Abatement under Central Excise Rules raised a question of law on compliance, requiring reference to the High Court.

The Tribunal's abatement ruling was treated as raising a question of law because the allowability of abatement depended on whether the statutory requirement under Rule 96ZO(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 had been satisfied. The High Court held that this legal issue warranted reference, and directed the Tribunal to draw up the statement of the case and refer the question for the Court's opinion. The operative point is that compliance with the Rule 96ZO(2) condition was central to determining entitlement to abatement, making the matter suitable for legal reference.

---

---

Issues: Whether a question of law arose from the Tribunal's order on the assessee's abatement claim for the period in question, warranting reference to the High Court.

Analysis: The Court found that the Tribunal's order gave rise to a question of law concerning the allowability of abatement when the statutory requirement under Rule 96ZO(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 was alleged to be unfulfilled. On that basis, the Court directed the Tribunal to prepare the statement of the case and refer the question to the High Court for opinion.

Conclusion: The question of law was held to arise, and the petition was allowed with a direction to make the reference.

---