JUDGMENT J. B. KOSHY, J. – The business place of the petitioner was inspected on October 14, 1989 and on November 9, 1989 by the Intelligence Officer, Squad No. I and Intelligence Inspector, Squad No. II, Kollam respectively and prepared shop inspection report recording the complete physical stock of certain items of goods. Stock analysis disclosed stock variations in certain items below 0.3 grams. This led to the imposition of penalty. The penalty was reduced to Rs. 25,000 by exhibit P4 order of the Deputy Commissioner in revision. The main point stressed by the petitioner is that at the time of inspection die books were produced before the authorities that was not considered for the year 1988-89. Closing stock as on March 31, 1989 was accepted by the assessing authority and signed the concerned pages on November 15, 1989. The Deputy Commissioner while considering the matter found that while imposing penalty by the Intelligence Officer, tax sought to be evaded was not quantified. The Deputy Commissioner himself found that the tax evaded was not quantified by the Intelligence Officer. In such cases, maximum penalty leviable is only Rs. 5,000. On going through the revisional orders it can be seen that it is not stated that tax sought to be evaded is quantified. In fact, even though the petitioner did not produce the stock register at the time of inspection, on verification of the accounts the petitioner produced the closing stock inventory as on March 31, 1989 before the Intelligence Officer. The Sales Tax Officer, First Circle signed the same on November 15, 1989. Therefore, there is no definite finding by the authorities regarding quantum of tax said to have been evaded. Since tax said to have been evaded is not quantified, maximum penalty that can be imposed is only Rs. 5,000. 2. Therefore, I set aside the penalty order which is confirmed by exhibit P6 order and hold that since tax evaded is not quantified, maximum penalty of Rs. 5,000 alone can be imposed. As per the interim order of this Court the petitioner had paid Rs. 10,000. That may be accepted as penalty and no further amount will be recovered from the petitioner. Exhibit P6 is modified to the above extent. The original petition is allowed. Order on C.M.P. Nos. 20745 and 16588 of 1995 in O.P. No. 9465 of 1995B dismissed. Petition allowed.