ORDER R. SUDHAKAR J. - Petitioner challenges the assessment order dated July 4, 2006. The grievance of the petitioner is that there was a request to grant time to produce the purchase list. However, the assessment order has been passed levying tax and penalty without an opportunity as above. Further, the petitioner relied on the clarification issued on November 17, 1999 by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, which according to the petitioner has not been followed. Therefore, the order of assessment dated July 4, 2006 is challenged under article 226 of the Constitution of India. Heard the learned Special Government Pleader, who would refer the paragraph 9 of the impugned order, in which it is specifically stated that a notice was issued and served on the dealer calling for objections. It is also stated that the dealer has filed the objections on June 1, 2006. The said objections were considered by the authority and an order of assessment has been passed on merits. He further submitted that as against the order of assessment there is a remedy by way of appeal and the petitioner has rushed to this court without exhausting the statutory alternative remedy. In respect of the first contention of the petitioner that the request to produce the purchase list, has not been considered, it is submitted that there is nothing to show that such request was specifically made. In any event, the petitioner has filed the objections and such objections were considered on merits. Therefore, the grievance of the petitioner that their request to grant time to produce the purchase list has not been considered, is without any basis. With regard to the clarification of the Commissioner, it is submitted by the learned Special Government Pleader that the assessing authority will have to deal with the matter on its own merits. Even assuming such clarification has not been specifically dealt with in the order of assessment, it is open to the petitioner to agitate the same in accordance with law by filing an appeal as provided under the statute. As regards the allegation regarding violation of the principles of natural justice pleaded stating that no opportunity was given to furnish the document, there is nothing on record to show that such request was made. Therefore, the said contention cannot be accepted. The second contention is that the clarification has not been specifically dealt with in the order. As regards the allegation regarding violation of the principles of natural justice pleaded stating that no opportunity was given to furnish the document, there is nothing on record to show that such request was made. Therefore, the said contention cannot be accepted. The second contention is that the clarification has not been specifically dealt with in the order. The assessing authority is entitled to deal with the matter independently. If the assessee is aggrieved on account of non-consideration of certain material, it is open to the assessee to challenge the order of assessment by way of an appeal. In this case, a statutory remedy by way of appeal is provided to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes. The petitioner can canvass all the issues including this claim on merits before the appellate authority in accordance with law. In this regard, it will be useful to refer to the decision of the apex court in Union of India v. Tata Engineering & Locomotive Co. Ltd. reported in AIR 1998 SC 287 , wherein in paragraphs 4 and 5 the apex court held as follows : "4. In our view, this writ petition should not have been entertained by the High Court at all. The Assistant Collector is entitled to complete the assessment as he thinks fit in exercise of his judgment and according to the understanding of the law and facts. For this purpose, he can call for and examine whatever documents he considers relevant. If the Assistant Collector fails to follow any judgment of the High Court or this court, the assessee had adequate statutory remedies by way of an appeal and revision against the assessment order. The court should not try to control the mode and manner in which an assessment should be made. If the Assistant Collector is of the view that enquiries are necessary to be made as to the price at which trucks were sold at the regional sales offices, the court cannot stop him from making such enquiries. 5. Mr. Sorabjee, appearing on behalf of the respondents, has complained that the assessments are going on endlessly and without due regard to an earlier judgment of the Patna High Court in respect of an earlier assessment year on the very same issues. 5. Mr. Sorabjee, appearing on behalf of the respondents, has complained that the assessments are going on endlessly and without due regard to an earlier judgment of the Patna High Court in respect of an earlier assessment year on the very same issues. Whether the controversy raised in this case is covered by an earlier judgment of the High Court is a matter to be decided by the Assistant Collector. He will have to decide all questions of fact and law. He has to make whatever enquiries he thinks necessary for determination of the value of excisable goods. The High Court in exercise of its jurisdiction cannot give guidance to Assistant Collector about the manner and mode in which the assessment should be made." So, the challenge to the order of assessment cannot be entertained by this court at this point of time as an effective alternative remedy is available to the petitioner by way of a statutory appeal. Without exhausting such alternative remedy, the assessee has rushed to this court. This court finds no merit in the writ petition and accordingly the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected W. P. (MD) No. 1 of 2006 is closed. The registry is directed to return the original assessment order so as to enable the petitioner to pursue the appeal remedy.