Manufacture test for tinted paint: adding colourants to base paint did not create a new taxable commodity.

Addition of colourants to base paint did not create a new commercial commodity where the base material was already understood and sold as paint. The governing test was whether the process produced a distinct product in name, character or use; mere variation, finishing or alteration was not manufacture unless a new commercially different commodity emerged. Applying that principle, tinted paint remained within the same taxable description as base paint under Entry No. 47 of Notification No. 2375 dated 23.11.1998, so no fresh tax liability arose on the tinting process.

---

---

Issues: Whether the base paint after addition of colourants remained paint for the purposes of Entry No. 47 of Notification No. 2375 dated 23.11.1998, or whether the tinting process resulted in manufacture of a different commercial commodity liable to tax again.

Analysis: The relevant test was whether the process brought into existence a new commodity commercially different in name, character or use. The Court accepted the evidence that the base material itself was paint, commonly sold and understood as such, and that the subsequent addition of colour did not create a new product. It relied on the settled principle that mere variation, finishing, or alteration does not amount to manufacture unless a distinct commercial commodity emerges. Applying that principle, the Court held that the decision in the earlier connected matter correctly treated the base paint and the tinted paint as falling within the same taxable description under the notification.

Conclusion: The addition of colour to base paint did not amount to manufacture, and the goods remained covered by Entry No. 47 of Notification No. 2375 dated 23.11.1998. The assessee succeeded and the State's challenge failed.

---