Abatement of duty claims require notice and hearing; rejection without natural justice is unsustainable.

Rule 96ZQ(7) on abatement of duty for non-operation of a hot air stenter requires the assessee to be given notice and a reasonable opportunity to show that the prescribed conditions have been met. An abatement claim cannot be rejected without hearing the applicant and properly considering the application. An order passed without notice, without hearing, and without due application of mind is contrary to the Rule's basic requirements and violates natural justice. The rejection of abatement was therefore stated to be unsustainable, and the matter was remanded for fresh decision after personal hearing.

---

---

Issues: Whether the rejection of the claim for abatement of duty under Rule 96ZQ(7) was sustainable when the assessee was not issued a show cause notice or afforded a reasonable opportunity of hearing before the order was passed.

Analysis: Rule 96ZQ(7) governs abatement of duty for non-operation of a hot air stenter and contemplates compliance with the prescribed requirements by the independent processor. The decision on such a claim cannot be made without giving the assessee a reasonable opportunity to satisfy the authority that the conditions of the Rule have been fulfilled. Where the adjudicating authority passes an order without notice, without hearing, and without proper application of mind to the application for abatement, the order is contrary to the basic requirement embedded in the Rule and violates natural justice.

Conclusion: The rejection of abatement was unsustainable. The order was set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh decision after consideration of the application and after affording personal hearing.

---