STATE OF KERALA Vs. SRI.MOHAMMED MUSTHAFA PROPRIETOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision is by the State, challenging the order of the Tribunal. Though the respondent was served, there was no appearance. We, hence appointed Smt.K.Krishna as Amicus Curiae. We have heard the matter and Sri.Mohammed Rafiq, learned Senior Government Pleader argued for the State.

(2.) Sri.Mohammed Rafiq points out that the Tribunal had taken contrary stances in the order, rejecting one benefit to the assessee, the reasoning of which would squarely apply in the other issue also. It is also pointed out that the Tribunal has applied equity, which it could not have in an appeal as provided under the Statute.

(3.) The questions raised are re-framed as follows: