Natural justice in tariff classification matters requires the hearing and final adjudication to be by the same officer.

An adjudication order affecting excise duty liability was held unsustainable where the hearing was conducted by one Assistant Collector and the final order changing the tariff heading was passed by another. The divergence between the officer who heard the matter and the officer who decided it was treated as a breach of natural justice because the tariff classification directly determined duty liability or exemption. The impugned order was quashed and the matter remanded for fresh disposal on the basis of the original show cause notice.

---

---

Issues: Whether the adjudication order was vitiated because the hearing was conducted by one Assistant Collector and the final order changing the tariff heading was passed by another, and whether the matter should be quashed and remanded.

Analysis: The hearing and the final decision were admittedly rendered by different officers. Since the change in tariff heading determined the liability to excise duty or exemption from it, the order was passed in breach of natural justice and could not be sustained.

Conclusion: The impugned order was quashed and the matter was remanded to the Assistant Collector for fresh disposal on the basis of the original show cause notice.

Ratio Decidendi: An adjudication order affecting duty liability is unsustainable where the officer who hears the matter is not the officer who renders the final decision, as this violates natural justice.

---