Report No. 30
61. Gordhandas' case.-In Gordhandas v. B. Banerjee, (AIR 1958 SC 1006) the existence of privity between the foreign merchant and the Appellant who claimed exemption for his sale under Article 286(1)(b) was regarded as necessary to render his sale as occasioning export. Here the facts were, the Appellant Gordhandas sold the goods to the Bombay party who in their turn exported the goods to foreign merchants. In para. 10 (on p. 1010) the Supreme Court observed:-
"As soon as the goods were sold to the Bombay parties the Appellant's interest in the goods ceased and whatever happened to the goods subsequently was no concern of the Appellant. In fact, there is no privity between the Appellant and the foreign merchants to' whom the goods were ultimately exported.".
62. Gokal's case as summarising the two Travancore cases.-In J.V. Gokal & Co. v. Assistant Collector Sales Tax, (1960) 2 SCR 852: AIR 1960 SC 595, the Supreme Court again followed the two Travancore Cases and at para. 10, p. 598, observed:-
"This Court in State of Travancore-Cochin v. Bombay Co. Ltd., held that a sale which occasioned the export was a sale that took place in the course of export of goods..... This Court again in 1954 SCR 53: AIR 1953 SC 333, extended the doctrine to a case of sale or a purchase of goods effected within the State by transfer of shipping documents while the goods were in the course of transit.".
Thus, it is only to this extent that the principles laid down in (the First Travancore case) for determining when a sale or purchase took place in the course of export or import were regarded as extended by the (Second Travancore case).
Back
