1. Heard Sri Digvijay Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri B.K. Pandey, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.

2. Present writ petition has been filed against the order dated 10.06.2018 passed by the Assistant Commissioner Commercial Tax, Sector-6, Mathura, by which the petitioner has been assessed to tax for the month April, 2018 under Section 64 of the U.P. GST Act, 2018 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).

Against that order, the assessee had filed first appeal that came to be dismissed as beyond time.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order dated 10.06.2018 passed by the assessing authority is wholly without jurisdiction inasmuch as on 27.11.2017, the assessee had applied for compounding and had paid tax through compounding method. Thus, no regular assessment may ever have arisen under the Act.

4. During the assessment year in question, the assessee was engaged in running brick kiln. While the assessee claims that it had filed compounding application and therefore, could not have been subjected to tax, the supplementary counter affidavit filed by the State discloses that during the assessment year in question, the assessee filed its return of regular assessment of tax and did not opt for compounding.

5. In view of that fact, there is no merit in the contention that it had been wrongly subjected to tax.

6. The present writ petition lacks merit and is accordingly dismissed.