ORDER V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN, J. - The petitioner reported a total and taxable turnover under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act for the assessment year 2006-07. The accounts were called for and checked, by the assessing officer. The place of business was inspected by the enforcement wing of officials on December 7, 2006. Thereafter, the petitioner produced records and the assessment officer passed an order dated March 30, 2009. Challenging the said order, the petitioner has come up with the present writ petition. Heard Mr. R. Senniappan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. R. Mahadevan, learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents. It is seen from the penultimate paragraph of the impugned order of assessment that the petitioner not only filed his objections, but also filed all the records and registers before the assessing officer. But the assessing officer who is the second respondent herein, did not look into the records, on the sole ground that these records were not produced by the dealer at the time of inspection by the enforcement wing officers for processing D7 records. Taking such a view, the assessing officer held that the dealer had manipulated the accounts between the date of inspection by the enforcement wing on December 6, 2006 and date on which the assessment was taken up on March 10, 2008. Such an approach on the part of an assessing officer cannot be accepted. The duty of an assessing officer cannot be equated to the duties discharged by the enforcement wing. The assessing officer discharges quasi-judicial functions and he is obliged statutorily to look into all the records and documents and arrive at an independent conclusion. In the written instructions handed over by the second respondent to the learned Special Government Pleader, the second respondent has reiterated the same stand as found in the impugned order, to the effect that the records not produced before the enforcement wing, need not be accepted. This stand of the second respondent is not legally sustainable, since the second respondent is statutorily bound to peruse the records and arrive at an independent conclusion. In view of the above, all the writ petitions are allowed, the orders impugned in these writ petitions are set aside and the matter remitted back to the second respondent for a fresh consideration. In view of the above, all the writ petitions are allowed, the orders impugned in these writ petitions are set aside and the matter remitted back to the second respondent for a fresh consideration. The second respondent is directed to examine the records and registers produced by the petitioner and finalise the assessment within a period of six weeks. The petitioner shall produce the records and registers within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.