Interest waiver on warehoused goods requires reasons and hearing; unreasoned rejection of a power-project claim was remanded.

Waiver of interest on warehoused goods imported for a power project could not be refused by an unreasoned communication issued without hearing the importer. The circular relied on by the importer covered power projects and other specified categories where interest relief could be considered, so the adverse decision had to show application of mind and a reasoned basis. The absence of reasons and denial of natural justice made the rejection unsustainable. The matter was remanded to the Chief Commissioner for fresh consideration and a speaking order after hearing the importer.

---

---

Issues: Whether the rejection of the request for waiver of interest on warehoused goods imported for a power project, conveyed without reasons and without hearing the appellant, was sustainable and whether the matter required remand for fresh consideration.

Analysis: The request for waiver was supported by the CBIC circular covering power projects and other specified categories where interest could be waived having regard to the nature of the import and the project cost implications. The rejection communicated by the Chief Commissioner contained no reasons and reflected no application of mind. The appellant was not heard before the adverse decision, and the absence of any reasoned basis prevented meaningful scrutiny of the exercise of discretion. An administrative decision affecting entitlement must be supported by reasons and conform to natural justice.

Conclusion: The rejection was unsustainable for want of reasons and denial of hearing. The matter was remanded to the Chief Commissioner for fresh consideration and a reasoned order after hearing the appellant.

---