Jurisdiction over excise duty determination lies with the Supreme Court when duty assessment is the core dispute.

Where the real controversy concerns determination of excise duty payable under the Central Excise Act, the statutory appellate route lies to the Supreme Court rather than the High Court. The commentary states that once duty assessment is the core issue, ancillary questions raised by the revenue must also be taken before the Apex Court. On that basis, the High Court appeal was treated as not maintainable and the parties were directed to pursue the merits before the proper forum.

---

---

Issues: Whether the High Court appeal was maintainable where the dispute related to determination of duty payable under the Central Excise Act and such determination was held to fall within the Supreme Court's jurisdiction.

Analysis: The dispute in the appeal concerned the determination of excise duty payable on the assessee's clearances. The Court noted that such determination was to be made by the Apex Court under the relevant statutory provision governing appeals in matters involving duty assessment. As the core controversy was one of duty determination, the ancillary questions raised by the revenue also had to be considered by the Supreme Court and not by the High Court in the present appeal.

Conclusion: The appeal was not maintainable before the High Court and had to be pursued before the Supreme Court.

Final Conclusion: The judgment rests on a jurisdictional holding that disputes concerning determination of excise duty in such matters must be carried to the Supreme Court, leaving the parties to agitate the merits before the proper forum.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the real controversy is the determination of duty payable under the Central Excise Act, the statutory appellate route excludes the High Court and vests jurisdiction in the Supreme Court.

---