Maintainability of customs reference application turns on filing by the proper authority and a stated question of law.

A reference application under the Customs Act was held not maintainable because it had been filed by an Assistant Commissioner rather than the Commissioner of Customs, and a delegated junior officer could not invoke the reference mechanism. It also failed to state any question of law arising from the Tribunal's order and merely sought to have that order set aside, which was beyond the permissible scope of a reference application. The application was therefore rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the reference application filed by the Assistant Commissioner was maintainable under Section 130(1) of the Customs Act and whether it disclosed a question of law for reference.

Analysis: The application was required to be filed by the Commissioner of Customs and not by a junior officer acting on delegation. It did not formulate any question of law arising from the Tribunal's order and merely sought setting aside of that order, which was beyond the scope of a reference application.

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

---