ORDER 1.Leave was granted only in relation to what are called Hamilton poles. 2. It was found, as fact, by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes that Hamilton poles were manufactured by rolling and riveting steel. It was the case of the appellants that these were goods covered by Section 14 of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 and that they fell within clause (iv) subclause (vi) thereof. The said clause (iv) applies to goods of iron and steel and sub-clause (vi) speaks of: "14. (iv)(vi) sheets, hoops, strips and skelps, both black and galvanised, hot and cold rolled, plain and corrugated, in all qualities, in straight lengths and in coil form, as rolled and in riveted conditions;" The Tribunal rejected the case of the appellants for the reason that Hamilton poles were not mentioned in the said sub-clause and they werecommercially different commodity from the strips mentioned in the said subclause and had different use. The Tribunal rejected the observation of the Deputy Commissioner that Hamilton poles were manufactured by rolling and riveting sheets because, in its opinion, this could not be construed to mean that they were only sheets in riveted condition. 3. At an earlier point of the hearing, it was contended on behalf of the Sales Tax Authorities that zinc was used in making Hamilton poles and that, therefore, they fell outside the said sub-clause. Now, affidavits have been filed on behalf of the assessee and the Revenue which state that zinc is not used in making Hamilton poles and that Hamilton poles are galvanised for which purpose zinc is used. 4. The contention on behalf of the Sales Tax Authorities now is that because Hamilton poles are galvanised, they are different commodities and fall outside the scope of the said sub-clause. We are not inclined to accept the submission. Hamilton poles are strips of steel in rolled and riveted condition and, accordingly, fall within the description contained in the said sub-clause. There is no material on record to show that they are different commodities orhave different uses. 5. Accordingly, the civil appeals are allowed. The order under appeal is set aside. 6. No order as to costs.