Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:91213-DB Chief Justice's Court Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 2578 of 2025 Petitioner :- M/s Lifestyle International Private Limited Respondent :- State of U.P. and another Counsel for Petitioner :- Krishna Agrawal Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C., Ankur Agarwal (S.C.) With Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 2586 of 2025 Petitioner :- M/s Lifestyle International Private Limited Respondent :- State of U.P. and another Counsel for Petitioner :- Krishna Agrawal Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C., Ankur Agarwal (S.C.) With Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 2591 of 2025 Petitioner :- M/s Lifestyle International Private Limited Respondent :- State of U.P. and another Counsel for Petitioner :- Krishna Agrawal Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C., Ankur Agarwal (S.C.) And Case :- WRIT TAX No. - 2592 of 2025 Petitioner :- M/s Lifestyle International Private Limited Respondent :- State of U.P. and another Counsel for Petitioner :- Krishna Agrawal Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C., Ankur Agarwal (S.C.) Hon'ble Arun Bhansali, Chief Justice Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra, J. 1. These writ petitions have been filed by the petitioner aggrieved of the impugned assessment orders dated 26.03.2025 (Annexure-1 to the respective writ petitions), passed by respondent no.2 under Section 28(2)(ii) read with Section 32 of the Uttar Pradesh Value Added Tax Act, 2008 ('the Act'). 2. Initially, separate assessment orders were passed on 25.01.2019, 07.06.2019 and 23.03.2021 respectively. Aggrieved, the petitioner filed appeals before the Additional Commissioner (Appeals), Commercial Tax, Noida who, by separate orders dated 31.01.2023 and 31.12.2021 (relating to Writ Tax No. 2586 of 2025), allowed the appeals, set aside the assessment orders and remanded back the matter to the Assessing Authority requiring it to take into consideration the documents produced by the petitioner in appeal. Pursuant to which, the orders impugned dated 26.03.2025 have been passed for various assessment years. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner made submissions that the assessment orders passed by the authority are ex facie illegal and contrary to the orders of remand and therefore, the same deserve to be quashed and set aside. 4. Submissions have been made that while passing the orders of remand, specific directions were given to take into consideration the documents produced by the petitioner, however, the Assessing Authority, instead of taking the said documents into consideration, has simply reiterated the orders passed earlier. 5. Submissions have been made that the extent of reiteration is to the extent that even the mistakes, which were later on rectified, have also been again committed in the orders impugned. Not a single document produced by the petitioner has been taken into consideration and only a formality of passing the order on remand has been done and therefore, the orders impugned deserve to be quashed and set aside. 6. Learned counsel for the respondents, though attempted to make submissions that the orders impugned are appealable, however, after going through both the orders passed, is not in a position to defend that the Assessing Authority has simply copy pasted the earlier order without taking into consideration any of the documents and has even repeated the mistakes committed earlier. 7. We have considered the submissions made by counsel for the parties and have perused the material available on record. 8. The facts are glaring, wherein we have ourselves compared the two orders passed by the Assessing Authority, one which was passed on 23.03.2021, which was set aside in appeal on 31.01.2023, and the order impugned dated 26.03.2025. The order dated 26.03.2025 is verbatim the copy of the order dated 23.03.2021. The Assessing Authority has not even cared to indicate the fact about passing of the previous order, the appellate order and that he was passing the order on remand and, surprisingly has incorporated even the mistakes, which were there in the earlier order and have been rectified, in the orders impugned. 9. The manner of dealing with the matter on remand by the Assessing Authority is ex facie contrary to the requirements on remand and are essentially in dereliction of his duty to act in a manner which may reflect his application of mind to the issue before him. The manner in which the Assessing Authority has dealt with the matter, clearly reflects non application of mind and a totally mechanical exercise has been undertaken in passing the orders impugned. 10. It is true that the orders impugned are appealable, however, looking to the conduct of the Assessing Authority in passing the orders requiring the petitioner to file appeals, would be an empty formality. 11. In view of the above, the assessment orders dated 26.03.2025 passed by the Assessing Authority cannot be sustained. 12. Consequently, the petitions are allowed, the impugned orders dated 26.03.2025 (Annexure-1 to the respective writ petitions) are quashed and set aside. 13. The matter is remanded back to the Assessing Authority to pass appropriate orders after taking into consideration the directions given in the orders of remand and after providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 14. Looking to the conduct of the Assessing Authority, a copy of this order be communicated to the Principal Secretary, State Tax, Government of Uttar Pradesh, who would look into the conduct of the Assessing Authority and take appropriate measures in accordance with law. Order Date :- 28.5.2025 AHA/Sazia (Kshitij Shailendra, J) (Arun Bhansali, CJ) Digitally signed by :- AFZAL HUSAIN ABBASI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad