https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179778 Paddy husk was treated as distinct from rice husk for purposes of the taxing notifications. Reading the earlier notifications in light of later entries that separately referred to rice husk and paddy husk, the Court accepted that the later notifications clarified the pre-existing distinction rather than altering the law. The commodity purchased by the dealer was therefore identified as paddy husk, not rice husk. On that basis, it was not taxable at the first purchase under the earlier notifications, and the revisions failed. en-us Fri, 30 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 09 Mar 2016 17:27:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179778 Paddy husk was treated as distinct from rice husk for purposes of the taxing notifications. Reading the earlier notifications in light of later entries that separately referred to rice husk and paddy husk, the Court accepted that the later notifications clarified the pre-existing distinction rather than altering the law. The commodity purchased by the dealer was therefore identified as paddy husk, not rice husk. On that basis, it was not taxable at the first purchase under the earlier notifications, and the revisions failed. Case-Laws VAT and Sales Tax Fri, 30 Jan 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179778