“7.As noticed above, while issuing the notice dated 30.12.2013 the respondent had stated that the petitioner/ dealer are given an opportunity of hearing and file their objections if any, within 15 days of the receipt of the notice. Further, the notices indicate that apart from the petitioner's right to file their objection, opportunity of being heard would also be afforded. Under normal circumstances, the first requirement is to file an objection/reply to show cause notice. The opportunity to file a reply is to enable the dealer to clarify the factual issues. Therefore, after objections were filed before the respondent, the respondent should have fixed a date for personal hearing and afforded an opportunity to the petitioner to appear before the respondent and make their submission and produce the records in support of their claim. In fact, Circular No. 07/2014 mandates such a procedure, which specifically states that, before passing a revision order, the dealer should be given a reasonable opportunity and personal hearing and no order of revision should be made without affording an opportunity to the dealer as provided under the provisions of the Act. Though there would have been an intention for giving personal hearing in the show cause notice,the personal hearing ought to be fixed by the respondent and not that the petitioner should seek for a personal hearing to produce the records, since it is a proposal to revise an assessment already made. Since there is violation of principles of natural justice this Court has to interfere with the revision order.”
