Natural justice in customs adjudication: failure to consider written defence and evidence led to remand for fresh decision.

Proceedings confirming duty and penalty were vitiated by denial of natural justice because the adjudicating authority failed to consider the importers' written submissions, documentary evidence and request for adjournment before deciding the alleged violation of Notification No. 203/92-Cus. The demand was based on an assertion that Modvat credit had been availed, but the notice did not disclose supporting evidence, and the jurisdictional excise certificate placed by the importers was not dealt with. The order was set aside and the matter remanded for a fresh decision after affording adequate hearing and considering the evidence and submissions.

---

---

Issues: Whether the adjudication order was vitiated for denial of natural justice in proceeding to confirm duty and penalty without considering the importers' written submissions, documentary evidence, and request for adjournment.

Analysis: The demand was founded on an allegation of violation of Notification No. 203/92-Cus. on the assumption that Modvat credit had been availed, but the notice did not disclose supporting evidence. The importers had placed their defence in writing and produced a certificate from the jurisdictional excise authority, yet the adjudicating authority did not deal with those submissions and proceeded to decide the matter after declining an adjournment request.

Conclusion: The order was held to suffer from denial of natural justice and was set aside, with the matter remanded to the Commissioner for a fresh decision after granting adequate opportunity of hearing and considering the documentary evidence and submissions.

---