Judgment :- 1. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner had submitted that the appellate authority, namely, the first respondent herein, had passed the impugned order, dated 13.10.2010, directing the assessing officer, the second respondent herein, to verify whether the excise duty in question, paid by the petitioner, is for the previous assesment years and to assess the same in respect of the appropriate assessment years. He had further submitted that such a direction cannot be given by the first respondent, as he does not have the jurisdiction to do so, unless it is clarified that the second respondent shall make the appropriate assessment for the previous years, as per law. 2. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents had submitted that it is implied that the second respondent could make the assessment for the previous years only as per law, following the directions issued by the first respondent. 3. In view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties concerned, it is made clear that any assessment made by the second respondent, in respect of the previous assessment years, as directed by the first respondent, shall be done only as per law. In view of the above clarification, since, no further orders are necessary, the writ petition stands closed. No costs. Connected M.P.No.1 of 2011 is closed.