Natural justice and speaking orders require reasoned adjudication; ignoring defence material and procedural objections can justify remand.

An adjudication order may be set aside where it ignores a corrigendum to the show cause notice, does not address late intimation of personal hearing, and fails to consider the noticee's defence and subsequent material. A non-speaking order that relies mainly on earlier statements without clear reasoning on disputed factual issues does not satisfy natural justice. In such circumstances, the order cannot be sustained and the matter is remanded for fresh de novo adjudication after hearing the noticees and considering the record.

---

---

Issues: Whether the adjudication order was vitiated by violation of natural justice and lack of reasons so as to require setting aside and remand.

Analysis: The order did not deal with the corrigendum to the show cause notice or the effect of the late intimation of the personal hearing. It was found to be non-speaking, as it relied mainly on earlier statements without considering the subsequent material and the defence put forward. The duty demand, reversal of credit, penalty and confiscation were recorded without adequate examination of the documents and without clear reasoning on the disputed factual issues.

Conclusion: The adjudication could not be sustained and the matter had to be remanded for fresh decision after hearing the noticees and considering their defence and materials.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded only to the extent that the impugned adjudication was set aside and the matter was sent back for de novo adjudication, with the substantive issues left open.

Ratio Decidendi: An adjudication order that ignores material defence, does not deal with relevant procedural objections, and is passed without reasoned consideration of the record is liable to be set aside and remanded for fresh adjudication in accordance with natural justice.

---