Natural justice in customs adjudication requires cross-examination of expert witnesses when their reports are used against an importer.

Denial of cross-examination of Chemical Examiners, whose reports were relied upon to determine the nature of imported goods on a contested factual issue, breached natural justice. Because those reports were used against the importer and the importer's contrary reports were disregarded, fairness required an opportunity to test the experts' findings. The refusal to permit cross-examination caused prejudice and vitiated the adjudication. The order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh adjudication after allowing cross-examination of the Chemical Examiners.

---

---

Issues: Whether the denial of cross-examination of the Chemical Examiners whose reports were relied upon in adjudication vitiated the order for breach of natural justice and warranted remand.

Analysis: The adjudicating authority determined the nature of the imported goods mainly on the basis of reports of two Chemical Examiners, while ignoring the reports produced by the appellants. Since those reports were used against the appellants on a contested factual issue, fairness required that the appellants be given an opportunity to test their correctness through cross-examination. Denial of that opportunity amounted to violation of natural justice and resulted in miscarriage of justice.

Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication after granting cross-examination of the Chemical Examiners to the appellants.

---