Commercial identity test preserves export exemption for frozen frog legs, as mere preservation did not create a distinct commodity.

Fresh frog legs cleaned and frozen only to prevent decomposition were treated as the same commodity as fresh frog legs for exemption under Section 5(3) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956. The governing test was whether the processed goods were regarded in trade and commercial parlance as a distinct commodity from the original article. Applying that test, the Court held that preservation by freezing and incidental cleaning did not alter the essential character or commercial identity of the goods. The assessee therefore remained entitled to the export-linked exemption, and the exemption claim was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether fresh frog legs, after cleaning and freezing to prevent decomposition, remained the same commodity for the purpose of exemption under Section 5(3) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956.

Analysis: The governing test is whether the processed article is regarded in trade and commercial parlance as a distinct commodity from the original article. Applying that test, freezing and incidental cleaning done only to preserve the commodity did not change its essential character or identity. The processed frog legs continued to be commercially the same as the fresh frog legs purchased for export. The earlier decision on processed seafood, following the same principle, supported the conclusion that mere processing preserving the commodity does not create a new and distinct commodity.

Conclusion: The assessee was entitled to the benefit of Section 5(3) because frozen frog legs were the same commodity as fresh frog legs.

Final Conclusion: The appeal failed, and the exemption claim of the assessee was upheld.

Ratio Decidendi: For purposes of export-linked exemption under Section 5(3) of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, processing that merely preserves a commodity and does not make it commercially distinct does not change its identity as the same commodity.

---