JUDGMENT DR. VINEET KOTHARI, J. - Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. These two revision petitions are being disposed of by a common order. The Tax Board by its order dated May 9, 2003 has allowed the assessee's appeals and held that since the composition scheme for payment of entertainment tax, which was in force vide notification dated July 8, 1982 was cancelled with effect from May 22, 1999, for the period in question from May 23, 1999 to May 31, 1999 (in C.R. No. 556 of 2005) and June 1, 1999 to June 30, 1999 (in C.R. No. 555 of 2005), the assessee had collected and paid the entertainment tax on the basis of actual collection and had filed returns for the said period. The actual collection of entertainment tax for these periods was Rs. 6,611 and Rs. 14,566 respectively. However, the learned assessing authority proceeded on the assumption that since the order cancelling the composition for the assessee with effect from May 22, 1999 was passed by the Deputy Commissioner (Administration) on August 3, 1999, the assessee would be liable to pay the entertainment tax under the same composition scheme and would be liable to pay the amount determined under said composition scheme at Rs. 89,560 for the month. The assessing authority in its impugned order has categorically and rightly noted that whether to continue with the composition scheme or not and whether to pay the entertainment tax as per the composition scheme or not, is the choice of the assessee - cinema and he cannot be compelled to pay under composition scheme because any compensation is a voluntary act of the assessee and the department cannot compel any assessee to go under the composition scheme. However, the learned assessing authority ignoring the returns filed by the assessee passed the best judgment assessment for the said period taking the monthly composition amount as the correct tax liability of the assessee at Rs. 89,560. The said order was upheld by the first appellate authority namely, Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) who even went to the extent of saying that since, the order revoking the composition for the period after May 22, 1999 was passed by the learned Deputy Commissioner (Administration) on August 3, 1999 therefore, for the period up to June, 1999, the assessment was bound to be completed as per the composition scheme. Being aggrieved of the said order of Deputy Commissioner (Appeals), the assessee preferred second appeal before the Tax Board, which was allowed by the Tax Board by the impugned order dated May 9, 2003 holding that the assessee was free to opt for the system of paying the tax on return basis for the period after May 22, 1999 up to June 30, 1999 and therefore, the Tax Board holding it to be so, remanded back the matter to the assessing authority for passing fresh orders in accordance with law on that basis. Aggrieved by the said order of Tax Board, Revenue is up in the present revision petitions under section 13-c of the Rajasthan Entertainments and Advertisements Tax Act, 1957. I have heard the learned counsel and perused the impugned orders. I do not find any error in the order of the Tax Board wherein, the tax Board has rightly held that the assessee could not be compelled to pay the tax under the composition scheme even after May 22, 1999 up to June 30, 1999, for which period, it collected the entertainment tax and reverted back to the return system and paid the aforesaid tax in question. In view of composition scheme itself having been revoked with effect from May 22, 1999, there was no valid basis for the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) to hold that the assessee was bound to pay the tax as per the composition scheme. The mere fact that the order was passed by the learned Deputy Commissioner (Administration) on August 3, 1999 cancelling the composition with effect from May 22, 1999, is of no consequence. Therefore, the Tax Board was right in holding that the assessee could not be compelled to pay the tax as per the composition scheme and therefore, the matter was remanded back to the assessing authority to pass assessment orders on the basis of returns filed by the assessee for the said period. I do not find any question of law to be arising out of the impugned order of the Tax Board. Consequently, these revision petitions having no force, are hereby dismissed.