MEHTA, J. - The Tribunal has referred the following question in this reference to this Court :

"Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and on the construction of section 24 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, read with Explanation to clause (28) of section 2 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, and sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, the opponent can be said to have fulfilled the conditions for the grant of authorization under the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959?"

The short facts which have given rise to this reference are as under :

The opponent-assessee, namely M/s. Godrej Soap Private Ltd., has its principal place of business in Bombay. It has also a place of business in Ahmedabad, in the State of Gujarat. It holds Registration Certificate No. N. 10-K 1714, dated 16th June, 1960, as a registered dealer for its business in the State of Gujarat. The opponent had applied under section 24 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, hereinafter referred to as "the Act", for the grant of authorization on the ground that the turnover of sales of goods exported by it during the year 1962-63 outside the territories of India from the State of Gujarat exceeded the limit of Rs. 30,000. The opponent supported the application by the invoice dated 7th March, 1963, showing that crude groundnut oil of the value of & 48,008-15-0 was exported by sea under c.i.f contract from Bhavnagar to Malaga in Spain. The invoice was issued by the Bombay office of the opponent-firm. The opponent-firm also filed a revised return for the quarter ending 31st March, 1969, in which the sale of this oil was included. By the order, dated 31st March, 1964, the Sales Tax Officer filed the application. In appeal the Assistant Commissioner of Sales Tax came to the conclusion that there was no evidence from which it could be proved that the transaction was of sale by the registered dealer under the Act with the place of business in the State of Gujarat and he accordingly dismissed the appeal In second appeal the Tribunal observed that the real question to be decided was whether the sale was made in the State of Gujarat within the extended definition of section 2(28) read with the Explanation. In view of this fiction introduced by the Explanation, the Tribunal held the sale of the goods which were exported by the opponent-assessee during the relevant period, was a sale in the State. Therefore according to the Tribunal, subject to the fulfilment of other conditions, the opponent was entitled to an authorization certificate. The Tribunal according]y reversed the decision of the authorities and remanded the matter for disposal of the opponent's application in accordance with law and for compliance by the opponent with the remaining conditions laid down in section 24 of the Act. The Tribunal has thereafter referred the aforesaid question to this Court at the instance of the State of Gujarat.

Relevant section 24 of the Act reads as under :

"Where, during the previous or current year; the turnover of sales of a registered dealer of goods -

(a) which are exported by him from the State outside the territory of India, or despatched by him from the State to any place in India outside the State, and

(b) which are sold by him to an authorised dealer and exported or despatched by that dealer to any destination referred to in clause (a), exceeds thirty thousand rupees, he may apply for an Authorization to the Commissioner. Subject to the provisions of section 2 the Commissioner shall, if the registered dealer satisfies such further requirements (including the furnishing of adequate security) as may be prescribed, issue to him an Authorization in such form, and subject to such conditions, as may be prescribed,"

Such an authorization results in various benefits. Under sections 7, 8, 9 and 10 when sale of goods or resale of goods is made to an authorised dealer, deduction is made from the turnover of the vendor, if certificate is furnished by the authoris