1997 (11) TMI 475

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t dismissing writ petitions filed by the appellants. The order states: "In view of the decision of the Division Bench of this Court dated November 6, 1996 in M.C.C. No. 3 of 1996 [Indian Poultry v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1998] 230 ITR 909 (MP)], the matter is no longer res integra. A similar controversy was raised in the said case and negativing the contention this Court held that the process which is involved in developing of chicks into broilers did not bring about any change so as to produce a commodity having any new commercial identity. It was held that manufacture implies a change but every change is not manufacture and yet every change in an article is the result of some treatment, labour and manipulation." 2.. The appellants ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rty other than actionable claims, newspapers, stocks, shares, securities or Government stamps and includes all materials, articles and commodities, whether or not to be used in the construction, fitting out, improvement or repair of movable or immovable property; and also includes all growing crops, grass, trees, plants and things attached to, or forming part of, the land which are agreed to be severed before sale or under the contract of sale." By reason of section 6(2)(a) a concessional rate of tax is payable on the sales of goods specified in Schedule II if they are to be used in the "manufacture or processing of goods." 5.. Our attention was drawn by learned counsel for the appellants to the judgment of this Court dated 3rd November, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ving regard to this judgment, that the basis upon which the High Court had proceeded, that is to say, its insistence on the production of a commodity having a new commercial identity, was misplaced. He submitted that rearing of the chicks until they produced marketable broilers was an act which fell within the definition of "manufacture" as contained in section 2(j). The broilers were "goods" prepared for the market. 6.. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that broilers were not "goods" for the purposes of the definition of "manufacture" in section 2(j), but they were "goods" within the meaning of section 2(g). This, in his submission, was because the levy of sales tax was not on "manufacture". For the purposes of section 2(j), w....