https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41774 Amendment of a Central Excise licence by adding additional names could not be sustained without notice to the original licensee, because the licence was treated as a valuable personal privilege and deprivation of that privilege required observance of natural justice. The absence of an express statutory notice requirement did not dispense with the need for notice, and the record did not show a valid refusal of notice. The existence or continuance of a partnership also could not be assumed unilaterally to bypass notice. The amendment order was therefore vitiated for breach of natural justice and was quashed, with the matter remitted for fresh hearing after due notice. en-us Tue, 01 Jul 1986 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 Jun 2010 10:18:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41774 Amendment of a Central Excise licence by adding additional names could not be sustained without notice to the original licensee, because the licence was treated as a valuable personal privilege and deprivation of that privilege required observance of natural justice. The absence of an express statutory notice requirement did not dispense with the need for notice, and the record did not show a valid refusal of notice. The existence or continuance of a partnership also could not be assumed unilaterally to bypass notice. The amendment order was therefore vitiated for breach of natural justice and was quashed, with the matter remitted for fresh hearing after due notice. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 01 Jul 1986 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=41774