Reference jurisdiction cannot reopen factual penalty findings under Central Excise Rules when no question of law actually arises.

A reference under the Central Excise framework cannot be used to reopen the Tribunal's factual assessment or its evaluation of penalty. The Tribunal held that the goods in transit were not covered by a valid gate pass, that this constituted a contravention attracting penalty under Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, and that intention was not essential for clauses (a), (b) and (c). A challenge to the quantum of penalty was treated as an attempt to dispute that assessment rather than a distinct question of law. A plea based on Rule 210 was also rejected because it had not arisen from the original order. No question of law was held to arise.

---

---

Issues: Whether any question of law arose from the Tribunal's earlier order so as to warrant a reference to the High Court, and whether the challenge to the imposition and quantum of penalty under the Central Excise Rules could be entertained in reference jurisdiction.

Analysis: The application sought to reopen the Tribunal's factual and evaluative findings, including the conclusion that the goods in transit were not covered by a valid gate pass and that this constituted a violation attracting penalty. The Tribunal noted that, for Rule 173Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944, intention was not essential for clauses (a), (b) and (c), and held that the applicant's complaint about the quantum of penalty was only an attempt to challenge the Tribunal's assessment of the seriousness of the contravention. The plea based on Rule 210 was also rejected because that rule had neither been pleaded nor discussed in the original order and therefore did not arise from it. The reference jurisdiction could not be used as a substitute for appeal.

Conclusion: No question of law arose from the Tribunal's order, and no reference to the High Court was called for.

Final Conclusion: The reference application was held to be not maintainable on the grounds urged and was rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: A reference application cannot be used to reopen factual evaluation or the Tribunal's assessment of penalty, and only a question of law actually arising from the order can be referred.

---