Judgment ( 1. ) THIS is a reference under Section 44 (1) of M. P. General Sales Tax Act, 1958 read with Section 13 of M. P. Sthaniya Kshetra Me Mai Ke Pravesh Par Kar adhiniyam, 1976 (hereinafter referred to as the "entry Tax Act" ). ( 2. ) THE facts as stated in the statement of case drawn up by the Board of Revenue of M. P. are that M/s Western Coalfields Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "the assessee") deals in mining and sale of coal. The coal produced by the assessee were loaded in the trucks of purchasers at the pit heads and were taken to the weigh bridges for weighment owned by the assessee. The weigh bridges were located in different local areas. After weighment at the weigh bridges in such local areas, the trucks left for their destination. In the assessment for the periods 1-4-1980 to 31-3-1981 and 1-4-1982 to 31-3-1983, the Assessing Officer found that sale of such coal was completed at the weigh bridges when the weight of coal was ascertained and, therefore, the sale of coal took place in local areas and as such sale of coal was liable for entry tax under the Entry Tax Act. Aggrieved by the two orders of assessment, the assessee preferred appeal before the Appellate Deputy Commissioner who remanded the cases to the Tax assessment Office for consideration of the tax imposed at various points. Since the claim of assessee was that no entry tax was payable under the Entry Tax Act on such coal, the assessee preferred a second appeal before the Board of revenue, M. P. The Board of Revenue, M. P. referred to its order for the earlier period in which ft had taken a view that the determination of the price for the coal took place only after weighment and after the weigh bridge clerk gives a certificate indicating the weight, and, therefore, the sales were complete within the local areas in which the weigh bridges were located and assessee who had caused the entry of goods to the local areas in which the weigh bridges were located has been rightly subjected to entry tax. After referring to the said view taken by it for the earlier period in the case of assessee, the Board of Revenue dismissed the appeal of the assessee. ( 3. After referring to the said view taken by it for the earlier period in the case of assessee, the Board of Revenue dismissed the appeal of the assessee. ( 3. ) AFTER stating the aforesaid facts, the Board of Revenue has referred the following question of law for our opinion:- "whether under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Board of Revenue was justified in holding that the sale is complete only at the weigh bridge and not at the pit heads from where it is transported in trucks by the persons to whom it is sold. " ( 4. ) MR. H. S. Shrivastava, learned Sr. Advocate appearing for the assessee submitted that the question of law, as framed by the Board of Revenue, should be reformulated by this Court inasmuch as the question as framed by the board of Revenue does not indicate that the finding of Board of Revenue that sale of coal was complete only at the weigh bridge was for the purpose of deciding whether entry tax was payable on such sale of coal. We find a lot of force in this submission and we accordingly reformulate the question of law as referred to us as follows :- "whether under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Board of Revenue was justified in holding that the assessee was liable to entry tax under the Entry Tax Act on sale of coal brought into the local areas for the purpose of weighment at the weigh bridges and thereafter dispatched outside the local areas. " ( 5. ) MR. Shrivastava submitted that under Section 3 of Entry Tax Act, the entry tax is leviable on the entry of goods into a local area for consumption, use or sale therein. In the present case the coal entered into the local areas not for the purpose of consumption, use or sale within the local areas, but only for the purpose of weighment at the weigh bridges located in the local areas. He submitted that the authorities are now clear that so far as octroi and entry tax are concerned, the situs of sale is irrelevant and the true test for determining as to whether octroi or entry tax was payable on goods is whether sale of goods has been made for the purpose of ultimate use and consumption within the local area. In support of his submission, he cited the decisions of the Supreme Court in Burmah-Shell Oil Storage and Distributing Co. of India Ltd. , Belgaum Vs. Belgaum Borough Municipality, Belgaum, AIR 1963 SC 906 , Hiralal Thakorlal dalai Vs. Broach Municipality, AIR 1976 SC 1446 , Municipal Council Vs. Parekh automobiles Ltd. , (1990) 1 SCC 367 , Tata Engineering and Locomotive Company ltd. Vs. Municipal Corporation of the City of Thane and others, AIR 1992 SC 645 and Entry Tax Officer, Bangalore Vs. Chandanmal Champalal and Co. , (1994) 4 scc 463 . ( 6. ) MR. Sanjay Yadav, learned Deputy A. G. for the State of M. P. , on the other hand, referred to Section 22 of Sale of Goods Act, 1930 which provides that where there is a contract for the sale of specified goods in a deliverable state, but the seller is bound to weigh, measure, test or do some other act or thing with reference to the goods for the purpose of ascertaining the price, the property in the goods does not pass until such act or thing is done and the buyer has notice thereof. He argued that unless the coal intended to be sold by the assessee to a purchaser is weighed at the weigh bridge located in the local area, property in the coal does not pass on to the purchaser and sale is not complete. He strenuously urged that since the sale of coal was completed at the weigh bridge in the local area, the goods were liable to entry tax as per the provisions of section 3 of Entry Tax Act. ( 7. ) WE are unable to accept the aforesaid submission of Mr. Sanjay yadav, Dy. A. G. for State of M. P. in Burmah-Shell Oil Storage and Distributing co. of India Ltd. Vs. Belgaum Borough Municipality (supra), one of the questions which arose for decision before the Supreme Court was as to whether Burmah-Shell Company was liable to octroi in respect of goods which it brought into the municipal area but which were re-exported thereafter and the Supreme Court held that said Company was not liable to octroi in respect of such goods which it brought into the municipal area but which it re-exported thereafter. The reason for the decision given by the Supreme Court was that the concept of octroi included bringing of goods into the municipal area for use or consumption therein so that the