JUDGMENT P. Puttaraju—This is an appeal filed under Section 63 of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (for short, the 'Act') challenging the appeal order dated 24th March, 2012 in Case Nos. JCCT/AP/BG/KVAT-238 to 247/2011-2012 for the tax periods from June 2007 to March 2008 passed by the Joint Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Appeals), Belgaum Division, Belgaum (for brevity as 'FAA') who has upheld the reassessment order dated 17th June, 2011 concluded under Section 39(1) of the Act for the tax periods of April 2007 to March 2008 by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Audit-2), Belgaum (for short, as 'AA'). The FAA has also upheld the penalty and interest levied by the AA. The relevant facts and grounds leading to this appeal can be briefly stated as follows.-- (i) The appellant is a private limited company and engaged in supply erection and commissioning of electrical work. The appellant is borne on the records of ACCT, LVO-390, Belgaum wherein, the appellant has filed Form VAT 100 for each tax period. (ii) The appellant has been reassessed for the impugned tax periods by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (Audit-2), Belgaum vide order dated 17th June, 2011. (iii) Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant has carried the matter before the FAA. At the time of adjudication of appeals, the AA had become FAA on promotion. Thus, the AA has passed the appeal order in the capacity of FAA also at the time of disposal of appeals. 2. There is delay of 19 days in filing the appeal for which application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 read with Section 151 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 along with affidavit has been filed. The same is considered and delay is condoned. The appeal is admitted. 3. The learned Counsel for the appellant and the learned State Representative are heard. The learned State Representative highlighted the fact that the FAA and AA is the same person and therefore the matter cannot be decided on merits. 4. Therefore, the only point which arises for our consideration is: 1. Whether, the FAA is correct in disposing of the appeal in both capacities as AA and FAA? 5. Our answer to the above point is in the negative for the following.-- REASONS Point No. 1.--Perusal of the lower Court records reveals that the AA and FAA are one and the same. Whether, the FAA is correct in disposing of the appeal in both capacities as AA and FAA? 5. Our answer to the above point is in the negative for the following.-- REASONS Point No. 1.--Perusal of the lower Court records reveals that the AA and FAA are one and the same. One cannot pass "orders" in both capacities as AA and FAA. One cannot be Judge in his own case or cause. Therefore, the impugned order of the FAA is liable to be set aside and so also the orders of the AA. The case has to be remanded back to the AA only. The issues involved in the appeal is not touched or analysed in view of the above facts. Hence the above point is answered in the negative. Therefore, we proceed to pass the following order.-- ORDER (1) The appeal is allowed. (2) The impugned order of the FAA is set aside. (3) The order of the AA is also set aside and the case is remitted back to the AA to act in accordance with law after the appellant being afforded an opportunity of being heard. (4) The office is directed to send back the lower Court records along with the copy of the judgment forthwith.