ORDER :

1. The petitioner has challenged the order passed by the learned Divisional Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Tax, Bilaspur dated 21.07.2022, whereby the order dated 16.09.2001 passed by the learned Commercial Tax Officer has been affirmed. By way of present petition, the petitioner has sought for following relief(s):-

“10.1 Set aside/quash the 21.07.2022 (Annexure P/1) passed by Divisional Deputy Commissioner by which the order dated 16.09.2021 (Annexure P/2) passed by learned Commercial Tax Officer has been confirmed, and/or

10.2 Allow the Revision filed by the petitioner concern, and/or

10.3 Direct the Respondent authorities to act and assess in accordance with law, upon the material available before it, and/or

10.4 Grant any other relief as may be deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

2. The facts of the present case are that the petitioner is sole proprietorship firm, engaged in the trading of FMCG materials such as Aata (flour), salt, match boxes and Pan Masala etc. Since the assessment year 2016-2017, assessment proceeding under Section 21 & 22 of the Valued Added Tax Act, 2005 (for short 'Act of 2005') was initiated by the Commercial Tax Officer and notice was issued to the petitioner for producing the account books and other supporting documents for assessment.

3. The petitioner presented account statements and audit reports before the authority on 16.09.2021 and thereafter the Commercial Tax Officer passed the assessment order and imposed an additional tax liability of Rs.1,52,311/-. The petitioner preferred revision under Section 49 of the Act of 2005 and vide order dated 21.07.2022 same has been dismissed affirming the findings recorded by the Assessment Officer.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that principle of natural justice has not been complied with and the order dated 16.09.2021 has been passed by the Assessment Officer without application of mind. He would further submit that requisite records were submitted, but they have not been considered while passing the order dated 16.09.2021. It is also stated that no discrepancy was pointed out by the Commercial Tax Officer, nonetheless the additional tax of Rs.1,52,311/- has been imposed. He has further argued that turnover to the amount of Rs.35,56,870/- from the Tax Slab of 5% has been shifted to turnover of 14.5% Tax Slab without any justifiable reason. The Revisional Authority has affirmed the order passed by the Assessment Officer without taking into consideration the contentions made and grounds raised by the petitioner. He would also submit that mechanical order has been passed ignoring the settled judicial precedent. Thus, he would pray to set aside the order dated 16.09.2021 passed by the Commercial Tax Officer and order dated 21.07.2022 passed by the Divisional Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Tax respectively. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the judgment passed by this Court in Writ Petition (T) No. 36 of 2018 dated 16.02.2018 (M/s Jaika Automobiles and Finance Ltd. Vs. State of Chhattisgarh & Others) and would submit that rightly or wrongly the revision petition filed by the petitioner was entertained by the revisional authority and has been decided on merits, therefore, writ petition is maintainable.

5. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State/respondents would submit that the petitioner has an efficacious alternative statutory remedy to challenge the order dated 21.07.2022 before competent forum, but the petitioner for reasons best known to him filed writ petition by passing the statutory remedy. She would further submit that even the petitioner may prefer appeal against the order passed by the Revisional Authority according to Section 49(4) of the Act of 2005. She would next contend that for assessment of transaction of the year 2016-2017, the assessment notice under Form 28 was issued to the petitioner on four different dates i.e. 04.03.2021, 10.06.2021, 02.08.2021 and 25.08.2021