Heard Sri Sergi Joseph Thomas, the learned counsel for the petitioner, and Dr. Thushara James, the learned Government Pleader, appearing for the respondents.

2. The petitioner, an assessee, wanted to revise its monthly returns for WPC No. 35704 of 2018 2 the assessment years 2015-2016-from April 2015 to March 2016. Initially, on 25. 10. 2016, the Assistant Commissioner (Assessment) allowed the petitioner to revise the monthly returns from November 2015 to March 2016. But the request concerned the months from April 2015 to March 2016. When this was brought to the second respondent’s notice, he passed the Ext. P4 order, and the order reads:

“This is to inform you that the above referred return revision application filed by the dealer M/s Sree Lekshmi Cashew Company bearing TIN 32020294252 for the year 2015-16 is rejected from the Office of the Commissioner, State Goods & Services Tax Department, Kerala, Thiruvananthapuram. ”

3. The Assistant Commissioner discharges the functions of a quasi judicial authority. And the reasoning is the heart of the adjudication. Here, the Ext. P4 reads more like a fiat. It contains no reasons for rejection.

4. I, therefore, set aside the Ext. P4 and remand the matter for fresh adjudication. Until the second respondent passes fresh orders on the petitioner’s request, the department will defer all coercive steps.