1996 (2) TMI 501

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... irmed by the second revisional court in exhibit P6. The penalty came to be imposed on the petitioner on the ground that when there was an inspection on September 29, 1987 by the 1st respondent, he found stock variation and other defects in the oil mill of the petitioner. 2.. Counsel for the petitioner now submits that the order, exhibit P1, imposing penalty upon the petitioner which was later co .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nt. I see some force in the contention of the petitioner. It is not in dispute that the order imposing penalty under exhibit P1 which, as stated earlier, was confirmed by exhibits P4 and P6, was passed without the petitioner being given the copy of the stock register which was taken away by the department as evidenced by exhibit P2. It is also not in dispute that after the assessment orders were p .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X