ORDER H. S. KAMATH, PRESIDENT. - Only one ground has been pressed in revision. That ground was dealt with as follows by the Commissioner in appeal :- "Some claims made by the appellants for lost consignments have been paid for by the Railways. It is argued that these should not be counted towards taxable goods. It is evident that full sale prices are recovered from the Railways for the lost consignments. The recoveries, therefore, are virtually for sale. These are, therefore, liable to sales tax." Neither of the learned counsel could explain on what facts exactly the learned Commissioner arrived at these numerous conclusions. All that they could point out to me in the record is contained in a statement of the applicant-concern's representative recorded by the Assessing Officer. It reads as follows :- "The sales of stores include the value of Rs. 6,551-6-0 due to goods lost in transit by the railway. We claim exemption on this amount." According to the applicant's learned counsel, the facts are that some colliery equipment consigned to the applicant was lost in transit. The applicant claimed damages from the Railway Company; and the amount mentioned is what it got by way of damages. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, I have no reason to disbelieve the facts as stated. But I have considered also the possibility of the applicant being the consignor, instead of the consignee. Whatever be the position, it should be clear that there has been no transfer of property to the Railway Company or, for that matter, to anyone else. It is immaterial if the amount received by way of damages should represent the full price of the goods lost. The learned Commissioner has obviously overlooked the fact that the Act contemplates a tax on sales. Unless there has been a sale, in other words, unless there has been a transfer of property, no question of levying any tax arises. In a case like this, where goods have been lost, no question arises of a transfer of property in them - the loss of goods giving rise only to actionable claims, which have been specifically excluded from the definition of "goods" in Section 2(d) of the Act. 2. The application succeeds on the ground pressed. The amount in question should not be included in the turnover. Application allowed.