Cross-examination of expert witnesses is essential in classification disputes when their report determines the goods' identity.

Denial of cross-examination of Geological Survey of India officials, whose report was the basis for classifying imported goods as other calcareous stones rather than marble, was found inconsistent with fair adjudication. Expert opinion cannot be accepted unquestioningly merely because the institution is reputed or long-established, and a party must be allowed to test such evidence when it determines classification. The adjudication was set aside and the matter remitted for fresh decision after permitting cross-examination of the concerned officials.

---

---

Issues: Whether the denial of cross-examination of the Geological Survey of India officials, whose report formed the basis of the classification dispute, vitiated the adjudication and warranted fresh decision-making.

Analysis: The Commissioner had relied on the Geological Survey report to hold that the imported goods were other calcareous stones and not marble. Refusal to allow cross-examination was not justified merely because the institution was reputed or long-established. Expert opinion cannot be accepted unquestioningly, and denial of an opportunity to test such evidence was inconsistent with fair adjudication.

Conclusion: The denial of cross-examination was held to be unsustainable. The adjudication was set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh decision after permitting cross-examination of the concerned Geological Survey officials.

---