Excise duty rate and valuation disputes fall under the apex appellate route, leaving the High Court without maintainability.

Where an excise dispute turns on the rate of duty applicable on removal of goods and the valuation of those goods, the statutory appellate route under Section 35-L of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is attracted and the High Court lacks maintainability. The appeal was therefore held not maintainable before the High Court and dismissed, with liberty to pursue the appropriate remedy before the Apex Court. The merits of the substantive tax question were not examined, as the matter was disposed of on the preliminary jurisdictional objection.

---

---

Issues: Whether the tax appeal was maintainable before the High Court when the controversy involved the rate of excise duty and valuation of the goods, thereby attracting the appellate forum under Section 35-L of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

Analysis: The admitted question required determination of the duty payable on inputs removed as such from the factory, involving both the rate applicable on the date of removal and the value of such goods under the excise framework. On that basis, the respondent raised a preliminary objection that the appeal lay to the Apex Court and not to the High Court because the dispute concerned rate of duty and valuation.

Conclusion: The appeal was held to be not maintainable before the High Court and was dismissed with liberty to pursue the appropriate remedy before the Apex Court.

Final Conclusion: The matter was finally disposed of on the preliminary jurisdictional objection, leaving the merits of the substantive tax question unanswered by the High Court.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the controversy in an excise appeal turns on the rate of duty and valuation of goods, the statutory appellate route under Section 35-L of the Central Excise Act, 1944 is attracted and the High Court lacks maintainability.

---