Judgment :- The petitioner filed O.P. No.1261 of 2003 before the Tribunal praying to quash the order of assessment passed by the respondent in TNGST No.126868/94-95 dated 30.09.2003 consequent to the remand order of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner (CT)-IV, Chennai passed in petitioners Appeal in AP. No.311 of 1999 dated 17.07.2001 as violative of the principles of natural justice and against the provisions of the TNGST Act since the same has been passed without issuing a notice and without following the directions of the Appellate Authority issued in the petitioners aforesaid Appeal which is binding on the respondent herein. 2. The facts, in short, are : For the assessment year 1994-95 the petitioner was originally assessed on the basis of the returns and books of accounts in the year 1996. Later on, on the basis of the inspection report of the Enforcement wing officials (D3 proposals) the respondent revised the order of assessment for the assessment years 1993-94 and 1994-95 on 111. 1998. Against the said order of assessment for the above said assessment years, the petitioner preferred appeals before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner (CT IV) in Appeals Nos.312 and 311/1999. The appellate authority, after verification of the books of accounts and necessary documents in support of the bill discounting, passed a detailed common order on 17.07.2001 partly remanding and partly dismissing the appeal and the matter stood remanded back to the assessing officer to reconsider the issue with certain directions. The assessing officer, who passed the revised order, which is the subject matter of the appeal before the appellate authority and which has been remanded back with the specific directions, has over-stretched his jurisdiction, and passed the impugned order. Hence, the present OP, which is now converted to this writ petition on being transferred to the file of this Court. 3. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record. 4. The order of the appellate authority dated 111. 1998 on which reliance was placed read as follows : "When the appellants had admitted that the sale bills were issued for the purpose of discounting by the bank only and produced documentary evidence for discounting of the bills, it cannot be presumed that the actual sales transactions had taken place in the above bills, unless the department provides positive proof for the actual sales. The goods were allegedly supplied to two customers in Chennai only. One of them Tvl. EID Parry ltd., have already issued a certificate denying the transactions involved in the sales bills issued for the purpose of bill discounting. The appellants expressed their inability to get a similar certificate from Tvl. Shaw Wallace Co. Ltd., due to administrative problems. If the department is particular to prove the transactions, the accounts of Tvl. EID Parry Ltd., and Tvl. Shaw Wallace Co. Ltd., could have been verified. But merely on the basis of invoices only, the actual sales have been presumed, without establishing the fact transfer of property in goods had taken place for valuable consideration." The appellate authority, while observing as above, concluded as follows : "I set aside the assessment made on the rest of the turnover of Rs.24,31,419/-and remand back to the assessing authority with the following directions: a) The details that would be furnished by the appellants in respect of entries available in slip Nos.11, 13, 21, 22, 29, 30 and 31 should be verified with reference to the accounts of the appellants and if the transactions involved the slips had already accounted for by the appellants, the assessment made by the turnover of Rs.2,29,599/- along with estimated suppression should be deleted. b) Tvl. EID Parry Ltd., and Tvl. Shaw Wallace Co., are companies of some repute. Therefore, the alleged sales transactions involved in bill discounting and reflected in the invoices recovered at the time of inspection should be cross verified with the above buyers. c)If the transactions reflect in the accounts of the above buyers, such transactions should be assessed, if not already assessed. d)If the transactions do not reflect in the books of accounts of the buyers, the assessment on such transactions should be deleted. Pursuant to the same, the impugned assessment order has been made. On seeing the assessment order, it is manifest that none of the directions issued by the appellate authority has been taken note off while passing the order impugned. The assessing officer has not taken any pain to comply with the directions. On the other hand, he has pointed out that the assessee has not supplied the relevant materials. It is not as if the onus of proof on the part of the assessee vis-a-vis the assessing officer has not been considered by the Courts or the appellate authorities. The assessing officer has not taken any pain to comply with the directions. On the other hand, he has pointed out that the assessee has not supplied the relevant materials. It is not as if the onus of proof on the part of the assessee vis-a-vis the assessing officer has not been considered by the Courts or the appellate authorities. It has been held in several cases, and one among them is the order of the Tamil Nadu Taxation Special Tribunal in O.P. Nos.116 and 117 of 1999 dated 11.03.1999 (M/s. Orjay Packaging products v. CTO, Coimbatore), wherein the appellate Tribunal constituted under Article 323-B of the Constitution, in a similar set of facts, has opined that the action of the assessing authority in proposing to ignore the order of the AAC and adopt his own proposal earlier made prior to the AAC order is thoroughly illegal. Once the order of assessment is set aside by the AAC with certain directions, the assessing authority is bound to obey the said order of the AAC. In that case it is peculiar that the Tribunal called upon the Government Advocate to collect the factual details from the assessing officer and pursuant to that the Government Advocate submitted written instructions from the assessing officer. On perusal of the written instructions, the Tribunal was of the opinion that the submission and the written instructions support their view that the assessing officer was trying to over-reach the order of the appellate authority and instances have been stated. The order impugned in the present writ petition is a classical example of one such overreaching attitude of the assessing officer. When the appellate authority, whose order is binding on the assessing officer, has given certain directions to the assessing officer, while remanding the matter, the assessing officer cannot over-reach the appellate authoritys order. If at all the respondent revenue is not satisfied with any of the observations made, it is for them to take that part of the order on appeal before the second appellate authority and get it expunged. Leaving that, inspite of direction given by the appellate authority, the assessing officer cannot stick on to his original position and frame his assessment to his own thinking which would otherwise destroy the binding nature and hierarchial procedure of the statutory authorities. Leaving that, inspite of direction given by the appellate authority, the assessing officer cannot stick on to his original position and frame his assessment to his own thinking which would otherwise destroy the binding nature and hierarchial procedure of the statutory authorities. It could also be seen that the assessing officer in his order impugned has observed, as "But they have furnished the details for Rs. ---- Which they have claimed that only bills were made for bank purpose, but not included in the turnover....". The assessing officer has not taken minimum care to see that the blank in the order, as highlighted above is filled up. An order of assessment, which has civil consequence, cannot be issued in a callous manner, as in this case. Hence, the order, which is ex facie over reaching the order of the appellate authority has to be set aside and the matter has to be remitted back to the assessing officer to frame assessment by following the directions issued by the appellate authority by its order dated 17.07.2001. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the assessing officer to pass fresh order of assessment by following the directions issued by the appellate authority by his order dated 17.07.2001. The writ petition is ordered as above. No costs.