Report No. 30
60. Two sales could not occasion export.-Mr. Justice Vivian Bose speaking for the Court observed (p. 1005, paras. 19 and 20):-
"There are two sales here and both could not have occasioned the export, only the second of the two did that, and the Respondents (Mills) were not parties to it either directly or through the exporters as their agents. It follows that the first sale with which alone the Respondents were associated, did not do that. If it did not, then it hardly matters, whether the goods were exported through the instrumentality of the exporters or not, because according to the decisions of this Court, all sales that precede the one that occasions the export are taxable.
"Even if the facts were as stated (i.e., if the goods had been manufactured with the main intention for export), as we have already pointed out, this Court has decided that only the sale that occasions the export is exempt and that the sale to the exporter that preceded it is not, even if it was made "with a view to" or "for the purpose of export".
This case, it will be seen, explained the same principle of the sale occasioning export in a different way by reference to the number of transactions of sales involved and leading up to the export. If there were two sales, as there were in this case, one leading to the other, only the last sale could be regarded as having occasioned the export.
It was also held in this case that even if the goods had been manufactured (in the present case, by the Mills) with the main intention of exporting them and with that end in view had been sold to the exporters in the ports, the sale by the Mills under these circumstances could still not be considered as one occasioning the export.