1992 (2) TMI 359

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... area for refining is taxable under entry 16B up to March 31, 1987, has approached this Court. Pursuant to this clarification, in the course of the assessment, a pre-assessment notice is issued to the petitioner relying upon the aforesaid clarification. 2.. Though normally this Court could not have interfered with a preassessment notice issued, but relegated the parties to work out their remedie .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... held that it does not give rise to a new commodity at all and therefore tax was not attracted to that particular goods. The contention advanced on behalf of the assessee in that case is that the hydrogenated groundnut oil was no less groundnut oil than either refined or unrefined oil and the fact that the quality of the oil had been improved does not negative its continuing to be oil and the mate .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... content of the raw oil being separated and removed, rendering the oily content of the oil 100 per cent. Thus, it falls within the scope of the decision that the quality of the oil had been improved and therefore it does not negative its continuing to be oil. In refining the same, purification process is involved and nothing more. 4.. I think this contention raised on behalf of the petitioner ha .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X