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

.... which when contested, was rejected by the first revisional court through exhibit P4 which was later confirmed 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 ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... that without the stock register he will not be able to controvert the allegations made by the 1st respondent. 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 t....