JUDGMENT B.N. KIRPAL, J. The Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi has referred the following question to this Court:- "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the utilization of the vehicles on hire-purchase basis before their actual sales did not render the second proviso to section 5(2) (a) (ii) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, as then extended to Delhi applicable." The admitted facts are that the dealer is registered under the local Act and had made purchases on the basis of its registration certificate. The business of the dealer is that of hire-purchase. It enters into agreements and sells vehicles on hire-purchase basis. The assessing authority in respect of the year 1973-74 came to the conclusion that the registration certificate had been misutilised because the dealer had purchased vehicles for resale, but, in the year in question, it had not resold them. He, therefore, invoked the provisions of section 5(2) (a) (ii) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act and required the dealer to pay sales tax thereon. The basis of passing this order was that the sale did not take place at the time when the hire-purchaser agreement was entered into and the sale had taken place, according to the assessing authority when all the instalments were paid. The aforesaid conclusion of the assessing authority was upheld by the first appellate court. The second appeal of the dealer was allowed by the Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal held that eventually hire-purchaser sale had taken place under the hire-purchase agreement and, therefore, the second proviso to section 5(2) (a) (ii) was not attracted. In our opinion the conclusion of the Tribunal is correct but for a different reason. This Court in Goodwill India Ltd. v. State [1980] 45 STC 368 has come to the conclusion that where hire-purchase agreement is entered into the sale takes place. This decision is based on the definition of the word "sale" occurring in section 2(g) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, as extended to the Union Territory of Delhi. According to that sub-section transfer in property, inter alia, takes place when there is transfer of goods on hire-purchase. This decision is based on the definition of the word "sale" occurring in section 2(g) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, as extended to the Union Territory of Delhi. According to that sub-section transfer in property, inter alia, takes place when there is transfer of goods on hire-purchase. As Delhi was a Union Territory, therefore, the Parliament could enact such a law and regard the transaction as sale even though in general law under the Sale of Goods Act it may not be a sale. The hire-purchase agreement was deemed to amount to a sale under section 2(g) and, therefore, in [1980] 45 STC 368 (Goodwill India Ltd. v. State) it was held that the sale took place when such an agreement was entered into. This being so it is obvious that the dealer did sell, within the meaning of the expression in section 2(g), all the vehicles which it had purchased and, therefore, there was no misutilisation of the registration certificate. The question of law, therefore, is answered in the affirmative and in favour of the dealer. There will be no order as to costs. Reference answered in the affirmative.