Natural justice in abatement claims requires a meaningful hearing before rejecting duty relief; ex parte order was remanded.

An ex parte rejection of abatement of duty under the compounded levy scheme was set aside because the assessee had not been given an effective opportunity to file a written reply or be heard. The record showed material facts on closure of the unit, stock verification, resumption of production and electricity meter readings that required proper consideration before deciding the abatement request. The matter was remanded for fresh consideration after affording the assessee a meaningful hearing and opportunity to place its case before the Commissioner.

---

---

Issues: Whether the ex parte order rejecting abatement of duty could be sustained when the assessee had not been afforded an effective opportunity to file a reply and be heard.

Analysis: The order under challenge was passed without the assessee's written reply and without a proper opportunity of hearing being availed in a meaningful manner. The record indicated material facts relating to closure of the unit, stock verification, resumption of production and electricity meter readings, which required consideration before deciding the request for abatement under the compounded levy scheme. In these circumstances, the matter called for reconsideration after giving the assessee another opportunity to place its case before the Commissioner.

Conclusion: The ex parte rejection was set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh consideration after hearing the assessee.

---