IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SALES TAX APPLICATION NO. 80 OF 2009 IN REFERENCE APPLICATION NO. 111 OF 2008 The Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax. ... Applicant. V/s. M/s.Ion Exchange Specialty Chemicals Limited. ... Respondent. Ms.Imran Calcuttawala, AGP for the applicant. M.P.Patkar i/b. M.M.Vaidya for the respondent. CORAM : V.C.DAGA AND K.K.TATED, JJ. DATED : 8th January 2010. P.C. : Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. This application is taken out by the Revenue seeking direction to the Tribunal to refer the questions for the opinion of this Court. 3. Having heard both parties, prima facie, we are of the opinion that the questions raised needs consideration at the hands of this Court. Hence we direct the Tribunal to forward statement of case and refer the following questions for the opinion of this Court: (i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and on true and correct interpretation of the provision contained in section 3(a) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the subsequent sales of goods effected by the respondent dealer during their movement from one State to another, being sales to the first sales in respect of the same goods effected by the vendors in the State outside the State of Maharashtra to the respondent dealer are covered by section 3(a) of the said Act. (ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and on true and correct interpretation of the provision contained in section 3(b) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, the Tribunal was justified in holding that, because the goods were directed consigned by the vendors of the respondent in one State to the buyers of the respondent in another State, both the States being other than the State of Maharashtra, the sales of the said goods effected by the respondent in the course of inter-State movement of the said goods were not the ones effected by the transfer of document of title to the goods during the course of inter-State movement of the goods? (iii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and on true and correct interpretation of the provision contained in sub-section (1) of section 4 and the first proviso to section 9 read with clause (a) to sub- section (1) of section 9 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that since the movement of the goods commenced in the State outside the State of Maharashtra and terminated at the destination of the purchasers of the respondent dealer in another State which is also the State outside the State of Maharashtra, the sales effected by the respondent dealer to such purchases had taken place outside the State of Maharashtra under section 4(1) of the said Act, and therefore are not liable to Central Sales Tax in the State of Maharashtra? 4. Application stands disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs. (K.K.TATED, J.) (V.C.DAGA J.)