https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105106 The Supreme Court construed the inclusive definition of "agricultural produce" under the U.P. Krishi Utpadan Mandi Adhiniyam, 1964 as extending to processed forms of items listed in the Schedule. Because "hides and skins" are scheduled animal husbandry products, tanned leather was treated as a processed form of that commodity after cleaning, curing and preservation. The Court held that commercial distinctness from raw hide or skin did not prevent coverage under the Act. On that construction, tanned leather remained within the statutory definition and was liable to mandi fee. en-us Wed, 14 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 01 May 2014 15:45:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105106 The Supreme Court construed the inclusive definition of "agricultural produce" under the U.P. Krishi Utpadan Mandi Adhiniyam, 1964 as extending to processed forms of items listed in the Schedule. Because "hides and skins" are scheduled animal husbandry products, tanned leather was treated as a processed form of that commodity after cleaning, curing and preservation. The Court held that commercial distinctness from raw hide or skin did not prevent coverage under the Act. On that construction, tanned leather remained within the statutory definition and was liable to mandi fee. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Wed, 14 Feb 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=105106