Judgment :- RAMAKRISHNAN, J. There has been a specific finding by the lower Appellate Tribunal that the goods were delivered to buyers outside the Madras State for consumption in the delivery States. This would suffice to attract to the sales the ban under Article 286(1)(a) of the Constitution and render them not liable to tax in the Madras State. The revision is sought on the ground that the decision of the Supreme Court in Ashok Leyland Ltd. v. State of Madras should be interpreted so as to imply that in the case of inter-State sales, if the goods were in the Madras State at the time of the contract of sale, then explanation (2) to section 2(h) of the Sales Tax Act of 1939 will be attracted and the sales will be taxable in Madras. But this Court in several decisions including the latest decision in Jainulabdeen Sahib's case has held the view that the decision in Ashok Leyland's case interpreted only the scope of the a ban under Article 286(2) of the Constitution, but where a sale is an outside sale within the meaning of Article 286(1)(a) of the Constitution, the ban under Article 286(1)(a) of the Constitution will operate. According this view, we see no ground to admit this revision case, which is dismissed.