Taxability disputes are not maintainable under Section 35G before the High Court and must be taken to the Supreme Court.

An appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 challenging a question of taxability was not maintainable before the High Court. Following its earlier rulings, the Bench reiterated that disputes on taxability lie to the Supreme Court and not to the High Court under this provision. The appeal was dismissed for want of maintainability, with liberty to pursue the appropriate remedy in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether an appeal under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 was maintainable before the High Court in a matter involving taxability.

Analysis: The Division Bench followed its earlier decisions holding that disputes concerning taxability do not lie to the High Court under Section 35G and that the proper forum is the Supreme Court. In view of the settled position and the nature of the question raised, the appeal was held to be not maintainable.

Conclusion: The appeal was dismissed for want of maintainability under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944, with liberty to take recourse in accordance with law.

Ratio Decidendi: An appeal raising a question of taxability is not maintainable before the High Court under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and lies only to the Supreme Court.

---