JUDGMENT : 1. This Writ Petition is filed for a Writ of Certiorari to quash: the Clarification No.147 of 2005 in D.Dis Acts Cell II/39022/05 dated 26.09.2005 of the First Respondent and the Assessment Order in TNGST No.1780326/2003-04 dated 15.06.2006. 2. The Petitioner is a registered dealer in Cotton lint, vegetable seed, paddy seed and cotton seed for sowing purpose only. The Petitioner states that the seeds are treated with fungicides, insecticides and pasted with bio-polymers and that, as a result of the commercial treatment, the seeds become poisonous and cannot be used for edible purposes. In effect, according to the Petitioner, the seeds become inedible and are capable of being used only for sowing purposes by farmers. According to the Petitioner, the seeds were classified under entry 17, 18, 19 and 20 of Part-B of the Third Schedule of the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 (the TNGST Act) and the said entries read as under: 17. Bacterial culture for agricultural purpose; 18. Organic manures and green manure seeds; 19. Certified and truthfully labelled seeds for seeding purpose; and 20. Vegetable seeds and flower seeds but excluding oil seeds. Subsequently, Part-B of the III Schedule was amended on 27.03.2002. In the amended Part-B of the III Schedule, the erstwhile entries 17,18,19 and 20 were replaced by entry 7 which reads as under: "7. Bacterial culture for agricultural purpose, Organic manures and all kinds of seeds including greed manure seeds, excluding oil seeds those described in II Schedule." After the amendment, the Second Respondent issued pre-assessment notices, in respect of both CST and TNGST, for the assessment year 2003-2004 to the Petitioner on 29.04.2005. In the said circumstances, the Tamil Nadu Seed Association sent a representation dated 06.08.2005 to the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Chepauk, Chennai, the First Respondent herein, requesting that entry-7 of Part-B of the III Schedule should be modified as under: “Bacterial culture for agricultural purpose, organic manures and all kinds of seeds including green manure seeds for seeding purpose, excluding oil seeds those described in II Schedule for use in extraction of oil either for industrial or human consumption.” In response to the said representation, by reply dated 30.08.2005, the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Chepauk, Chennai informed the Tamil Nadu Seed Association that the request for amendment cannot be accepted. Thereafter, it appears that Clarification No.147 dated 26.09.2005 was issued stating that hybrid cotton seeds are taxable at the rate of 4% under entry 6(iii) of the II Schedule to the TNGST Act and the said Clarification is impugned herein. This position was reiterated by the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes by letter dated 13.10.2005 wherein it was further stated that the usage theory cannot be invoked in entry 7 Part-B of the III Schedule. Thereafter, the assessment order dated 15.06.2006 was issued under the TNGST Act whereby tax was imposed on the basis that cotton seeds are oil seeds and, therefore, taxable under the II Schedule. The assessment order is also impugned herein. An interim stay of the impugned proceedings is in force from 27.09.2006. 3. At the hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner referred to and relied upon the Order of this Court in Tvl.CHENNAI PESTICIDES Vs. THE SPECIAL COMMISSIONER AND COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, CHENNAI in W.P.No.13986 of 2007, which is a case relating to the sale of certified cotton seeds for sowing purpose. In the said case also, the contention of the Petitioner was that the said seeds are not edible and that, therefore, the seeds should be exempted from tax under entry 7 of Part-B of the III Schedule of the TNGST Act, whereas, tax was imposed at 4% on the said cotton seeds by classifying the same under entry-6(iii) of the II Schedule of the TNGST Act. In the said case also, the clarification dated 26.09.2005, in response to the representation of the Tamil Nadu Seed Association, was referred to and it was contended that the said clarification was in violation of the principles of natural justice and without jurisdiction. The facts in the said case are almost identical to the instant case. In the said circumstances, this Court passed the following order: “8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned order passed by the first respondent is set aside and the matter is remitted to the first respondent for passing appropriate orders, independently applying the Schedule to the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act,1959, after affording due opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner. Such an exercise shall be completed within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.” 4. Such an exercise shall be completed within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.” 