Natural justice in customs valuation demands fair consideration of rival expert evidence before confiscation and penalty are sustained.

Rival expert evidence on the character and valuation of imported goods had to be fairly considered before enhancing value or sustaining confiscation, redemption fine and penalty. The adjudication relied on the NML report while rejecting the importer's technical material largely because the experts had not visually tested the goods, even though they had examined the data, literature and specifications and offered a reasoned contrary view. Because the basis of enhancement and misdeclaration was not properly disclosed and the importer was not given a fair opportunity to meet the case, the order was set aside and the matter remanded for de novo consideration of valuation, classification and the competing expert opinions.

---

---

Issues: Whether the order enhancing valuation and imposing confiscation, redemption fine and penalty was liable to be set aside and the matter remanded for fresh adjudication on account of non-consideration of the importer's expert evidence and failure to follow natural justice.

Analysis: The dispute turned on the nature and valuation of the imported goods. The order had proceeded on the basis of the NML report while rejecting the importer's expert material mainly because those experts had not themselves visually examined or tested the goods. The record showed that the importer's experts had examined the NML data, technical literature and ISI specifications and had given a contrary opinion supported by reasons. The valuation enhancement and the finding of misdeclaration were also found to have been reached without adequate disclosure of the basis and without proper opportunity to meet the case. In such circumstances, the matter required fuller inquiry, including examination of the importer's experts and re-examination of valuation and the consequential allegations.

Conclusion: The impugned adjudication could not be sustained and the matter was remanded to the Commissioner for de novo consideration after giving the parties opportunity to meet the valuation and classification issues and to test the rival expert opinions.

Ratio Decidendi: Where rival expert evidence on the character of imported goods is material to confiscation and valuation, rejection of one side's opinion without adequate reasons and without a fair opportunity to clarify the technical controversy violates natural justice and warrants remand for fresh adjudication.

---