Central Excise appeal jurisdiction turns on rate of duty and valuation; High Court remedy is excluded under section 35G.

An appeal under section 35G of the Central Excise Act is not maintainable where the substantial controversy concerns determination of the rate of duty or valuation of goods. In such matters, the statute excludes High Court jurisdiction and directs the remedy to the Supreme Court under section 35L(b). The document notes that even if the challenge is framed around the assessee's status or exemption, the decisive issue remains whether the dispute is essentially one of duty rate or valuation.

---

---

Issues: Whether an appeal under section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was maintainable when the dispute involved determination of the rate of duty and valuation, for which an appeal lies to the Supreme Court under section 35L(b) of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

Analysis: The appeal challenged the Tribunal's finding on the assessee's status and the applicability of the exemption, but the real controversy was whether the matter involved determination of the rate of duty and valuation. Section 35G excludes the High Court's jurisdiction in such cases and provides for an appeal to the Supreme Court under section 35L(b).

Conclusion: The appeal was not maintainable before the High Court and was rejected, with liberty to approach the Supreme Court under section 35L(b).

Ratio Decidendi: Where the substantial question in appeal concerns the rate of duty or valuation of goods, the High Court has no jurisdiction under section 35G and the remedy lies under section 35L(b) before the Supreme Court.

---