Hon’ble Tarun Agarwala, J.—The petitioner is a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 and is engaged in trading of goods in the State of Uttar Pradesh. The petitioner applied for registration under Section 17 of the Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2008 (hereinafter referred to as the Vat Act) as well as under the Central Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) in the year 2011 indicating its principal place of business in the State of U.P. as “Cabin No. 2, First Floor, G-15, Sector-3, Noida”. The petitioner also indicated in the application form that the other address of the petitioner is in Banglore in the State of Karnataka. On 5.12.2013, the petitioner applied for change of principal place of business from “Cabin No. 2, First Floor, G-50, Sector-3, Noida” to “D-510-513, Buffer Godown Compound, Devi Mandir Road, Dasna, Ghaziabad-201001” and requested the registering authority to amend the registration certificate accordingly. The petitioner contends that while applying for change of place of business, the petitioner had indicated that they had shifted to the new place of business on 20.1.2013. According to the petitioner, no action was taken on the petitioner’s application inspite of a reminder being issued again on 11.2.2015.

2. The petitioner contends that in the year 2004 ex parte assessment orders were passed by the assessing authority for the assessment year 2011-12, 2013-14 and 2014-15. According to the petitioner, no notice was served upon them, and that, on this ground, the appeals filed by the petitioner were allowed by orders dated 31.1.2015, 20.2.2015 and 30.5.2015. The assessment orders were set aside and the matter was remitted to the assessing authority to pass a fresh assessment order. The assessment proceedings for the aforesaid years is still pending consideration. The assessment orders were set aside on the ground that the petitioner had no notice of the assessment proceedings, inasmuch as their principal place of business had changed and that the summons were sent to the petitioner’s old place of business.

3. The petitioner contends that pursuant to the ex parte assessment orders for the assessment years 2011-12, 2013-14 and 2014-15, attachment notices were issued which were never served and thereafter the bank accounts of the petitioner were seized and an amount of Rs. 27,65,18,303/- was withdrawn, which was equivalent to the tax assessed under the ex parte assessment order. The petitioner contends that even though the appeals have been allowed and the assessment orders have been set aside, the amount has not been refunded till date.

4. The petitioner received garnishee notices for recovery of Rs. 49,82,01,250/-. The petitioner being aggrieved by the method in which huge sums of money were being withdrawn by the respondents in such cavalier fashion by making ex parte orders without giving due notice filed the present Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 80 of 2006 questioning the action of the respondents in attaching the petitioner’s bank account. The petitioner contends that before the matter could be heard by the Court the amount was withdrawn pursuant to the ex parte assessment orders dated 15.12.2015. This Court, while entertaining the writ petition passed an order dated 2.2.2016 directing the petitioner to file an application for recall of the ex parte assessment orders. Subsequently, writ petition No. 168 of 2016 was filed for the quashing of the ex parte assessment orders dated 15.12.2015 passed under U.P.Vat Act and Central Sales Tax Act for the months of April to October, 2015 as well as the order dated 11.2.2016 by which the petitioner’s recall application was rejected. The petitioner in this writ petition also prayed for the quashing of the order dated 2.9.2014, by which their application for change of place of business was rejected.

5. Since co