4. The learned counsel also referred to the Order of this Court in M/s.VEESONS ENERGY SYSTEMS (P) LTD Vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES, CHENNAI in W.P.(MD)No.5866 of 2010, wherein this Court held that the first respondent therein did not have power to suo moto issue a clarification under Section 48 A of the Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006. On the basis of the above Order, the learned counsel for the Petitioner submitted that Clarification No.147/2005 is liable to be quashed and that the Assessing Authority should be directed to make a fresh assessment after providing reasonable opportunity to the Petitioner. 5. In response, the learned counsel appearing for the Respondents submitted that when the III Schedule to the TNGST Act was amended, entries 17, 18, 19, and 20 were omitted. Instead entry 7 was introduced and entry 7 does not include the language of entry 19 of the pre-amended III Schedule. Accordingly, the submission of the learned counsel was that “certified and truthfully labelled seeds for seeding purposes” were expressly exempted under the pre-amended III Schedule, whereas the amended III Schedule does not contain such an exemption. Therefore, according to the learned counsel, all oil seeds are taxable under the II Schedule and there is no scope to exclude oil seeds that are used exclusively for seeding purposes. She further referred to Clarification No.71 of 2006 dated 12.05.2006, wherein it was stated that the entry does not distinguish between ordinary oil seeds and oil seeds specially grown for seeding purposes. She further referred to the Division Bench judgment of this Court in JOTHI ANDAVAR AND CO Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS in (1994) 92 STC 386 wherein it was held that when the principal entry is oil seeds, groundnut cannot be excluded from the scope of the principal entry, namely, oil seeds. She also referred to the Division Bench Judgment of this Court in V.SOMASUNDARAM Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU in (2010)33 VST 474 , wherein it was held that groundnut cannot be regarded as a vegetable seed but can only be regarded as an oil seed, which is taxable under the II Schedule. 6. She also referred to the Division Bench Judgment of this Court in V.SOMASUNDARAM Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU in (2010)33 VST 474 , wherein it was held that groundnut cannot be regarded as a vegetable seed but can only be regarded as an oil seed, which is taxable under the II Schedule. 6. Upon carefully considering the affidavit, documents on record and the oral submissions, it is clear that the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, the First Respondent herein, has stated, in the letter dated 30.08.2005 that the request for amendment of entry 7 cannot be complied with and, in the Clarification dated 26.09.2005, that hybrid cotton seeds are taxable at the rate of 4% under entry 6 (iii) of the II Schedule to the TNGST Act. The said Communication and Clarification do not contain any reasons. It also appears that proper opportunity was not provided to the Petitioner to state its case or its objections before the said Communication and Clarification were issued. Although Section 28 A of the TNGST empowers the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes to issue a clarification on the rate of tax in response to a request from a registered dealer, the said communication and Clarification also do not cite any applicable provisions of law. Further, the Assessment Order dated 15.06.2006 was issued without waiting for the objections of the Petitioner and, therefore, the assessment order does not consider the submission that cotton seeds that are used only for seeding purposes are exempted under Entry 7 of Part -B of the III Schedule. Consequently, it is in the interest of justice that the Assessment Order dated 15.06.2006 under the TNGST Act be set aside. As a result, the Assessing Officer is directed to carry out fresh assessment after providing a reasonable opportunity to the Petitioner to submit objections and make its submissions. The said Assessing Officer shall make the assessment on an independent basis by disregarding Clarification No.147 dated 26.09.2005 or any other clarification and the communications dated 30.08.2005 and 13.10.2005. The said fresh assessment proceedings with regard to the taxability of cotton seeds used for seeding purposes shall be completed within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The said fresh assessment proceedings with regard to the taxability of cotton seeds used for seeding purposes shall be completed within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Needless to say, the Assessing Officer shall decide the taxability of cotton seeds used exclusively for seeding purposes without taking into account any observations in this order on the merits of the dispute. 7. In the result, this Writ Petition is disposed of in the above terms. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected M.P. is closed.