Reference to High Court barred where excise dispute turns on duty rate and notification interpretation under the statutory appellate scheme.

Questions relating to excise duty liability, rate of duty, and interpretation of an exemption or refund notification are not referable to the High Court under the reference provision where the statute excludes such matters and provides a separate appellate route. Because the dispute centred on duty on the goods and a refund claim based on Notification No. 113/85, the Tribunal applied the statutory bar under the Central Excise Act and held that the reference remedy was unavailable. The reference application was therefore rejected as not maintainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the reference application seeking reference of questions to the High Court was maintainable under the statutory scheme governing excise disputes involving rate of duty and interpretation of notification.

Analysis: The dispute arose from levy of duty on the goods and the consequent refund claim founded on Notification No. 113/85 dated 08-05-1985. The statutory scheme under Section 35G(1) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 excludes matters relating to rate of duty, valuation, and interpretation of notification from reference to the High Court, as such matters lie in the appellate channel provided under Section 35L of the Central Excise Act, 1944. Since the questions raised were connected with duty liability and notification interpretation, the reference remedy was unavailable.

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

Final Conclusion: The Tribunal held that questions concerning rate of duty and notification interpretation in excise matters cannot be referred to the High Court under the reference provision, and the proper statutory route lies elsewhere.

Ratio Decidendi: A reference to the High Court is barred where the dispute concerns rate of duty or interpretation of a notification and the statute provides an alternative appellate route.

---