TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether sugar brought into the local area and used for preparing Bura is consumed or used as raw material for the manufacture of other goods so as to attract the concessional rate of entry tax under the proviso to section 4(1) of the Entry Tax Act, or whether Bura remains the same commodity as sugar and entry tax is chargeable at the normal rate.
Analysis: The proviso to section 4(1) applies only where the goods brought into the local area are consumed or used as raw material for the manufacture of other goods. That requires the original goods to lose their identity and emerge as a new and different commercial commodity. The wide definition of manufacture in the sales tax law does not by itself govern the proviso, because the words "raw material" and "other goods" necessarily imply distinct goods. Applying the test of transformation and commercial identity, the Court found that Bura is only an amorphous form of sugar. Both cane sugar and Bura contain substantially the same sucrose content, and the processing of sugar into Bura does not produce a new marketable commodity with a different name, character, or use. The conclusion was reinforced by the statutory treatment of all forms of sugar as one category in the relevant enactments and by decisions treating similar processes as not amounting to manufacture of a different commodity.
Conclusion: Sugar used for making Bura was not consumed as raw material for the manufacture of other goods. Bura is not a different commercial commodity from sugar, and the petitioner was not entitled to the concessional rate under the proviso to section 4(1). The higher rate of entry tax was rightly applied.
Ratio Decidendi: The concessional rate for goods used as raw material applies only when processing results in a new and distinct commercial commodity; where the processed product retains its substantial identity with the original goods, the proviso does not apply.
TaxTMI 
