In Brief
A paint dealer mixed base paint with colorant using a computerized DTS machine to produce custom-shaded paints. The tax authority claimed this was 'manufacture' and subject to fresh taxation. The dealer argued it was merely variation of an existing product. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision that mixing paint with colorant does not constitute manufacture under the U.P. Trade Tax Act. The resultant product remains 'paint'—a commercially recognized variation, not a new commodity. Since both ingredients were separately taxed, no additional tax was due.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.