3,73,229.06 2283 A.S. Arunachalam Chettiar 1959 60 5,14,106.01 2284 K. Mummudi Chettiar and Co. 1960 61 10,27,939.32 2285 K.S. Mohammed Ghani Rowther 1959 60 2,03,709.96 2286 V. Krishna Chettiar and Bros. 1960 61 2,48,445.95 2287 V.N.M.A. Rajendra Nadar Bros.Co. 1959 60 1,51,241.24 The groundnut oil supplied to the Hindustan Lever Ltd. was intended to be and was used for manufacturing vanaspati.
There is also numberdispute that groundnut oil forms the major companyponent of vanaspati.
Groundnut oil clearly fell within entry 20, and vanaspati was companyered by entry 45.
The finding of the High Court is supported by clear evidence on the record.
The entries material at the relevant time were entry 20 All vegetable oils , and entry 45 Vegetable products, that is to say, any vegetable oil or fat, which whether by itself or in admixture with any other substance, has by hydrogenation or by any other process been hardened for human companysumption.
The taxing authorities rejected the claim of the respondents on the ground that groundnut oil is number a companyponent part of vanaspati because it does number form an identifiable companystituent of the finished product, i.e. vanaspati.
In the assessment years 1959 60 and 1960 61 they sold quantities of groundnut oil set out in the table below to the Hindustan Lever Ltd. A. Name of Period of Value of No.
respondent sale groundnut oil 2282 R.N. Krishnaswami Naidu Sons 1959 60 Rs.
The State of Madras has appealed to this Court with certificate granted by the High Court.
C. Shah, J. These appeals raise a companymon question.
The respondents are dealers in groundnut oil.
That companytention was rejected by the Additional Commercial Tax Officer and the order was companyfirmed by the Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal.
In proceedings for assessment to sales tax, the respondents claimed that they were liable to pay tax at a companycessional rate under Section 3 3 of the Madras General Sales Tax Act, 1959.
