IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR. J U D G M E N T D.B. CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL (WRIT) NO.264/2008. In S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.9080/2006. Lekh Raj Vs. The Secretary to the Government & Ors. Date of Order :: 13/8/2008. HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.NARAYAN ROY HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Mr. R.K. Jain for the appellant. Mr. Dharmendra Pareek for Mr. J.M. Saxena for the respondents. **** Heard learned counsel for the parties. Delay is condoned. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 6/12/2006 whereby, writ petition filed by the petitioner against the order of assessment dated 30/6/2004 passed by the Assistant Commercial Taxation Officer, Ward-3, Circle B, Alwar has been dismissed. Learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition on the ground of petitioner-appellant was having alternative remedy of appeal against the assessment order. Shri R.K. Jain, learned counsel for the appellant has argued that in view of the fact that the impugned-order of assessment is composite order of compounding the default as also of penalty, the appeal would not be available thereagainst. In this connection, reference was made to sub-Section (6) of Section 72 of the Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994 (for short, the “Act of 1994”) which provides that no appeal shall lie against an order of composition. However, it is not in dispute that the appellant is aggrieved by the order of penalty only but he insists that since penalty has been accompanied with the order of composition, writ petition should be held maintainable against. On perusal of the impugned-order, we find that amount of Rs.10923/- has been levied as compounding charges whereas, the amount of penalty of Rs.26574/- has been levied under Section 78(10A) of the Act of 1994. It is later part of the order imposing penalty with which the appellant is aggrieved and appeal as provided under Section 84 of the Act of 1994 would still be available to the appellant, notwithstanding assessment order being composite. We, therefore, while dismissing the appeal, set the appellant at liberty to now approach the appellate authority against that part of the order. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. (NARAYAN ROY), CJ. anil/- 2