The petitioner claims to be rendering service as decorators by erecting Samiyana, pandal etc. The petitioner also gives on hire chairs, crockery etc. He charges the amount from the customers, which according to it, are service charges. It is the case of the petitioner that it does not transfer possession and control of samiyana and pandal etc., and that no sale or purchase of any goods or commodity is effected and that it is not covered by the definition of 'sale' under Section 2(t) of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981 (for short 'the Act, 1981'), and, therefore, the assessment order dated 7th October, 2004 under Section 17(5) of the Act, 1981 and the ex-parte order on the review application passed on 13th September, 2006 under Section 47 of the Act, 1981 are bad in law.

2. Counsel for the petitioner, although, did not dispute that the order dated 7th October, 2004 is appealable under Section 45 of the Act of 1981, but according to him, since the aforesaid activity of the petitioner is not covered by the definition of 'sale' as provided in Section 2(t), the availability of the remedy should not come in the way of the petitioner in approaching this court directly under Article 226 of