https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44866 Withdrawal of an earlier permission and rejection of an extension request under Rule 173H could not be sustained where the department relied on monthly reports and an adverse inference that the activity was manufacture rather than repair, but those materials and inferences were never confronted to the assessee. The authority was required to afford an opportunity of hearing before taking action with adverse civil consequences, even if the rule did not expressly provide for one. The impugned orders were therefore quashed for breach of fair play and natural justice. en-us Mon, 15 Jul 1996 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 Jul 2010 12:45:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44866 Withdrawal of an earlier permission and rejection of an extension request under Rule 173H could not be sustained where the department relied on monthly reports and an adverse inference that the activity was manufacture rather than repair, but those materials and inferences were never confronted to the assessee. The authority was required to afford an opportunity of hearing before taking action with adverse civil consequences, even if the rule did not expressly provide for one. The impugned orders were therefore quashed for breach of fair play and natural justice. Case-Laws Central Excise Mon, 15 Jul 1996 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=44866