The Petitioner has contended in the writ petition that the Appellate Authority has not taken into consideration the figure of taxable turnover and thereby erroneously computed the tax liability. Learned counsel for the Petitioner has further brought to the notice of this Court that the aforesaid appeal was at the behest of the tax payer-assessee pertaining to the period April, 2018 to March, 2019 in connection with adjudication made under Section 74 of the OGST Act, 2017 by the Additional State Tax Officer, CT & GST Circle, Mayurbhanj, Baripada; however, further notice dated 13th September, 2021 has been issued initiating proceeding under Section 73 of the OGST Act, 2017 for the tax period 1st December, 2018 to 31st December, 2018. Ms. Roy Choudhury has urged that since the adjudication order under Section 74 of the OGST Act, 2017 has been merged in the appellate order dated 12th May, 2021, the subsequent action by issue of notice dated 13th September, 2021 issued under Section 73 of the OGST Act, 2017 involving a period (December, 2018), which was subject-matter of appeal, is not tenable in the eye of law. Learned Additional Standing Counsel for the CT & GST Organization objecting to such contention submitted that the figures have been obtained from the data available in WAMIS [Works and Accounts Management Information System]. Since the Petitioner filed returns disclosing NIL figures, the revenue authorities have ascertained the figures from date available in WAMIS and appropriately determined the tax liability.