STATE OF MADRAS NOW ANDHRA PRADESH Vs. VUPPALA PEDA VENKATARAMANIAH AND SONS COMMISSION KOTTU SHOPS ANAKAPALLE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These four are analogous appeals raising a point whether certain sales took place within the State of Madras under Section 2 (h) of the Madras General Sales Tax Act. They are brought by the State against the judgment of the District Judge, Visakhapatnam, allowing the claims of the plaintiffs for refund of the amounts collected by way of sales-tax. The facts of these cases need not be restated elaborately nor is it necessary to recapitulate the details peculiar to individual cases. It is sufficient to relate the common features of all the cases as the question involved in them is the same. In fact all the suits were tried together, evidence having been adduced in one soft (O. S. 1 of 1051) and disposed of by a common judgment. The suit related to the assessment year 1947-48 and the assesses are residents of Anakapally. They were all merchants dealing in jugglery, The undisputed facts are that the buyers from outside the State would come to Anakapally or sent their agents and select the goods. After selecting the jugglery, it is weighed in their presence, some advance is paid to the sellers and the goods despatched in their presence. The invoices are prepared showing the price, freight and other incidental charges. In token of the correctness of the entries made therein the signatures of the buyers or their agents are taken. The balance of the sale-price is debited to the account of the buyers. The railway receipt is taken in the name of the sellers and presented through the bank. The defence to all the suits was that these transactions were assessable to tax in the State of Madras as the sales occurred within that State.

(2.) The trial court over-ruling these objections decreed the suit being of opinion that the sales were not completed in the State so as to enable the department to levy tax on those transactions. This conclusion of the trial Judge is canvassed before us.

(3.) The Government Pleader urges in support of these appeals that having regard to the terms of Section 23 of the Sale of Goods Act, the property in the goods passed to the buyers within the State as the goods must be said to have been unconditionally appropriated to the contracts on the facts found viz., that the goods were selected, weighed, put in bags and dispatched and the balance of the sale price was debited to the buyers in the account books ol the plaintiffs. According to him the last circumstance is a clinching one in that it shows that the assesses have treated their buyers as their debtors and that their only remedy is to realize the unpaid purchase money by process of law in the event of a default in that behalf.