Judgment :- R. JAYASIMHA BABU, J. These appeals are by the assessee, which is a manufacturer of medicines. It had supplied medicines pursuant to an order placed by the Director of Medical and Health Services of the Government. The payment therefor was admittedly made by the Government in the Labour and Employment Department, and the amount paid was debited in the Government account under the head "E.S.I. Scheme". The officer, who placed the order, had directed the assessee to make supplies to the E.S.I. corporation, and the supplies were so made. The assessee produced the "D" forms issued by the Officer, who had placed the order, viz., Director of Medical and Health Services (E.S.I. Scheme), who is admittedly an officer of the Government. This form was initially rejected by the assessing officer, but was accepted by the appellate authority. The Joint Commissioner, in a suo motu revision, has reversed the order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner on the ground that the E.S.I. corporation is a separate statutory corporation, that it is not a department of the Government, that payment for the goods supplied though made by the Government was only pursuant to an obligation that it had to contribute to the funds of the Employees State Insurance Scheme and, therefore, the sale effected was not a sale to the Government. He has also held that the "D" form signed by the Director of Medical and Health Services is not a form signed by the authorised officer of the Government. That finding has been recorded solely on the ground that the designation of the officer is mentioned, as Director of Medical and Health Services (E.S.I. Scheme). There was no material before the Commissioner, nor has any material been placed before us to show that the officer, who signed the certificate, is an officer of the E.S.I. corporation. 2. The opening part of section8(4) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 reads as under : "8 Rates of tax on sales in the course of inter-State trade or commerce. - (4) The provisions of sub-section (1) shall not apply to any sale in the course of inter-State trade or commerce unless the dealer selling the goods furnishes to the prescribed authority in the prescribed manner." Section 8(4)(b) of the Act is relevant for the purposes of this case. - (4) The provisions of sub-section (1) shall not apply to any sale in the course of inter-State trade or commerce unless the dealer selling the goods furnishes to the prescribed authority in the prescribed manner." Section 8(4)(b) of the Act is relevant for the purposes of this case. It deals with instances of goods sold to the Government and the need for a certificate in the prescribed form duly filled and signed by a duly authorised officer of the Government. If these conditions are satisfied, then the form "D" which is the form prescribed, is required to be accepted. 3. On the facts of these cases, it is clear that the goods had been sold to the Government, though delivery of the goods sold was effected to the E.S.I. hospitals pursuant to the direction given by the officer of the Government who placed the order. After such delivery of the goods, payment therefor was made by the Government, which fact is not in dispute. The fact that the buyer had directed the seller to deliver the goods to a third party does not have the effect of substituting the third party as a buyer, the obligation of the person who ordered the goods to pay for the goods delivered as per his instructions, is .unaffected by the mere delivery of the goods to a third party to whom the buyer had directed the delivery. That obligation was clearly recognised by the Government in this case. The payment for the goods supplied was made by the Government. The payment was accounted for, for the purpose of the Government's records as a payment debitable under the head "E.S.I. Scheme". The manner in which the Government maintains its accounts, and the head under which the amounts paid by it were debited does not have any relevance for the purpose of deciding as to whether the Government is the buyer. The order placed by the Government clearly placed the Government in the position of a buyer, and the payment made for the goods supplied clearly establishes that the Government itself had no doubt that it was the buyer of the goods. Once it is clear that the Government is the buyer of the goods, Government certainly is competent to issue the "D" form through its authorised officer. Once it is clear that the Government is the buyer of the goods, Government certainly is competent to issue the "D" form through its authorised officer. The Director of Medical Services being the officer who placed the order, the form signed by him is prima facie in accordance with the requirements of the provisions of the statute and the rules. There was no dispute as to the competence of the Director of Medical Services to sign the form on behalf of the Government, before the authorities below. 4. The Joint Commissioner was, therefore, in error in holding that the goods were sold to the E.S.I. corporation, and that the form "D" furnished had been signed by the officer of the corporation. : His findings are not supportable by any material on record. We have perused the original "D" form. We are satisfied that the form had been issued by the Director of Medical and Health Services, who was in-charge of the E.S.I. Scheme, but who was nevertheless an officer of the Government. As noticed earlier, payment for the goods supplied pursuant to the order placed by him has been made by the Government. 5. In the result, these appeals are allowed. No costs.