Natural justice requires a fair chance to produce defence evidence; adjudication was set aside and remanded.

Failure to allow the appellant to examine relevant witnesses and produce defence records vitiated the adjudication, because the authority proceeded on an incorrect factual premise and gave no reasons for refusing the requested evidence. The requested sales voucher, statutory registers and witness testimony were relevant to the defence, so refusal of an effective opportunity offended natural justice. The impugned order was set aside and the matter remanded for fresh reconsideration after permitting the appellant to lead the evidence sought.

---

---

Issues: Whether the adjudication was vitiated for failure to grant the appellant an opportunity to examine witnesses and produce relevant records, warranting remand for reconsideration.

Analysis: The seizure was not disputed, but the adjudicating authority proceeded on an incorrect factual premise that the appellant had not denied the alleged corrections in the Repair Register. The record showed a specific request by the appellant to examine the gold dealer and the two certified goldsmiths, and to rely on the sales voucher and statutory registers. The order did not deal with this request or give reasons for refusing the evidence. Since the proposed evidence and records were relevant to the defence, refusal of such opportunity offended fair procedure.

Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the Collector for reconsideration after affording the appellant an opportunity to adduce the requested evidence.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded only to the extent of a remand for fresh adjudication on the merits after permitting the appellant to lead relevant defence evidence.

Ratio Decidendi: Where relevant defence evidence is sought to be produced and no effective opportunity is given, the adjudication cannot stand and must be remitted for fresh consideration in accordance with natural justice.

---