Natural justice requires cross-examination where an amended chemical test report is relied on to confirm demand.

Denial of cross-examination of the Chemical Examiner, after the test report was amended and relied on against the assessee, was treated as a breach of natural justice. The initial report had supported the assessee, and the later amended report formed the basis of the demand confirmation, so cross-examination was necessary to allow an effective rebuttal of the material used by the Revenue. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh decision on merits after granting cross-examination and reconsideration of the issue.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether denial of cross-examination of the Chemical Examiner, after amendment of the test report, amounted to violation of natural justice warranting interference with the classification order.

Analysis: The initial test report had supported the assessee, but the report was later amended and used against it. In such circumstances, cross-examination of the Chemical Examiner was necessary in the interest of justice. The refusal to permit cross-examination, particularly where the amended report formed the basis of confirmation of demand, resulted in denial of a fair opportunity to rebut the material relied upon by the Revenue.

Conclusion: The denial of cross-examination constituted a gross violation of natural justice and the impugned order was set aside, with the matter remanded for decision afresh after granting cross-examination and reconsidering the issue on merits.

---