1 acd IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION SALES TAX APPLICATION NO. 39 OF 2009 IN REFERENCE APPLICATION NO. 32 OF 2008 The Additional Commissioner of Sales Tax (BST)Maharashtra, Mumbai ...Applicant V/s. M/s Tata Iron And Steel Co Ltd. ... Respondent. ---- Mr. A.A. Kumbhakoni a/w Ms. Uma Palsule Desai, for the Applicant. Mr. P.S. Jetly with Mr. Atul Thakkar and Ms. V. Nair i/b M/s Mulla & Mulla & C.B. & C.for the Respondent. --- CORAM : V.C.DAGA AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. DATED : 4th December, 2009 P.C. : 1. Heard. Admit on the following questions of law: (i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law in allowing the claim of Rs. 31,84,48,925/-, in respect of various transactions of local sales and of Rs.86,35,265, in respect of interstate sales covered bulk imports by ships which were in unascertained stage till the clearance from customs as sales in the course of import by transfer of documents of title 2 to the goods within the meaning of section 5(2) of Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 read section 75 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act 1959 and hence not liable to tax under the B.S.T. Act 1959 or CST Act 1956 ? (ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in law holding that the sales of Rs. 32,70,84,190/- effected by the respondent dealer are in the course of import under section 5(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 merely on the ground that the reference application filed by the Commissioner of Sales Tax against the decisions of the Tribunal in SA No.713 and 714 of 2000 were rejected both by the Tribunal and the Bombay High Court even without ascertaining the facts on the basis of evidence as to whether the impugned sales were covered by the first limb of section 5(2) or the second limb of section 5(2) of the C.S.T. Act ? 2. By consent of parties application is taken for hearing. 3. Learned counsel for both the parties agreed that the Tribunal be directed to forward statement of the case to this court so as to seek opinion of this court on the above substantial questions of law. This application stands disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs. (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.) (V.C.DAGA J.) 3