"Proceedings recorded" under sales tax law includes a demand notice with an appended recovery note, making revision maintainable.

The expression "proceedings recorded" in section 36(1) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 was construed in a practical sense to include a demand notice carrying an appended note that recorded departmental steps for recovery of penal interest. The notice was not treated as a mere intimation, and the absence of a separate formal order did not defeat revisional maintainability. On that basis, the Court held that the material disclosed recorded proceedings within section 36(1), so revision was maintainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether a demand notice containing an appended note recording steps for recovery of penal interest constituted "proceedings recorded" within section 36(1) of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 so as to make a revision maintainable.

Analysis: The statutory expression "proceedings recorded" was construed in a practical sense to include a recorded step taken in legal action for recovery. The demand notice was not treated as a mere intimation, because the appended note expressly recorded the departmental action to recover penal interest. On that basis, the Court found that the material placed before it contained recorded proceedings within the meaning of section 36(1), and the absence of a separate formal order did not defeat revisional maintainability.

Conclusion: Revision under section 36(1) was maintainable against the proceedings recorded in the demand notice, and the assessee succeeded.

---