https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102824 A remission application under Rule 49 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 had to be decided by the Commissioner as a quasi-judicial matter, so rejection without giving a reasonable opportunity of hearing and without a speaking order could not stand. Because the refusal affected the assessee's duty liability, compliance with natural justice was required, and communication of the rejection through a subordinate officer was not the procedure contemplated by the rule. The rejection was set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh decision after hearing the assessee and issuing a reasoned order. en-us Fri, 09 Aug 2002 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 16 Feb 2012 13:18:47 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102824 A remission application under Rule 49 of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 had to be decided by the Commissioner as a quasi-judicial matter, so rejection without giving a reasonable opportunity of hearing and without a speaking order could not stand. Because the refusal affected the assessee's duty liability, compliance with natural justice was required, and communication of the rejection through a subordinate officer was not the procedure contemplated by the rule. The rejection was set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh decision after hearing the assessee and issuing a reasoned order. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 09 Aug 2002 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102824