Timber logs and sawn timber remain the same taxable commodity where sawing does not create a new commercial product.

Timber logs and sawn timber were held to be the same commercial commodity for sales tax purposes because sawing only changes form and does not create a new article with a distinct name, character or use. The revisional order was based on the erroneous assumption that logs and sawn timber were different items, so that finding was quashed. Consequential demand notices founded on the same mistaken separation were also quashed.

---

---

Issues: Whether timber logs and sawn timber are the same commodity for the purposes of sales tax, and whether the revisional order and consequential demand notices based on a contrary view were valid.

Analysis: The Court applied the settled principle that a mere change in form does not amount to manufacture unless a new and different article emerges with a distinct name, character or use. Relying on the authorities on timber, logs, beams, rafters and planks, it held that timber logs and sawn timber remain the same commercial commodity. The revisional order proceeded on the erroneous assumption that logs and sawn timber were different and separate items, and the consequential demand notices were founded on that error.

Conclusion: The finding that logs and sawn timber were different commodities was quashed, and the consequential demand notices were also quashed. The writ petition succeeded.

Ratio Decidendi: Where sawing timber logs does not bring into existence a new and distinct commercial commodity, the goods remain the same taxable commodity and a revisional or consequential demand based on their mistaken separation cannot stand.

---