JUDGMENT M.S.Ramachandra Rao, J. - Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri J.Anil Kumar, learned Special Counsel for Commercial Taxes for the respondents. 2. In this Writ Petition, the petitioner has assailed the Assessment Order dt.31.03.2020 passed by the 1st respondent under the provisions of the CST Act, 1956 for the period 2015-16 which has been served on the petitioner on 18.06.2020. 3. The petitioner is a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 and is a registered Dealer on the rolls of the 1st respondent. 4. Notice dt.16.11.2019 was issued by the 1st respondent proposing to levy tax under the CST Act for the period 2015-16 on the ground that the petitioner did not submit statutory C and F Forms and the 1st respondent proposed to disallow branch transfers and inter-State sales. 5. According to the petitioner, it had already submitted relevant F-Form in original along with a covering letter on 11.12.2017 and as regards C-Forms, the petitioner contended that it did not receive them from its customers and so, it could not file the same. 6. After filing a reply dt.17.02.2020 by e-mail in which the petitioner sought time to file C-Forms in order to avail concessional rate of tax on inter-State sales, the 1st respondent issued another notice on 06.03.2020. 7. The petitioner sent a reply through registered post and courier on 10.03.2020 seeking additional one month's time on the ground that the web portal of the Revenue was not responding and the petitioner was unable to download the entire data. It was also stated that the petitioner was disabled from travelling on account of the COVID-19 pandemic and availing the opportunity of personal hearing and on humanitarian grounds, additional four months' time be granted. 8. However, ignoring the said request, the 1st respondent completed the assessment on 31.03.2020 and passed the impugned order without even referring to the request of the petitioner for adjournment. 9. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that in the circumstances of COVID-19 pandemic, the request of the petitioner was a reasonable one; that the 1st respondent cannot ignore the same arbitrarily; and deny the petitioner even a personal hearing because the petitioner's Corporate Office is in Bangalore and the records pertaining to the issue are at Bangalore and other places and reasonable time is required for the petitioner to produce the documents to defend itself. 10. 10. Sri J.Anil Kumar, learned Special Counsel for Commercial Taxes states that the 1st respondent ought not to have ignored the request made by the petitioner for adjournment in view of the difficulty expressed by the petitioner and the 1st respondent would reconsider the issue in the light of the plea taken by the petitioner. 11. In view of the said submission, the Writ Petition is allowed; the impugned Assessment Order AAO No.53867 dt.31.03.2020 passed by the 1st respondent is set aside; the matter is remitted back to the 1st respondent for fresh consideration; the petitioner is granted six weeks time from the date of receipt of a copy of this order to submit relevant documents and file objections to the show-cause notices dt.16.11.2019 and 06.03.2020; an opportunity of personal hearing be provided by the 1st respondent to the petitioner's representative; and then a reasoned order shall be passed by the 1st respondent in accordance with law within three months of filing of objections and documents by the petitioner and the same shall be communicated to the petitioner. 12. Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, in this Writ Petition shall stand closed. No costs.