Common Parlance Test: cutting oil classified as a petroleum product because its primary trade identity was coolant use.

Cutting oil was treated as a petroleum product rather than a lubricant for sales tax classification because its commercial identity in trade was that of a coolant used in machining, cutting and grinding operations. Applying the common parlance test, the court focused on how dealers and consumers understood the product and on its primary function. Any lubricating effect was only secondary and incidental, so that feature did not make it a lubricant under the relevant entry. The product was therefore not classifiable as a lubricant and fell under the petroleum product entry.

---

---

Issues: Whether cutting oil is classifiable as a lubricant under entry 15 of Schedule II, Part A of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 or as a petroleum product under entry 34 of Schedule II, Part A of the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969.

Analysis: The product was found, on the facts, to be marketed and understood in trade as a coolant used in machining, cutting and grinding operations, with any lubricating effect being only secondary and incidental. Applying the common parlance test, the relevant inquiry was the commercial identity of the as understood by dealers and consumers, and the product's primary function was decisive. Since it was commonly sold and purchased as a coolant, the mere presence of some lubricating quality did not make it a lubricant for sales tax classification.

Conclusion: The product is not classifiable under entry 15 as a lubricant and is rightly classifiable under entry 34 as a petroleum product.

---