- (1.) The Sales Tax Tribunal, State of Maharashtra, submitted for opinion two questions to the High Court of Bombay. They were : (1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was justified in law in holding that the impugned transactions were not purchases within the meaning of section 2 (13) of the Bombay sales Tax Act, 1953. (2) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was justified in holding that the impugned purchases were effected by the respondents outside the State of Bombay and that they were not inside the State of Bombay as per Explanation to article 286 (l) (a) of the Constitution of India.
(2.) The High Court answered the first question in the negative and held that in the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was not justified in law in holding that the impugned transactions were not purchases within the meaning of section 2 (13) of the Bombay Sales Tax act, 1953, hereinafter called the Act.
(3.) In considering the second question, the High Court felt that on the material available to them the question could not be answered. It appears that counsel appearing for the parties also agreed that an answer to the second question need not be recorded and the parties may be given another opportunity to establish their respective cases about the actual place of delivery of coal. The High Court then proceeded to order that the case be remanded to the Tribunal with a direction that "each side may be given a chance to lead evidence either before the Tribunal or any other authority it may direct to take up the matter regarding actual delivery of coal. After such evidence is tendered, a finding will be recorded and the question will be decided by the Tribunal in the light of the material on the record according to law. ";