Fair hearing requirement invalidated customs order and alert notice where notice service was not established.

Failure to serve the demand/show-cause notice and hearing notices vitiated the customs adjudication where the impugned order rested on alleged breach of a duty exemption notification. The petitioners' claim that the notices were never served, together with the fact that the redemption and export obligation discharge certificate had already been furnished, was not disputed. In these circumstances, the Court held that the decision-making process was defective, the petitioner was not required to pursue the alternative statutory appeal, and the absence of a fair hearing invalidated both the order and the consequential alert notice. The respondents were left free to proceed afresh only after issuing proper notice and granting a hearing.

---

---

Issues: Whether the impugned customs order and consequent alert notice were liable to be set aside for want of service of the show-cause notice and hearing notice and whether the availability of an alternative statutory appeal barred writ relief.

Analysis: The order under challenge was founded on an alleged breach of the conditions of the duty exemption notification. The petitioners asserted that the relevant notice, the demand/show-cause notice and the notices of hearing were never served, and that the redemption and export obligation discharge certificate had already been furnished to the adjudicating authority. The respondents did not dispute the factual position. In these circumstances, the decision-making process was found to be defective and the Court held that the petitioner need not be relegated to the statutory appeal remedy. The absence of a fair hearing vitiated the order and the consequential alert notice could not survive.

Conclusion: The impugned order and the consequent alert notice were set aside and the respondents were left free to proceed afresh only after issuing an appropriate notice and granting a hearing.

---