https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151262 Raw hides and skins and dressed hides and skins were treated as commercially distinct commodities because curing, tanning and dressing bring a new marketable product into existence. The inclusion of both forms in the same declared-goods entry did not make them identical for sales tax purposes, and the statutory scheme did not bar taxation of the processed commodity. Section 14 was held to be classificatory, while Section 15 did not prevent levy on a different commodity emerging after manufacture. The State was therefore entitled to tax inter-State sales of dressed hides and skins despite prior tax on the purchase of raw hides and skins, and the challenge to the amended provision failed. en-us Thu, 27 Nov 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 07 Aug 2013 16:34:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151262 Raw hides and skins and dressed hides and skins were treated as commercially distinct commodities because curing, tanning and dressing bring a new marketable product into existence. The inclusion of both forms in the same declared-goods entry did not make them identical for sales tax purposes, and the statutory scheme did not bar taxation of the processed commodity. Section 14 was held to be classificatory, while Section 15 did not prevent levy on a different commodity emerging after manufacture. The State was therefore entitled to tax inter-State sales of dressed hides and skins despite prior tax on the purchase of raw hides and skins, and the challenge to the amended provision failed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Thu, 27 Nov 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151262