Works contract in printing jobs depends on dominant intention and facts, so writ review is usually inappropriate.

Whether printing jobs on customer-supplied paper constitute a works contract depends on the factual nature of each contract and the dominant intention of the parties. After the Forty-sixth Amendment, tax may be levied on the transfer of property in goods involved in a works contract, but that characterisation cannot be decided in the abstract. Where the assessing authority will examine each contract and the assessee can raise all objections in assessment proceedings, writ jurisdiction under Article 226 is ordinarily not appropriate. The petition was therefore held not fit for writ intervention, and the parties were directed to pursue the dispute before the assessing authority.

---

---

Issues: Whether the writ petition challenging the trade circular and the applicability of the works contract levy to printing jobs on customer-supplied paper should be entertained under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, or whether the controversy should be left to assessment proceedings.

Analysis: The dispute turned on the nature of the contract in each individual case and on the dominant intention of the parties. The Court noted that, after the Forty-sixth Amendment, sales tax could be levied on the transfer of property in goods involved in a works contract, but whether a particular printing job constituted such a contract depended on the facts. Since the respondents stated that the nature of each contract would be examined in assessment proceedings and that the assessee could raise all objections there, the Court held that the writ court need not decide the challenge to the trade circular or the broader applicability issue in the abstract.

Conclusion: The writ petition was not fit for invocation of writ jurisdiction and the petitioners were required to pursue their objections before the assessing authority.

Ratio Decidendi: In matters turning on whether a printing transaction is a works contract, the decisive test is the dominant intention and the factual nature of the individual contract, so writ jurisdiction will ordinarily not be invoked where the issue can be determined in assessment proceedings.

---