STATE OF KARNATAKA Vs. CHAMUNDESWARI INDUSTRIES

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition is directed against an order made by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal holding that parched rice and puffed rice are rice and therefore do not attract purchase tax under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957, while the assessing authority and the appellate authority had held against the dealer.

(2.) The entries with which we are concerned are entry 138 of the Second Schedule and entry 9 of the Fourth Schedule to the Act. They read as under :

(3.) A careful perusal of that decision will disclose that the Supreme Court came to the conclusion that rice and puffed or parched rice are one and the same keeping in view the various provisions of the Act referred to therein together with the history of exemption of parched rice and puffed rice and its cancellation and there was no separate entry in regard to parched rice or puffed rice under that Act. Under the scheme of the Karnataka Act, however, the entries are separately given in that entry 138 of the Second Schedule covers parched rice or beaten rice and entry 9 of Fourth Schedule covers rice as such. It is permissible for the Legislature to classify goods in any manner it likes and this position is clear in view of the fact that after the manufacturing process a new commodity comes into existence. This is how the Supreme Court has dealt with the point in State of Tamil Nadu v. Pyare Lal Malhotra [1976] 37 STC 319 :