Judgment D. MURUGESAN, J. 1. The Tax Case Revision is at the instance of the assessee, who was unsuccessful both before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal. The assessee has raised the following question of law for consideration by this Court, viz., "Whether on facts and in the circumstances, the Tribunal has erred in not considering that movement of goods from one point to another point within the State will alter the transaction of intra-state sales merely because there was a detour to Pondicherry in between ?" 2. The assessee are the manufacturers of industrial paints. They reported a total and taxable turnover of Rs.10,84,563/- and Rs.9,16,707/- respectively for the year 1987-88 under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959. They claimed deduction as regards stock transfer for a sum of Rs.2,28,229/-. On verification of records, accounts, etc., the assessing officer found that the assessee manufactured paints with reference to specific orders placed by the parties, namely, Tvl.Indian Textile Paper Tube Co., Virudhunagar and Neyveli Lignite Corporation, Neyveli and the manufactured paints were transferred to their depot at Pondicherry. From Pondicherry, the goods were sent to Virudhunagar and Neyveli. Hence, the assessing officer found that there was a clear nexus in transfer and subsequent sales and when the goods have just passed through Pondicherry and the breaking journey at Pondicherry will not alter the character of the sale. Finally, the assessing officer concluded that the transfer of goods had amounted to sale and consequently, rejected the claim for deduction on stock transfer. The said order was taken on appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner and the finding of the assessing officer was confirmed. The further appeal to the Tribunal was also of no way. 3. We have heard Mr.Manoharan Sundaram, learned Government Advocate for the petitioner/State and Mr.N.Inbarajan, learned counsel for the respondent/assessee. 4. A reading of the order of the Tribunal shows that Virudhunagar office placed the purchase orders to the assessee's office at Chennai and the contract was concluded only at Chennai and the goods also reached Virudhunagar, which is within Tamil Nadu. With that factual material, the Tribunal also concluded that it is a local sale and not an inter-state sale. 5. With that factual material, the Tribunal also concluded that it is a local sale and not an inter-state sale. 5. The contention of the learned Government Advocate appearing for the petitioner/State is that the goods were sent to Pondicherry, unloaded there and again they were loaded and sent to Virudhunagar and therefore, it is an inter-state sale. Merely because the goods which were despatched from Chennai and enroute, the goods were unloaded at Pondicherry, does not make the nature of sale as one of interstate sale. The relevant test would be the place where the goods were booked and where they were received and in the event both the places are within the State, it must be considered to be a local sale and not inter-state sale. The finding of both the appellate authorities are on the above factual background. We find no interference is called for. 6. Accordingly, the Tax Case Revision is dismissed answering the question of law against the State and in favour of the assessee. No costs.