https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168613 Article 286 did not operate retrospectively to invalidate assessments for pre-Constitution tax periods merely because the orders were made later; liability was determined by the law applicable to the relevant period, so the constitutional objection failed. An attempted substitution of Explanation II to section 2(g) that lacked the requisite assent never validly came into force, so it did not repeal the old provision and the unamended Explanation II remained operative. Mere mixing of manganese ore grades during unloading and transport did not amount to manufacture, because no new commercially distinct commodity emerged; the assessee's contention failed on that issue. en-us Fri, 29 Oct 1976 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 17 Mar 2015 12:01:53 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168613 Article 286 did not operate retrospectively to invalidate assessments for pre-Constitution tax periods merely because the orders were made later; liability was determined by the law applicable to the relevant period, so the constitutional objection failed. An attempted substitution of Explanation II to section 2(g) that lacked the requisite assent never validly came into force, so it did not repeal the old provision and the unamended Explanation II remained operative. Mere mixing of manganese ore grades during unloading and transport did not amount to manufacture, because no new commercially distinct commodity emerged; the assessee's contention failed on that issue. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 29 Oct 1976 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168613