IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.20498 of 2010 ====================================================== M/s Rukunpura Concrete Udyog through Shri Deo Narayan Sinha aged about 75 years, S/o Late Hulash Singh, R/o Pasnauli, Maharajganj, Siwan, residing at present at Rukunpura, P.O.-Vetenary College, P.S.- Danapur, District-Patna. …………..Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Bihar, Patna. 2. The Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Bihar, Patna. 3. The Commercial Tax officer, Siwan Circle, Siwan. …………..Respondents ====================================================== APPEARANCE : For the Petitioner : Mr. L.N.Rastogi, Sr. Advocate With Mr. Sharat Kumar Sharan, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Lalit Kishore, A.A.G.1 With Mr. Vikash Kumar, Advocate. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE And HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE) 4. 05.04.2011 With the consent of the learned advocates the matter is heard and decided today. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution has been filed by a registered dealer against the order of assessment made under Section 33 of the Bihar Value Added Tax Act, 2005 for the assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07. The short ground on which the orders of re- assessment are challenged is that the reassessment is made in violation of statutory provisions contained in Rule 24 of the Bihar Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 without issuing statutory notice in Form N-VII. There is no gainsaying that the orders of 2 reassessment have been made pursuant to the report of the Comptroller and Auditor-General of India. Section 33 of the Act empowers the assessing authority to make reassessment on the objection raised by the Comptroller and Auditor- General of India. Sub section (2) thereof envisages the opportunity of hearing. Rule 24 of the Rules provides for hearing under Sections 32 & 33 of the Act. Sub rule (1) thereof provides for notice of hearing in Form N-VII in cases of reassessment under Section 33 of the Act. Form N–VII is the statutory form that envisages furnishing of the observations made by the Comptroller and Auditor-General to the dealer. In the present case the aforesaid formality had admittedly not been complied with i.e., neither the dealer was given notice of hearing in Form N-VII nor was the dealer supplied the observations made by the Comptroller and Auditor-General of India. In absence of adherence to the statutory requirement, we are of the opinion that the impugned orders are vitiated. On the aforesaid short ground, we allow this writ petition. The impugned orders of assessment and the consequential demand are quashed and set aside. The parties will bear their own costs. This order shall not preclude the respondent authorities from initiating the process of reassessment afresh in accordance with law, if otherwise permissible. Sujit (R.M.Doshit, CJ.) (Jyoti Saran,J.)