Procedural fairness in customs adjudication requires remand where an ex parte order ignores the importer's filed reply.

An ex parte customs order could not stand where the importer had in fact filed a reply to the show cause notice, supported by acknowledgement of receipt, the letter of credit and a timely registration application. Because the authority proceeded on the erroneous assumption that no reply was received and no hearing was attended, the order was procedurally unfair and unsustainable. The HC held that the matter required remand so the importer could be given a fair opportunity before fresh adjudication of the notification-based exemption claim.

---

---

Issues: Whether the ex parte order passed without due consideration of the importer's reply and supporting materials could be sustained, and whether the matter required remand for fresh consideration.

Analysis: The record showed that the importer had placed on file a reply to the show cause notice together with acknowledgement of receipt, along with the letter of credit and the application for registration within the stipulated period. The impugned order proceeded on the footing that no reply had been received and that no personal hearing had been attended. In view of the material produced, the decision to proceed ex parte was found unsustainable. The surrounding facts also showed that the matter required a fair opportunity to be afforded before any fresh determination on the merits of the notification-based exemption claim.

Conclusion: The impugned order could not be sustained and the matter was rightly remanded for reconsideration after granting opportunity to the petitioner.

Ratio Decidendi: An order passed ex parte on the erroneous premise that no reply was filed, despite material indicating otherwise, is vulnerable for want of procedural fairness and warrants remand for fresh adjudication after hearing the affected party.

---