IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.11852 of 2010 ====================================================== 1. M/S Progressive Construction Ltd., a Company registered under the Company Act, having its local office at Khagra Mela Ground, Kishanganj, through its authorized representative Satyendra Roy, S/o Ram Naresh Roy, R/o Vill.- Khagra Mela Compound, P.S.- Kishanganj, Distt.- Kishanganj .... .... Petitioner/s Versus 1. The State Of Bihar 2. The Commissioner of Finance, State of Bihar, Patna 3. The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, New Secretariat, Patna 4. The Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Patliputra Circle, Pant Bhawan, Bailey Road, Patna 5. The Treasury Officer, Patna Sadar, Patna .... .... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Rakesh Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Vikash Kumar, A.C. to A.A.G.-1 ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BIRENDRA PRASAD VERMA ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 6 27-06-2011 Learned Advocate Mr. Vikash Kumar is granted leave to place the typed copies of orders annexure-C series (PP 76-79). This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is filed by one M/S Progressive Construction Limited, a registered dealer within the meaning of the Bihar Value Added Tax Act, 2005. The petitioner seeks refund of the undisputed amount of Rs.1,67,91,502/- for the assessment year 2006-07 referred to in the assessment order dated 30th March 2010. On perusal of the record it appears that the aforesaid assessment order dated 30th March 2010 was taken in suo motu Patna High Court CWJC No.11852 of 2010 (6) dt.27-06-2011 2 review by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes. Pending the review, some audit objections were received in respect of the assessment order under review. In view of the audit objection, by order dated 23rd March 2011, with the consent of the representative of the writ petitioner, the matter was remitted to the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes for re- examination. After order of remand, the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes made the order of re-assessment on 16th April 2011 and raised a demand for a sum of Rs.3,10,41,637/-. In view of the order of re-assessment dated 16th April 2011 and the consequential demand of Rs.3,10,41,637/-, the claim for refund made by the petitioner has become futile. We have noticed some discrepancy in respect of the amount already paid by the petitioner. The Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes will re-examine the order dated 16th April 2011 and correct the mistake, if any. If there is any mistake in the order dated 16th April 2011, the same will be corrected and copy of the corrected order will be sent to the petitioner forthwith. The petitioner will be at liberty to challenge the order of re-assessment. We clarify that we have not examined the legality of the order of re-assessment. The petitioner will be at liberty to challenge the order of re-assessment before the appellate forum. Subject to the above direction, the petition is dismissed. M.Rahman/- (R.M. Doshit, CJ) (Birendra Prasad Verma, J)