Denial of relied-upon material and computer data can vitiate adjudication where fair opportunity to reply is impaired.

Denial of access to seized relied-upon material, including computer data forming the basis of an undervaluation allegation, was found to prejudice the noticee's defence and breach natural justice; the adjudication order was therefore liable to be set aside. The High Court also held that the mere availability of an alternative statutory remedy does not bar writ intervention where exceptional circumstances and denial of a fair opportunity are shown. The writ petition succeeded, the adjudication order was quashed, and the show cause notice was restored for fresh decision with directions to supply the computer data and return the CPUs.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the adjudication order was liable to be interfered with for denial of access to the seized and relied-upon material, including the computer data forming the basis of the allegation of undervaluation; (ii) Whether the writ petition should be declined on the ground of availability of an alternative statutory remedy.

Issue (i): Access to the relied-upon material and the relevant computer data was necessary for an effective reply to the show cause notice. The documents and data forming the foundation of the proposed valuation and duty demand had not been made adequately available, and the non-relied material had also not been properly returned. In these circumstances, the petitioners were prejudiced in their defence and the adjudication was affected by a breach of natural justice.

Conclusion: The issue was decided in favour of the petitioners, and the adjudication order was held liable to be set aside.

Issue (ii): The availability of an appellate remedy does not absolutely bar writ jurisdiction. Where the dispute discloses exceptional circumstances and a denial of fair opportunity, the High Court may interfere notwithstanding the existence of an alternative remedy.

Conclusion: The objection based on alternative remedy was rejected.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded, the adjudication order was quashed, the show cause notice was restored for fresh decision, and the respondents were directed to supply the computer data and return the CPUs while the Revenue's interest remained protected by the undertaking.

Ratio Decidendi: Where material forming the basis of a show cause notice is not made available to the noticee for reply, and the resulting prejudice amounts to denial of a fair opportunity, the adjudication cannot be sustained; the existence of an alternative remedy does not prevent writ intervention in such exceptional cases.

---