Reference application under excise law rejected for failing to frame any specific question of law.

A reference application under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act was held not maintainable because it did not frame any specific question of law. Mere dissatisfaction with the Tribunal's earlier order was insufficient, and a vague request that failed to identify a referable legal issue could not be entertained. On that basis, the application was rejected for want of merit and for not disclosing any proper ground for reference to the High Court.

---

---

Issues: Whether a reference application under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act was maintainable when no specific question of law was framed.

Analysis: The application merely expressed dissatisfaction with the Tribunal's earlier order and did not identify any question for reference. In the absence of a framed question, the request for referring the matter to the High Court could not be entertained. The application was also found to be too vague to disclose any merit.

Conclusion: The reference application was not maintainable and was rejected.

---