ORDER

1. The High Court, in the judgment and order under appeal, has found that the clauses of the contracts in question are very similar to the relevant clause of the contract which was considered by this Court in N. M. Goel and Co. v. STO [(1989) 1 SCC 335 : 1989 SCC (Tax) 74]. We have been taken by learned counsel for the appellants through the clauses in question, upon the basis of which both the Tribunal and then the High Court concluded the matter against the appellants and are satisfied that they are substantially similar to the clause that was considered in Goel case [(1989) 1 SCC 335 : 1989 SCC (Tax) 74] and to the same effect.

2. Learned counsel submitted that Goel case [(1989) 1 SCC 335 : 1989 SCC (Tax) 74] dealt with a different issue and, therefore, did not cover what is in question before us. In para 7 of the judgment in Goel Case [(1989) 1 SCC 335 : 1989 SCC (Tax) 74] it is said : (SCC p. 339)

"The question, therefore, was whether there was sale of iron, steel and cement by the PVRD while supplying those materials for the construction work undertaken by the appellant."

Again, in para 8 it is said : (SCC pp. 339-40)

"8. The question, therefore, is whether there was sa