THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA WRIT PETITION No.22059 of 2011 Date:08.08.2011 Between: M/s. K.S.Raghavendra Rao ..Petitioner And The Commercial Tax Officer, Vijayawada and others ..Respondents THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GODA RAGHURAM AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA WRIT PETITION No.22059 of 2011 ORDER: By the order impugned dated 02.07.2011, the first respondent passed the order of assessment in Form VAT 305 A for four tax periods 2007-08 to 2010-11 and determined the net amount of tax due at Rs.3,15,411/-. The grievance of the petitioner is that the order of assessment was passed on the basis of the authorization given by the third respondent to the first respondent to audit and such authorization does not enable passing an order of assessment and the same is contrary to the law declared by this Court in Balaji Flour Mills vs. the Commercial Tax Officer-II, Chittoor[1], wherein this Court held that an authorization for audit is not sufficient to make an assessment and that separate authorization for making an assessment is necessary. It is, however, contended by the learned Special Government Pleader for Commercial Taxes that the third respondent has given a composite authorization to the first respondent for audit-cum-assessment. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner and fairly conceded by the learned Special Government Pleader that the law declared in Balaji Flour Mills (supra 1) that authorization for audit of value added tax dealer and authorization to undertake assessment pursuant to such audit are two distinct requirements and the former alone would not suffice for undertaking the assessment, has been followed by this Court in M/s. Dekars Fire & Security Systems Pvt. Ltd. vs. the Deputy Commissioner (CT), by order dated 14.07.2011 in W.P.No.16952 of 2011 and batch, holding that in the absence of the jurisdictional Deputy Commissioner issuing separate orders authorizing assessment apart from audit, the officers concerned cannot undertake assessment, in accordance with law, not even on the basis of a composite authorization authorizing both audit and assessment. In the light of the law declared in Balaji Flour Mills (supra 1), and i n M/s. Dekars Fire & Security Systems Pvt. Ltd. (supra 2), the impugned order of assessment dated 02.07.2011 passed by the first respondent cannot be sustained and the same is accordingly set aside. It is, however, be open to the competent assessing authority to pass a fresh order of assessment in accordance with law. The Writ Petition is allowed as above, at the stage of admission. There shall, however, be no order as to costs. ___________________ GODA RAGHURAM, J ______________________ ASHUTOSH MOHUNTA, J 08th August, 2011 GHN [1] (2011) VST 40 150 (A.P.)