Goswami, J. - (1.) This is an appeal by special leave against the judgment of the Gujarat High Court dated 8th/9th December, 1970.
(2.) The respondent (hereinafter to be described as the assesses) entered into a contract with the Public Works Department of the Government of Gujarat on September 6, 1965 for manufacture and supply of kiln-burnt bricks to the said Department for the construction of the Capital Project, Gandhinagar. Large quantities of bricks were manufactured and supplied under the contract and the applicant received payment for the same in accordance with the agreed rates. The assesses made an application under Section 52 of the Bombay Sales Tax Act, 1959, on November 19, 1967, to the Deputy Commissioner of Sales Tax, to determine the question whether the said supplies of bricks by the assesses to the Public Works Department were sales or works contract. The Deputy Commissioner held the supplies of bricks by the assesses as sale. The assesses then appealed to the Tribunal against that order. The Tribunal following the ratio of the decision of this Court in Chandra Bhan Gosain v. State of Orissa, ((1963) 14 STC 766) came to the conclusion that the supplies of bricks were sales. At the instance of the assesses, the Tribunal referred the following question of law to the High Court:- "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the transaction envisaged by the contract entered into by the applicant with the Public Works Department of the Government of Gujarat on 6th September, 1965, for the manufacture and supply of kiln-burnt bricks to the said Department and the supply of bricks to the said Department in terms of their running Bill No. XI dated 28th October, 1967, is a sale or a works contract -
(3.) The High Court answered the question in favour of the assesses holding that the transaction was a works contract. In coming to that conclusion the High Court held as follows:- "In our opinion, the decision of the Supreme Court in chandra Bhan Gosain's case (supra) is clearly distinguishable on facts. The contract in that case, though prima facieworded as regards the relevant clauses in similar fashion as the contract in the instant case, is in fact cast in a different mould and it would be difficult to hold in the light of the special features and characteristics of the contract with which we are concerned that the decision of the Supreme Court in that case would completely govern the facts of this case.";