI C.J. These are companynected appeals from the judgment and order of the High Court of Travancore Cochin quashing the assessments under the United State of Travancore and Cochin Sales Tax Act No.
From that decision the State has preferred appeals in all the cases on a certificate granted by the High Court under article 132 1 of the Constitution.
October 16.
Thereupon the respondents by separate petitions applied to the High Court of the United State of Travancore and Cochin hereinafter referred to as the State under article 226 of the Constitution for issue of writs of certiorari and prohibition quashing the assessments made On them and pro hibiting such assessment in future.
The dealings followed more or less the same pattern in all the cases and companysisted of export sales of the respec tive companymodities to foreign buyers on c.i.f.
25 of 1952.
As the appeals involved important questions of law which may have a bearing on the sales tax legislation of the various States in India, this Court directed numberice of these proceedings to the Attorney General for India and the Advo cates General of those States, and they have intervened and participated in the debate at the hearing of these appeals.
28 of 1952.
C. Setalvad, Attorney General for India, and C.K. Daphtary, Solicitor General of India G.N. Joshi, with them for the Union of India.
29 of 1952.
N. Subramania Iyer, Advocate General of Travancore Cochin, T.R. Balakrishna lyer and M.R. Krishna Pillai, with him for the State of Travancore Cochin.
terms as the case may be.
11 of 1125 E. hereinafter referred to as the Act on the respond ents on the turnover of the sales of the companymodities companyf products in C.A. 25, lemon grass oil in C.A. 28 and tea in A. 29 in which they respectively deal.
4, 23and 24 of 1951 respectively.
