JUDGMENT N. Kumar, J.—The assessee has preferred this appeal against the order passed by the learned single judge dated February 10, 2011 (Tropicana Beverages vs. State of Karnataka) in W.P. No. 4865-4866 of 2011 declining to entertain the writ petition. The assessee is a company registered under the provisions of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 and is engaged in the manufacture and sale of beverages and juices. It has filed its return as per the provisions of Central Sales Tax Act (for short, hereinafter referred to as "the CST Act") read with the provisions of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act (for short, hereinafter referred to as "the KVAT Act") for the assessment periods 2007-08 and 2008-09. The assessee has effected, sales, both local and inter-State for the relevant tax period and had accordingly paid the taxes due under the provisions of the CST and KVAT Acts. In addition to effecting sales, the assessee had also stock transferred goods to its various places of business/branches and agents across the country on an inter-State basis. In other words the assessee had moved goods manufactured by it from the State of Karnataka to its various branches and agents in other States and since the goods were being moved on an inter-State basis for reasons other than a result of a sale of goods, the assessee claimed exemption on the value of goods on stock transferred as per the provisions of section 6A of the CST Act. However, the appellant was not able to obtain all the statutory F forms in support of its claim for exemption. It filed forms to the extent it had received from its other places of business/agents. Time was sought to produce form F which is yet to be received. The assessing authority proceeded to assess the tax, granted exemption in respect of the amounts which are covered upon form F and called upon the assessee to pay taxes in respect of transfer of stock which was not supported by form F. Thus, the assessing authority proceeded to pass orders under section 9(2) of the CST Act. Aggrieved by the two orders which are passed, the assessee preferred a statutory appeal under section 62 of the KVAT Act. The appellate authority by the impugned order has dismissed the appeal on the ground that it is not maintainable in view of section 18A(1) of the CST Act. Aggrieved by the two orders which are passed, the assessee preferred a statutory appeal under section 62 of the KVAT Act. The appellate authority by the impugned order has dismissed the appeal on the ground that it is not maintainable in view of section 18A(1) of the CST Act. Aggrieved by the same, the assessee has preferred the writ petition which was rejected. Hence this appeal. 2. The learned counsel for the assessee assailing the impugned order contends that the appeals are filed against the orders passed under section 9(2) of the CST Act for which section 18A(1) of the CST Act has no application. Therefore, the impugned order is illegal and requires to be set aside. 3. Per contra, learned counsel for the State submits that though the order is passed under section 9(2) of the Act, in fact, this is an order passed under section 6A(2) of the CST Act. Therefore, the authorities were justified in rejecting the said appeal as not maintainable. 4. Section 18A(1) of the CST Act was inserted and it came into effect from June 1, 2010. The present appeal is filed on June 8, 2010. It is in those circumstances, the appellate authority held the appointed day having been notified by the Central Government as June 1, 2010, this appeal is filed on June 8, 2010, that is subsequent to the said appointed day is not maintainable. According to the appellate authority, the dispute involved in both these appeals is with reference to tax levied for non-production of F forms which relate to the provisions of section 6A(2) to the CST Act, 1956. In view of the aforesaid amendment, the appeal was not maintainable. 5. Section 18A(1) as newly inserted reads as under : 18A. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in a State Act, any person aggrieved by an order made by the assessing authority under sub-section (2) of section 6A, or an order made under the provisions of sub-section (3) of that section, may notwithstanding anything contained in the general sales tax law of the appropriate State, prefer an appeal to the highest appellate authority of the State against such order : Provided that any incidental issues including the rate of tax, computation of assessable turnover and penalty may be raised in such appeal. 6. 6. Section 6A(2) and (3) reads as under : In the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 (74 of 1956) (hereinafter referred to as the Central Sales Tax Act), in section 6A : (a) in sub-section (2) for the portion beginning with the words "are true, he may" and ending with the words "declaration relates shall", the words "are true and that no inter-State sale has been effected, he may, at the time of, or at any time before the assessment of the tax payable by the dealer under this Act, make an order to that effect and thereupon the movement of goods to which the declaration relates shall, subject to the provisions of sub-section (3)," shall be substituted ; (b) after sub-section (2), the following sub-section shall be inserted, namely : (3) Nothing contained in sub-section (2) shall preclude reassessment by the assessing authority on the ground of discovery of new facts or revision by a higher authority on the ground that the findings of the assessing authority are contrary to law, and such reassessment or revision may be done in accordance with the provisions of general sales tax law of the State. 7. Sub-section (2) of section 6A provides that if the assessing authority is satisfied after making such enquiry as he may deem necessary that the particulars contained in the declaration furnished by the dealer under subsection (1) or (2), he may, at the time of, or at any rate before, the assessment of the tax payable by the dealer under this Act, make an order to that effect. 8. In other words, he may accept the declaration filed by the assessee claiming exemption in respect of the amounts covered under form F. If the same is not accepted, then, the assessee is the aggrieved person. If, he wants to prefer an appeal by virtue of the newly inserted provision, he has to prefer an appeal to the higher authority in the State, i.e., in the State of Karnataka, i.e., Karnataka Appellate Tribunal. The said provision has no application to a case where the assessee claims exemption and to substantiate the said claim, he does not produce form F. The enquiry that is contemplated under sub-section (2) of section 6A is an enquiry regarding the correctness of the particulars contained in the declaration. The said provision has no application to a case where the assessee claims exemption and to substantiate the said claim, he does not produce form F. The enquiry that is contemplated under sub-section (2) of section 6A is an enquiry regarding the correctness of the particulars contained in the declaration. When there is no form F, the question of conducting an enquiry to find out the correctness of the particulars contained in the said form does not arise. 9. In the instant case, a perusal of the impugned order makes it clear that order vide annexure A dated April 27, 2010 for the period 2007-08 shows the value of F forms filed is Rs. 1,16,24,187 which is accepted by the assessing authority. The assessee is directed to pay taxes in respect of turnover in a sum of Rs. 26,03,542 which is not supported by F forms. The assessee has preferred appeal only against that portion of the order, i.e., Rs. 26,03,542. Insofar as the period 2008-09 is concerned, the assessee has not furnished any F forms at all and therefore, the assessee was called upon to pay taxes. In the appeal, the assessee has furnished F forms, seeking the benefit. Therefore, it was contended on behalf of the respondents, that the appellate authority cannot allow the said additional evidence, look at form F which is produced by the assessee and make an assessment as that is precisely what is contemplated under sub-section (2) of section 6A. 10. We do not find any substance in the said contentions. The appellate authority has two options either to entertain form F produced before the appellate authority, look into it, accept or reject the declaration filed. Insofar as that portion of the order is concerned, that would become an original order. If the appellate authority is not inclined to adopt the said procedure, it is open to him to set aside the order and remand the matter to the assessing authority with a direction to take note of the F forms which are filed before him and pass an order under section 6A(2). If the appellate authority is not willing to adopt, either of these two methods it is open to them to dispose of the appeal on merits. If the appellate authority is not willing to adopt, either of these two methods it is open to them to dispose of the appeal on merits. However the impugned order saying that the appeal which is validly preferred against an order under section 9(2) of the Act as not maintainable in view of insertion of section 18A(1) of the Act is not proper. Therefore, the entire approach of the appellate authority is erroneous, contrary to statutory provisions and liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the impugned order is hereby set aside. Matter is remitted back to the appellate authority to follow any of the modes that is set out above in this order and then pass appropriate orders. Ordered accordingly.