Natural justice in confiscation matters requires disclosure of valuation material and opportunity to cross-examine adverse witnesses.

Confiscation based on valuation reports and market enquiry material could not be sustained where those materials were not supplied to the appellants and no opportunity was given to cross-examine the valuers. Reliance on adverse evidence requires disclosure and a fair chance to meet it; withholding the reports and denying cross-examination breached natural justice. The confiscation order was therefore set aside and the matter remanded for fresh decision after observance of natural justice.

---

---

Issues: Whether the confiscation order could be sustained when the valuation reports and market enquiry material relied upon were not furnished to the appellants and no opportunity was given to cross-examine the persons who valued the goods.

Analysis: The order recorded that the goods had been valued with the assistance of an independent panel of valuers and on the basis of market enquiry. Those reports were not supplied to the appellants, and they were not afforded an opportunity to test the adverse material by cross-examination. Such material, when relied upon against a party, must be disclosed and a fair opportunity must be given to meet it. The absence of disclosure and opportunity to cross-examine amounted to a breach of the principles of natural justice.

Conclusion: The confiscation order could not be upheld and the matter was remanded for fresh decision after observance of natural justice.

---