Exemption-notification questions tied to duty assessment fall within exclusive appellate jurisdiction of the apex forum, not regional remedies.

A question whether an exemption notification affects rate of duty or value for assessment is governed by the direct-and-proximate-relation test: if the issue directly and proximately relates to rate or value for assessment (including classification and scope of an exemption notification), it falls within the exclusive appellate channel to the higher appellate forum rather than under High Court jurisdiction; applying that principle the challenged CESTAT determination on classification and excess exemption was held to engage rate/value for assessment, rendering the High Court appeals not maintainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether appeals filed under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962 are maintainable before the High Court where the challenged CESTAT order involves determination of questions relating to an exemption notification that directly or proximately relate to the rate of duty or value of goods for purposes of assessment.

Analysis: The Court examined the statutory scheme distinguishing appeals to the High Court under Section 130 and appeals to the Supreme Court under Section 130E of the Customs Act, 1962. The Court applied the test that a question which has a direct and proximate relation, for purposes of assessment, to the rate of duty or to the value of goods falls within the scope of Section 130E and thereby lies before the Supreme Court. The Court referenced the explanatory scope of Section 129D(5) which defines the expression 'determination of any question having a relation to the rate of duty or to the value of goods for the purposes of assessment', including classification under the Tariff and coverage by exemption notifications. Applying that legal framework to the present facts, the Court found that the CESTAT order under challenge involved not only classification but also the grant and scope of exemption under Notification No.27/2002-CUS (including the question of excess exemption of 15% claimed), which directly and proximately affects the rate of duty and assessment of duty payable.

Conclusion: The appeals are not maintainable before the High Court as the issues involve determination of questions relating to the rate of duty/value for assessment connected with an exemption notification; the proper remedy is an appeal to the Supreme Court. The appeals are closed before this Court.

---