https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151352 Parched rice and puffed rice were held commercially and functionally distinct from rice simpliciter, so they did not fall within entry 66 of Schedule I merely because they are derived from paddy. The exclusion from that specific entry did not create tax immunity, and the commodities remained liable under the general charging provision. The earlier exemption notification was validly withdrawn by a later statutory notification, supported by the power to revoke exemptions, and the challenge to the withdrawal failed. The result was that the assessees were not entitled to exemption or concessional treatment for those commodities. en-us Tue, 24 Aug 1976 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 04 Jun 2013 18:16:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151352 Parched rice and puffed rice were held commercially and functionally distinct from rice simpliciter, so they did not fall within entry 66 of Schedule I merely because they are derived from paddy. The exclusion from that specific entry did not create tax immunity, and the commodities remained liable under the general charging provision. The earlier exemption notification was validly withdrawn by a later statutory notification, supported by the power to revoke exemptions, and the challenge to the withdrawal failed. The result was that the assessees were not entitled to exemption or concessional treatment for those commodities. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Tue, 24 Aug 1976 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=151352