JUDGMENT SUBRAMONIAN POTI, AG. C.J. The question raised in the case is covered directly by the decision in Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax, Ernakulam v. Sheth Brothers (T.R.C. No. 118 of 1981) [1983] 52 STC 40. Pepper, merely because it is garbled, and exported as such, does not become another commercial commodity. It continues to be pepper. The learned counsel, Sri Dharmadan, has nevertheless attempted to argue that because entry 58, of the First Schedule has been amended with effect from 1st April, 1978, by Act 21 of 1978, garbled pepper and ungarbled pepper should be considered as different commercial commodities. Merely because in the schedule pepper is itemised under two heads, garbled and ungarbled, it need not be that these are two different commodities. May be to make it clear that garbled pepper as well as ungarbled pepper will fall within the same clause this amendment was made. Whatever it be, as a matter of fact, ungarbled pepper and garbled pepper cannot be two different commercial commodities as held in Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax, Ernakulam v. Sheth Brothers (T.R.C. No. 118 of 1981) [1983] 52 STC 40. They do not become so merely by mentioning both of them under the same item. Hence the revision is dismissed.