Excise duty reference on non-manufacture claims and Rule 96ZO non-compliance was directed for judicial opinion.

A reference was sought on whether excise duty could be levied on goods alleged not to have been manufactured and on the effect of non-compliance with Rule 96ZO of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The High Court found that the questions of law arose from the dispute and that the matter warranted a reference under Section 35H(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. The Tribunal was therefore directed to state the case and refer the questions for the Court's opinion.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal should be directed to state the case and refer the questions of law arising from the refusal of abatement of excise duty.

Analysis: The petition was moved under Section 35H(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 seeking reference of questions concerning levy of excise duty on goods alleged not to have been manufactured and the effect of non-compliance with procedural requirements under Rule 96ZO of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The Court found that the questions raised did arise for its consideration and that the matter warranted a reference.

Conclusion: The petition was allowed and the Tribunal was directed to refer the questions of law for the opinion of the Court.

---