Appeal Dismissed: Alternative Remedy Lies with Supreme Court

The High Court held that the appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act was not maintainable as per Section 35L(b), directing appeals on duty rates or goods' value to the Supreme Court. The Court dismissed the appeal, allowing the appellant to seek the alternative remedy before the Supreme Court, in line with legal provisions and precedent.

---

---

Issues:
- Maintainability of appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 before the High Court

Analysis:
The appellant filed an appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, challenging the Final Order made by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal. The respondent raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the appeal, citing Section 35L(b) of the Act, which provides for an alternative remedy to appeal before the Supreme Court. The respondent relied on a judgment of the Division Bench in a similar case to support the contention that the present appeal is not maintainable before the High Court.

The appellant's counsel argued in favor of the appeal's maintainability. The Commissioner of Central Excise, Belgaum had dropped proceedings against the respondent in 2005, which led to the appeal before the Tribunal. However, the Tribunal rejected the appeal in 2016. The provisions of Section 35L(b) clearly state that appeals related to the determination of duty rates or goods' value for assessment must be directed to the Supreme Court. The judgment cited by the respondent further supported this interpretation, emphasizing that appeals falling under Section 35L(b) should be directed to the Supreme Court, not the High Court under Section 35G.

Based on the legal provisions and the precedent set by the Co-ordinate Bench, the High Court concluded that the present appeal under Section 35G is not maintainable before them. The Court declined to interfere in the matter and dismissed the appeal, granting the appellant the liberty to pursue the alternative remedy available in accordance with the law. The judgment was delivered in line with the established legal principles and the specific provisions of the Central Excise Act, 1944.

---