(2) The o bje:ct of section 8 is to prevent a multiple point taxation on goods specified in Schedule C and for impos1tion of single point tax on them under the Act. If a dealer is registered only under the Central Act and not und((r the Bombay Act, it would mean. that he is not liable to pay tax under the Bombay Act and in that event, even if he has sold goods specified in Schedule 'C', to a fl!gistered dealer under an intra-State sale, no tax would be payable by him on such sale and if the purchasing dealer is also to be exempt .F from tax in 1'espect of re-sale effected by him, the result would be that the goods would escape tax altogether and not suffer even single point tax. That is not the intendment of the legislature in enacting section 8(ii); on the contrary it would frustrate the very object of that section. The situation would be the same even where the sale effected by the dealer registeted under the Central Act is au inter-State sale. That sale would undoubtedly be taxable under the Central Act but there is no reason why the Gujarat State would give exemption to re-sale of goods in respect of which, at the time of the first sale tax has been levied under the Central Act of which the benefit has gone to another State. Moreover, in such a case, the first sale being an inter-State sale, would be taxable, at a fixed concessional rate under section 8(1Xa) or at the rate of 7% or at a rate equal to or twice the rate applicable to the sale of such goods in the State of the selling dealer, under clause (a) or (b) of sub-section (2) of section :B of the Central Act and if that be so, it is difficult to understand .H why the Legislature should have insisted, for attracting the applicability ofl section 8(ii), that the goods re-sold by the dealer should at the time of their first sale be goods specified in Schedule 'C'. [873F-G, 874C·G]
