Amendment status not verified — confirm the current text below against the official source.
Indo-Bulgar Foods v. C.S.T., AIR. 1993 A11164 at p. 165. 10 CENTRAL SALES-TAX ACT,1956 Inter-State sales—Estimation of.—The Revenue has not shown that the goods had moved from Uttar Pradesh to Calcutta in course of inter-State sales. Simply because the goods were sent to Calcutta and there they were sold, no inference for suppressing inter-State sales could be drawn. The Tribunal was, therefore, right in accepting the book version, so far as the disclosure of inter-State sales is concerned, simply because the books were rejected. the assessing officer was not justified in estimating the inter-State sales. To estimate the inter-State sales, he should have pointed out some instance of suppression of inter-State sales or a cogent material leading to suppression of the turnover of inter-State sales. ' Inter-State sales—What amounts to.—Once it is found that the movement of the goods was not occasioned by the placing of specific orders on the assessee, the movement could not be treated in the course of inter-State sales. In the present case, unless the revenue proves that the movement of the goods from Shikohabad to Delhi was occasioned by the placing of a particular order, it cannot amount to an inter-State sale. The Tribunal was of the view that on the facts of the case it was not established that the movement of the goods from Shikohabad to Delhi was connected with any order placed on the assessee and consequently it held that there was no inter-State sales when the goods moved from Shikohabad to Delhi by the assessee.2 Where the electricity as goods comes into existence and is consumed simultaneously. the event of sale in the sense of transferring property in the goods merely intervenes as a step between generation and consumption. In such a case when the generation takes place in one State wherefrom it is supplied and it is received in another State where it is consumed, the entire transaction is one and can be nothing else excepting an inter-State sale on account of instantaneous movement of goods from one to another occasioned by the sale or purchase of goods, squarely covered by Sec. 3 of the Central Sales-tax Act, 1956.3 . Inter-State sales and Intra-State sale.—A perusal of the judgment of the first Appellate Authority shows that it treated the transactions as inter-State sales whereas on the same material the Sales Tax Tribunal held them to be inter-Stat sales. No additional evidence was adduced before the Sales Tax Tribunal by either party to indicate whether they were inter-State sales or intra-State sales. It appears from the orders passed by the three authorities below that they proceeded on the assumption that those very goods which were supplied by the applicant to M/s. Metal Box India Limited. Faridabad were sold by the latter to the said three parties. However, there seems to be no evidence to prove positively that the delivery of the goods was taken by M/s. Metal Box India Limited, Faridabad and those very goods were sold or sent by M/s. Metal Box India Limited to the three parties. It appears necessary that there should be a finding of fact on these points before the matter is decided finally. Thus there seems to be no option but to send back the case to the Assessing Authority. 4 Inter-State sale or local sale.—In the instant case, all the subsequent sales effected by the appellant during the course'of inter--State movement of the subject goods are exempt. in terms of Secs. 3(b) and 6(2) of the Central Sales-tax Act. The subject sales is governed by the Act and, therefore, beyond the scope of Rajasthan Sales Tax Act. The proceedings initiated by the authorities under the Rajasthan Act