Natural justice governs disputed classification lists: protest filing was justified, and approval failed without hearing or test report consideration.

A disputed classification list is treated as quasi-judicial and must be decided in compliance with natural justice. Where an earlier classification had already been approved and was under challenge, filing a fresh list under protest after budgetary changes was justified and did not undermine the dispute. Approval was unsustainable where no show-cause notice or personal hearing was given and the authority failed to consider the awaited retest report. The matter therefore required fresh consideration after affording the assessee an opportunity of hearing and dealing with the relevant test material.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the assessee could file the subsequent classification list under protest in the context of the earlier approved classification and budgetary changes. (ii) Whether approval of the classification list was sustainable when the assessee was not given a proper opportunity and the retest report was not considered.

Issue (i): Whether the assessee could file the subsequent classification list under protest in the context of the earlier approved classification and budgetary changes.

Analysis: The earlier classification had already been approved by the Department and was under challenge. In that situation, when a fresh classification list had to be filed because of budgetary changes, the assessee could not be faulted for following the existing departmental classification and indicating that the filing was under protest. The protest reflected that the dispute on classification had not yet attained finality.

Conclusion: The filing of the subsequent classification list under protest was justified and could not, by itself, defeat the assessee's challenge.

Issue (ii): Whether approval of the classification list was sustainable when the assessee was not given a proper opportunity and the retest report was not considered.

Analysis: Classification, when disputed, partakes of a quasi-judicial character and must be decided after following the principles of natural justice. The record showed that no show-cause notice or personal hearing had been afforded, and the approval was granted without properly dealing with the awaited retest report from the Chief Chemist. In these circumstances, the approval order could not be sustained.

Conclusion: The approval of the classification list was unsustainable for breach of natural justice.

Final Conclusion: The matter required fresh consideration by the Assistant Collector after giving the assessee an opportunity of hearing and proceeding in accordance with natural justice, so the assessee succeeded in obtaining a remand.

Ratio Decidendi: A disputed classification list is quasi-judicial in nature and cannot be approved without observance of natural justice, including an opportunity of hearing and consideration of relevant material such as test results.

---