GUJARAT STEEL TUBES Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE appeals by certificate granted by the High Court of Kerala raise the question whether galvanised iron pipes and tubes are a commercially different commodity from steel tubes mentioned in S. 14 (iv) (xi) of the Central Sales Tax Act.

(2.) THE appellant is a company registered under the companies Act, 1956. It has its registered office at Ahamedabad in Gujarat. It is engaged in the manufacture and sale of steel tubes and pipes both black and galvanised.

(3.) THE purpose of galvanising a pipe is merely to make it weather-proof. It remains a steel tube. By being put through the process of galvanising it is made rust-proof. Neither its structure nor function is altered. As a commercial item it is not different from a steel tube. That galvanisation is done on steel tubes or pipes as a protective measure only was the basis of the decision of the Karnataka High Court in Associated Mechanical industries (supra ). Merely because the steel tube has been galvanised does not mean that it ceased to be a steel tube. THE Gujarat High Court in State of gujarat v. Shah Veljibai Motichand, Lunawada (1969) 23 STC 288 held that merely because iron is given the shape of a sheet and is subject to corrugation does not take it out of the description of "iron and steel". So also in sales Tax Commissioner and Others v. Jammu Iron and Steel Syndicate (1980) 45 stc 99 the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir held that galvanisation and corrugation do not change the essential character of iron sheets, and they remain iron sheets.