Retrospective sales tax amendment narrowed concessional levy to visually identifiable components, excluding groundnut oil in vanaspati manufacturing.

Retrospective amendment to the explanation under section 3(3) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 was treated as operating from 1 April 1959 by legal fiction, so the concessional levy applied only to components visually identifiable and capable of separation by mechanical process. On that construction, groundnut oil used in manufacturing vanaspati did not qualify as a component part, and the earlier view based on chemical identifiability could not stand. The Tribunal's decision was set aside and the Revenue's position prevailed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee was entitled to the concessional levy under section 3(3) of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959, in view of the retrospective amendment made by Madras Act 27 of 1970 to the explanation defining a component part.

Analysis: The amended explanation was brought into force retrospectively from 1 April 1959, the date of commencement of the principal Act, and therefore had to be treated as part of the Act from that date by legal fiction. On that basis, the benefit of section 3(3) was confined to components identifiable visually and capable of separation by a mechanical process. The groundnut oil used in the manufacture of vanaspati was not such a visually identifiable constituent, and the earlier view based on chemical identifiability could not survive the retrospective amendment.

Conclusion: The assessee was not entitled to the benefit of section 3(3), and the decision of the Tribunal was set aside in favour of the Revenue.

---