9911796707
TMI Blog1992 (9) TMI 319X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he purchase point. He also contended that the tamarind seed dhal is obtained by roasting the same. This is for the purpose of preserving from decay and making it marketable. The Commercial Tax Officer took the view that tamarind seed and tamarind seed dhal are two different commodities and accordingly levied tax on the said turnover at the rate of 4 per cent under section 5(1) of the A.P. General Sales Tax Act, 1957. The petitioner carried the matter before the Assistant Commissioner (CT), Kurnool. Relying upon the order of the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal in a similar case, the Assistant Commissioner held that they are not two different commodities and set aside the levy of tax. In exercise of the power under section 20 of the A.P. General ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l Sales Tax Act which excludes from tax liability under the Act, sale of agricultural and horticultural produce. The question before the court was whether arecanuts after they were peeled and the kernels thereafter sliced, boiled and dried change their character so as to cease to be agricultural or horticultural produce. The Madras High Court held that the arecanuts were only subject to the minimum processing absolutely necessary for their sale and therefore retained their character as horticultural produce within the meaning of the proviso to section 2(i). The principle laid down by the Madras High Court is that where any agricultural or horticultural produce is subjected to the minimum processing before that produce can be marketed, it wo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... there was no use to which the groundnut oil could be put for which the hydrogenated oil could not be used nor was there any to which the hydrogenated oil could be put for which the raw oil could not be used. The Supreme Court has observed that hydrogenated oil still continues to be "groundnut oil" notwithstanding the processing which is merely for the purpose of rendering the oil more stable thus improving its keeping qualities for those who desire to consume groundnut oil. In that view of the matter it held that the assessee was entitled to the benefit of deduction of the purchase price of the kernel or groundnut under the relevant rules. In the instant case there is no material to show that the tamarind seeds and the tamarind seed dhal a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t is removed from husk, the husk and rice become separately taxable under the Act. But, there are no separate entries for rice and rice reduced into an edible form by heating or parching without any addition of ingredients or appreciable changes in chemical composition and that the term "rice" is wide enough to include rice in its various forms whether edible or inedible. In Singh Trading Company v. Commercial Tax Officer [1979] 44 STC 1, the question before a Division Bench of our High Court was whether cashewnut and kernel are not two different commercial commodities and are not separately taxable. Under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, cashew kernel will not be liable to tax at the point of first purchase in the State when the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tity between the original commodity and the processed article it was not possible to say that one commodity has been consumed in the manufacture of another. Although it has undergone a degree of processing, it must be regarded as still retaining its original identity. The test laid down in this case is that even after processing the commodity must retain its original identity. In Udata Narasimha Rao and Co. v. State of Andhra Pradesh [1982] 51 STC 126 the question before a Division Bench of our High Court was whether cereals and pulses, ravva obtained from rice or wheat and fried gram dhal, were declared goods under entries 144, 147 of Schedule I of the A.P. General Sales Tax Act (sic). The Division Bench held that the meaning of the expr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er the tamarind dhal and tamarind seed dhal are one and the same commodity. As observed above, the use to which these commodities are put, is not recorded by the Tribunal as no evidence was placed by the parties before it. The commodity, tamarind seed is understood in commercial circles as different and distinct commodity from tamarind seed kernel. With regard to the characteristics, the Tribunal observed that when once the seed was converted into kernel it lost its essential characteristic and value. Therefore, it follows that tamarind seed and tamarind seed dhal are different commodities and both the commodities cannot be treated as one and the same. In this view of the matter, we confirm the order under revision. The revision is accord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
