“if the sale or purchase occasioned the
movement of goods from one State to another”.
So, we have to verify where the movement has
been occasioned by any document. In this case,
the appellants have already entered into a
contract with the Federation for the supply of
cotton bales with quantity and quality. In this
case, the appellants have already entered into
a contract with the Federation for supply of
specific number of cotton bales. The Federation
moved the goods from Maharashtra to Tamil Nadu
only in pursuance of that contract. It has been
categorically held by the Supreme Court in
various decisions. In the case of South India
Viscose Ltd., v. State of Tamil Nadu, reported
in 48 STC 232, “that if there is a conceivable
link between the contract of sale and movement
of goods from one State to another in order to
discharge the obligation under the contract of
sale the inter~position of an agent of the
seller, who may temporarily intercept the
movement, will not alter the interstate
character of the sale“. In this case, even
considering the said depot as a branch of the
Federation, the real fact that there is a
movement in pursuance of contract from one
