Judgment

S.RANGANATHAN, J.

(1) THESE four appeals are from the common judgment of the Allahabad High court dated 19/12/1973 in Writ Petition Nos. 2706, 2784, 2785 and 2786 of 1973. They can be disposed of by a common order as they relate to the case of the same respondent M/s Coal & Coke Supplies Corporation of Kanpur (hereinafter referred to as the assessee). They relate to the tour assessment years 1967-68, 1968-69, 1969-70 and 1970-71 and involve the same issue as to the interpretation of the provisions of the central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (the Act for short).

(2) THE assessee had filed the Writ Petition praying for the issue of writs of certiorari to quash the assessment orders passed for the assessment years in question resulting in demands of various amounts of sales tax from the assessee.

(3) THE assessee made the following averments in the writ petition :

THE petitioner is a Coal Agent pure and simple carrying on his business at Kanpur. He does not take actual delivery of goods. The prospective purchasers in U. P. place their orders or register their demand for the purchase of coal with the petitioner, who in turn forwards the demand to Jharia or Calcutta. The coal is despatched by the collieries invariably by rail and the R/Rs are either made out direct in the names of the purchasers or alternatively in the name of the petitioners.

THE collieries send these R/Rs in each case to the petitioners at Kanpur. The R/Rs which are made out direct in the names of purchasers are handed over as such to the purchasers for taking delivery of the coal from the railways, after making payment of the railway freight etc. Others which are made out in the name of the petitioners are endorsed by them to the respective purchasers who in turn take delivery of coal from the railway on payment of freight charges etc. The petitioners do not handle the goods, as such. The suppliers charge central sales tax in their bills and deposit the same in Bengal/Bihar.

THE petitioner did not purchase any goods from outside the State nor did he ever keep stock of any goods, with him.

The assessee contended that the above transactions only gave rise to inter-State sales which were taxable under S. 9(1) of the Act in the State of origin, namely, Bihar or West Bengal. According to the assessee, sales tax could be charged and assessed on it only if there had been subsequent sales within the meaning of the proviso to S. 9(1) of central Sales Tax Act but there were none. It was further contended that even the charge under proviso was attracted only in the case of registered dealers. The assessee not being a registered dealer, it was urged, this proviso was not applicable and hence no sales tax was leviable. Strong reliance was placed on behalf of the petitioner on a decision of the Allahabad High court in M/s Kasturi Lal Har Lal v. State of U. P.

(4) THE Writ Petition were disposed of by the High court on a very short ground. After referring to the petitioners challenge to the validity of the assessment orders on the ground that, since it was an unregistered dealer, the proviso was inapplicable and, therefore, it could not be assessed to central sales tax by the State of Uttar Pradesh, which was the State where the coal was consumed, the court proceeded to observe:

THE modus operandi of the petitioners business is that the purchasers from him in the State of Uttar Pradesh place their orders with him. The petitioner in his turn forwards the orders to the manufacturers of coal at Jharia in Bihar or Calcutta in the State of West Bengal. The collieries despatch the coal by railway and the railway receipt is either made out in the name of the purchaser or in the name of the petitioner. The petitioner endorses the railway receipt and hands the same over to the purchaser. The purchaser takes delivery of the coal from the railway authorities. It is thus clear that the movement of coal starts in the State of Bihar or West Bengal and