Reference jurisdiction barred for valuation and duty-rate questions under Section 35G, so the application was rejected.

Section 35G did not permit a reference where the proposed questions related to valuation of goods or any question having a bearing on the rate of duty for assessment purposes. The Tribunal applied its settled view that such matters fall outside reference jurisdiction under that provision. On that basis, it held the reference application to be not maintainable and rejected it, declining to send the questions to the High Court.

---

---

Issues: Whether the reference application was maintainable under Section 35G when the questions related to valuation of goods and matters excluded from reference.

Analysis: Section 35G excluded orders relating, among other things, to the determination of any question having a relation to the rate of duty or to the value of goods for purposes of assessment. The questions sought to be referred arose from valuation-related issues, and the Tribunal followed its consistent view that such matters did not fall within the reference jurisdiction under that provision.

Conclusion: The reference application was not maintainable and was rejected.

Final Conclusion: The Tribunal declined to send the questions to the High Court, leaving the parties without reference jurisdiction relief under Section 35G.

Ratio Decidendi: A reference under Section 35G is barred where the proposed questions relate to the valuation of goods or the rate of duty for assessment purposes.

---