MADEENA TIMBER INDUSTRIES Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the revision petitioner as well as learned Government Pleader representing the Revenue. The brief facts that led to present writ petition are as under:

(2.) Aggrieved by the same, the revision petitioner filed appeal contending that there was no opportunity whatsoever was given to the revision petitioner to establish their stand. After receiving the proposed assessment making additions to the turnover, the proceedings were closed within two days. Therefore, according to him, not only principles of natural justice were violated, but the said order of the assessing authority was erroneous.

(3.) The first appellate authority proceeded to consider the matter and treated the assessment as penalty. When this was brought to the Appellate Tribunal by the revision petitioner, the Tribunal did not even consider the contrary views expressed by the authorities below and simply proceeded to dismiss the appeal before the Tribunal. Therefore, the revision petitioner is before us.