Denial of cross-examination in customs adjudication did not vitiate proceedings where documents were disclosed and no prejudice was shown.

In customs adjudication, denial of cross-examination does not by itself breach natural justice where the documents and witness statements are disclosed and the noticee is allowed to inspect, rebut, and explain them. Applying that principle, the Court found that the petitioner had sufficient opportunity to peruse the materials and present its defence, and no demonstrable prejudice was shown. The challenge to the absence of cross-examination was therefore rejected and interference was declined.

---

---

Issues: Whether denial of cross-examination of witnesses in the customs adjudication proceedings violated the principles of natural justice and warranted interference.

Analysis: The Court relied on the law declared by the Supreme Court that where documents and statements are disclosed to the noticee and an opportunity is afforded to inspect, rebut, and explain them, the absence of cross-examination does not by itself vitiate the proceedings. The Court found that the petitioner had been granted sufficient opportunity to peruse the materials and to present the case, and that no demonstrable prejudice had been shown.

Conclusion: The challenge to the denial of cross-examination was rejected and interference was declined.

---