Judgment :- K.A. SWAMI, C.J The order of the Court was made by K.A. SWAMI, C.J.In these writ petitions, the petitioners have either challenged the provisional demand made under rule 18(4) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Rules, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as "the Rules") or the notice issued for provisional assessment under the said rule on the ground that it is not open to the State authorities to collect the sales tax on the transactions covered by the said provisional demand or the provisional notices, as those transactions are relatable to inter-State sales. The period relates to the assessment year 1993-1994. The State Government realising the difficulty in the matter of determining whether a particular transaction is in the course of inter-State sales or not, have issued G.O. Ms. No. 423, dated December 31, 1993 remitting the sales tax collected in respect of such transactions during the assessment years 1987-1988 to 1992-1993. The said G.O. reads thus : "The SC & CCT issued circular instructions to the assessing officers on the interpretation of section6(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 read with Explanation 1 to section3(b) of the same Act. The SC & CCT in the circular pointed out that in view of the decision of the Delhi High Court reported in Arjan Dass Gupta & Bros. v. Commissioner of Sales Tax, New Delhi and other decisions the Explanation 1 to section 3(b) will not permit the dealer to expand the movement of goods beyond the time of physical landing of the goods. So, where the goods have landed and after that, the transfer of documents is effected by endorsement, a constructive delivery can be inferred and such a sale shall be a local sale liable to tax and not a subsequent inter-State sale during the course of movement of goods from one State to another by transfer of document of title to the goods, which is not liable to tax. However, Commissioner of Commercial Taxes had allowed a period of 15 days as grace period for completing the formalities like getting documents through bank, transfer of documents, postal delays, etc." 2. However, Commissioner of Commercial Taxes had allowed a period of 15 days as grace period for completing the formalities like getting documents through bank, transfer of documents, postal delays, etc." 2. The Trade Associations and individual dealers in their various representations submitted to the Government have stated that all along the department had accepted in-transit sales after the arrival of goods irrespective of time lag between the arrival of goods and the endorsement made on the document. But suddenly, this position is reversed and the officers resorted to reopen the past cases and also begin to apply to the current cases also the stand that any sale after 15 days of arrival of goods, shall be a local sale in view of constructive delivery and not a sale under section 6(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. This has caused a serious hardship to them, as cases on the assessments already made and the stand already taken by the department they have not collected any tax and any new policy in this regard will hit them hard. 3. The Government in consultation with the SC & CCT examined the matter. The Government are of the opinion that Explanation 1 to section 3(b) does not permit unlimited time for the trade to bring the goods and keep them indefinitely and then effect sales and claim the same as one failing under section6(2) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 4. The Government after careful consideration direct that : "(a) in the case of assessments under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 already made for the period up to March 31, 1993 where any tax has been levied rejecting the claim of exemption under sub-section(2) of section6 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 on the ground that the sale has been effected after the arrival of the goods, such tax including surcharge, additional surcharge and additional sales tax shall be waived in cases, where such levies have not been collected by the dealers. (b) In the pending cases up to the period March 31, 1993 further action may be dropped on this particular issue and past assessments already completed need not be reopened for this particular issue. (b) In the pending cases up to the period March 31, 1993 further action may be dropped on this particular issue and past assessments already completed need not be reopened for this particular issue. (c) From April 1, 1993, a time-limit of 40 days shall be given to the dealers from the date of arrival of the goods to effect subsequent inter-State sale under sub-section(2) of section6 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 read with section3(b) of the said Act and any sale taking place after 40 days and failing under section 6(2) read with section 3(b) shall be treated as local sales in view of the fact that such sales can be local sales after constructive delivery of the goods by the carriers."* 5. As to the sale or purchase of goods taking place in the course of inter-State trade from April 1, 1993, paragraph 4(c) of the G.O. extracted above gives to the dealers 40 days from the date of arrival of the goods to effect subsequent inter-State sales as per section6(2) read with section3(b) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (for short "the CST Act"). However, such subsequent sales falling under section6(2) read with section3(b) of the CST Act, taking place after the expiry of 40 days from the date of arrival of the goods, are treated as local sales on the ground or on the assumption of the fact that such sales can be local sales after constructive delivery of the goods by the carriers. Therefore, there is no difficulty whatsoever in respect of such sales taking place within 40 days from the date of arrival of the goods inasmuch as the G.O. gives 40 days period to effect such sales. The difficulty arises only when such subsequent sale under section6(2) read with section3(b) of the CST Act takes place after the period 40 days, as the G.O. directs that such subsequent sale taking place after 40 days shall be treated as local sale, on an assumption, that such sales can be local sales after constructive delivery of the goods by the carrier. In our view, a fair reading of para 4(c) of the G.O. does not either exclude the possibility of or prevent the dealers from proving that in fact even such subsequent sale of goods taking place after the period of 40 days was a sale effected by a transfer of documents of title to the goods during their movement from one State to another in the course of inter-State trade or commerce, and as such, it attracted section6(2) read with section3(b) of the CST Act. Of course, if the dealer fails to prove the aforesaid fact, it would be open to the assessing authority to treat such sales as local sales. 6. Thus, the G.O. after giving full benefit to the dealers for the periods 1987-1988 to 1992-1993 has also made a further concession to them in respect of the transactions taking place from April 1, 1993 by permitting 40 days from the date of arrival of goods to effect subsequent sales in the course of inter-State trade or commerce, if they are able to show that such sale has taken place within 40 days from the date of arrival of the goods, they would be entitled to the benefit that is available to them under sub-section(2) of section 6, read with section3(b) of the CST Act. If the sale does not take place within 40 days from the date of arrival of the goods, it will still be open to them to prove that such sale of goods was in the course of inter-State trade or commerce and not a local sale. Therefore, we are of the view that the present provisional demands and also provisional notices issued under sub-rule (4) of rule 18 of the Rules which relate to the period from April 1, 1993 shall have to be re-examined in the light of the aforesaid G.O. and the assessing authority has to afford an opportunity to a dealer to prove that such subsequent sales in question have taken place, within 40 days from the date of arrival of the goods. The assessing authority is also required to afford an opportunity to a dealer even in respect of such subsequent sales which have taken place after 40 days from the date of arrival of goods to prove that even such subsequent sales had taken place in the course of inter-State trade and commerce and as such attracted section6(2) read with section3(b) of the CST Act. Hence, until this exercise is made, neither the provisional demands made from the petitioners can be enforced, nor the further proceedings pursuant to the provisional notices can be continued. That being so, we do not consider it necessary to decide these writ petitions on merits. At this stage, it can only be observed that it is open to the petitioners to put forth their cases in the light of the provisions contained in the aforesaid Government Order as interpreted by us when the assessing authorities take up these matters under rule 18-C of the Rules. In that event, the assessing authorities are required to consider the same and pass orders in accordance with law and in the light of the observations, made in this order. 7. Subject to the aforesaid observations the writ petitions are disposed of. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Writ petitions disposed of.