Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.27 seconds)

Mr. E.C. Kent vs Mrs. E.E.L. Kent on 27 March, 1925

In Kent v. Astley (L.R. 5 Q.B. 19), people were engaged in getting large blocks of slate to another part of the quarry and splitting them with hammers and chisels into laminae or slates, edging them square or dressing them with iron knife by hand into separate articles and dividing them into quantities for sale and it was held that the process of shaping slates was a "manufacturing process".
Madras High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 20 - Full Document

G.R. Kulkarni vs The State on 16 January, 1957

15. Breaking boulders into gitti was held to be a process of manufacture in G.R. Kulkarni v. The State [1957] 8 S.T.C. 294. Hidayatullah, C.J., and Chaturvedi, J., held that boulders themselves are a marketable commodity and if they had been sold as such it would not have been a sale of manufactured goods, but gitti is a different marketable commodity and the conversion of boulders into gitti amounted to manufacturing. The learned Judges observed at page 296 :
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 21 - M Hidayatullah - Full Document
1