SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1990 Supreme(Bom) 306

H.D.PATEL, V.A.MOHTA
KISANGOPAL SHRIKISANDAS DAMANI – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA. – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
V. C. Daga, for the applicant.
V. B. Dawda, for the respondent.

JUDGMENT

The judgment of the Court was delivered by

V. A. MOHTA, J. - The following question is referred for determination at the instance of the assessee under section 61 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 ("the Act") :

"Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding that conversion of crude cotton seed oil into refined oil amounts to manufacture within the meaning of section 2(17) of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959 ?"

2. The basic factual background is as under :

The assessee is an oil mill owner. He is a registered dealer. During the period 31st October, 1970 to 19th October, 1971, he purchased crude cotton seed oil for resale from registered dealers on form 16 of rule 21 framed under section 12-C of the Act. The crude oil was refined in his oil mill by a technical process which calls for mixing of caustic soda. According to the Sales Tax Officer, the process amounted to "manufacture" and hence, those purchases were subjected to purchase tax under section 14 of the Act. The assessee had contended that there was no manufacturing process involved. This submission was rejected by the Sales Tax Officer as well as by the first and















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top