Real judgements, distilled

Legal Case Shots

Court judgements broken down into the case type, how the decision played out, and the lesson worth remembering, with the full judgement available as a PDF.

Frequently asked questions

Is this suitable for use in legal research and court filings?+

Legal Case Shots is built to help you quickly identify and understand relevant precedent. For citation in pleadings or filings, always verify against the full judgment PDF and current citation format (e.g., 2026 INSC ___).

How is a "lesson learnt" different from the judgment's holding?+

The holding is what the court legally decided. The lesson learnt translates that into a practical takeaway: what a lawyer should factor into case strategy or client advice as a result of this precedent.

Is the full judgment available, or just a summary?+

Both. Each case shows a distilled summary (case type, key holding, and lesson learnt) and links to the full judgment as a PDF for when you need the complete text for research or citation.

Can I filter judgments by date or case type?+

Yes. Use Advanced Filters to narrow results by decision date and by practice area, including Constitutional Law, Criminal Law, Service & Administrative Law, Family Law, Civil Property & Inheritance, and Labour & Industrial Law.

Can I search judgments by a specific judge?+

Yes. You can filter judgments by the judge or bench that decided the case, which is useful for tracking how a particular judge has reasoned on similar issues across multiple rulings.

What is Legal Case Shots?+

Legal Case Shots is a searchable database of Supreme Court of India judgments, each broken down into the case type, the court's key holding, and a practical lesson learnt, with the full judgment available as a PDF for citation or deeper reading.

Tax & Customs LawSupreme Court of India

State of Jharkhand and Ors. Etc. vs. Linde India Ltd and Anr. Etc.

Civil AppealDecided 2 Dec 2022
Civil Appeal Nos. 8061-8064 of 2022
M.R. Shah · M.M. Sundresh

Background

Linde India Limited supplied pure oxygen gas to Tata Steel for its steel-making process and claimed a concessional 2% sales tax rate under the Bihar Finance Act, 1981 (as applicable to Jharkhand), on the basis that oxygen was a "raw material." A six-member expert committee, appointed after an earlier Supreme Court remand, found that oxygen was only a "refining agent" used to reduce carbon content, not a direct raw material, and tax authorities at three levels assessed tax at the higher 3% rate. The Jharkhand High Court overturned these findings and held oxygen qualified as raw material, prompting the State to appeal.

Decision Breakdown

The Supreme Court held that the High Court, exercising writ jurisdiction under Article 226, should not have overturned the concurrent factual findings of three expert/technical authorities on a technical question the High Court lacked expertise to re-decide. On merits, applying the tests from earlier precedents (Ballarpur Industries and Thomas Stephen & Co.), the Court found that oxygen used only to reduce carbon content in steel-making is akin to a "refining agent" or processing aid, not an indispensable raw material of the end product, so the concessional 2% rate did not apply. The assessment orders taxing the sale at 3% were restored and the High Court's judgment was set aside.

Lesson Learnt

Courts exercising writ/judicial review powers should be cautious about overturning technical, fact-based findings reached by expert committees and confirmed by multiple statutory authorities; and for tax purposes, an ingredient used only to refine or improve a manufacturing process, without becoming indispensable to or embodied in the end product, is not automatically a "raw material" entitled to concessional treatment.

State of Jharkhand and Ors. Etc. vs. Linde India Ltd and Anr. Etc. – Legal Case Shots | LegalAware