1. THE facts of the case will appear from the petition for revision and the order of the Additional Commissioner of Commercial Taxes dated 7th January, 1954.

2. THE only point for decision is if the petitioner's claim for deduction in respect of charges on account of repairing, oiling and cleaning of watches etc. should be allowed in fixing the amount of their taxable turnover. This question has already been answered in full in two previous cases decided by the Board, viz., Case No. 69 of 1948 (Messrs. Nalanda Press) and Case No. 120 of 1950 (Messrs. Metal Press Works Ltd.). In the first case the Board stated that the only goods in respect of which any transfer of property might be said to have taken place was the printing ink. But it would be twisting commonsense and logic to suggest that there was any contract, explicit or implied, for the sale of the printing ink. THE essence of the thing was the goods that was being sold. As there was only a contract for printing the papers supplied by the customers, there could be no sale of goods at all. THE Board also held that the definition of contract as given in section 2(b) of the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941, could not