goods come to a repose there, and since the goods which were re-exported were not used or consumed in the local area and did not come to repose within the municipal area, it was not liable to octroi. In Hiralal Thakorlal dalai Vs. Broach Municipality (supra), the goods were dispatched to a destination outside the municipal area for consumption or use and a plea was raised for review of decision in Burmah-Shell Oil Storage and Distributing co. case, but the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court rejected the said request for reconsideration and held that word "sale" in the colloquium of words "consumption, use or sale therein" means sale for consumption within the octroi limits. In Municipal Council Vs. Parekh Automobiles Ltd. (supra), the Supreme court held that there can be no octroi duty levied by Jodhpur Municipality in respect of goods sold by Indian Oil Corporation within the municipal limit but clearly intended to be transported for use or consumption outside the municipal limit. In Tata Engineering and Locomotive Company Ltd. Vs. Municipal corporation of the City of Thane and others (supra), the Supreme Court relying on aforesaid earlier decisions in Burmah-Shell Oil Storage and Distributing Co. of India Ltd. , Belgaum Vs. Belgaum Borough Municipality, Belgaum (supra), hiralal Thakorlal Dalai Vs. Broach Municipality (supra) and Municipal Council vs. Parekh Automobiles Ltd. (supra), held that sales within the municipal limits of the Municipal Corporation to persons who are carrying on business outside the limits of Corporation when the goods were intended to be consumed and used outside the limits of Municipal Corporation were not liable to octroi tax. ( 8. ) ALTHOUGH entry tax is levied by the State legislature under the Entry tax Act and is different from octroi which was levied by a municipality or a municipal corporation authorized by an Act of the State legislature, both entry tax and octroi are covered by one and the same legislative entry 52 of List II and are "taxes on entry of goods into local area for consumption, use or sale therein". The very preamble of the Entry Tax Act states that this is an Act to levy a tax on entry of goods into a local area in M. P. for consumption, use or sale therein. Section 2 (b) of the Entry Tax Act defines "entry tax to mean a tax on entry of goods into a local area for consumption, use or sale therein levied and payable in accordance with the Act. " Section 3 (1) (a) which is the charging section, states that there shall be levied an entry tax on the entry in the course of business of a dealer of goods specified in Schedule to the Act into "each local area for consumption, use or sale therein. " Hence, liability to entry tax under the Entry tax Act would arise only if entry of goods into the local area is for consumption, use or sale in the local area. Therefore, if entry of goods into a local area is only for the purpose of weighment not for consumption, use or sale of goods within the local area, no entry tax is payable. The expression "sale therein" in Section 3 of Karnataka Tax on Entry of Goods into Local Areas for Consumption, Use or sale Therein Act, 1979 arose for interpretation before the Supreme Court in entry Tax Officer, Bangalore Vs. Chandanmal Champalaland Co. (supra), and the supreme Court relying on its earlier decisions in Burmah-Shell Oil Storage and distributing Co. of India Ltd. , Belgaum Vs. Belgaum Borough Municipality, belgaum (supra), Hiralal Thakorlal Dalai Vs. Broach Municipality (supra), municipal Council Vs. Parekh Automobiles Ltd. (supra), held that the words "sale therein" would mean "sale of goods within a local area for consumption or use therein". In the aforesaid decision in case of Entry Tax Officer, Bangalore Vs. Chandamal Champalal and Co. (supra), the Supreme Court did not accept the submission of Shri Murthy, learned Counsel, to give a different meaning to the expression "sale therein" in the Entry Tax Act than what was given by the aforesaid decision of the Supreme Court to said expression in the context of octroi. Relevant portion of the judgment of Supreme Court in the aforesaid case of Entry Tax Officer, Bangalore Vs. Chandanmal Champalal and Co. Relevant portion of the judgment of Supreme Court in the aforesaid case of Entry Tax Officer, Bangalore Vs. Chandanmal Champalal and Co. (supra), is quoted here in below:- "while we cannot deny the force and substance in the submissions urged by Sri Narasimha Murthy, we do not finnd it possible to give effect to it in the light of the decisions referred to by Sri Salve. It is true that Burmah-Shell, (1963) Supp 2 SCR 216: AIR 1963 SC 906 , hiralal Thakorlal, AIR 1976 SC 1446 and Parekh Automobiles, (1990) 1 SCC 367 were concerned with State enactments which empowered the municipalities to levy the impost. All the same a close reading of the said decisions does indicate that they have read the words "sale therein" occurring in entry 52 of List II as meaning "a sale of goods within a local area for consumption or use therein" though as a matter of fact, in a given case, the goods may be taken out and consumed there. The decisions clearly say that where the goods are sold within a local area for the purpose of being taken out of that local area and are actually taken out, no levy is permissible under entry 52. It is not possible to distinguish the said decisions on the grounds suggested by Sri Murthy. There is yet another reason. Octroi or any impost in the nature of that impost has always been looked upon with certain amount of disfavour. Acceptance of the States contention in this case would ultimately result in driving up the price of these goods to the consumer. It would become another sales tax in effect. In the circumstances, we are inclined to indeed we have no option but to - affirm the decision of the Karnataka High Court on the meaning of the words "sale therein" in section 3 of the Karnataka Act. " ( 9. ) FOR the aforesaid reasons, we answer the question referred to us in the negative and hold that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Board of Revenue was not justified in holding that assessee was liable to entry tax on the coal brought into local area only for the purpose of weighment at the weigh bridges, if the said coal was sent out of the said local area for use or consumption outside such local areas. The question as to whether the entry tax, if already paid by the assessee on such sale of coal, is to be refunded to the assessee or not is left open to be decided in accordance with law.