https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216081 Interpretation of Notification No. 43/2001 and Notification No. 22/2003 was central to the dispute, but the controversy also involved a question relating to the rate of duty of excise. On that basis, the matter fell within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, and the High Court's jurisdiction was excluded. The appeal was therefore not maintainable before the High Court and was liable to be rejected. en-us Wed, 06 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 27 Aug 2012 17:20:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216081 Interpretation of Notification No. 43/2001 and Notification No. 22/2003 was central to the dispute, but the controversy also involved a question relating to the rate of duty of excise. On that basis, the matter fell within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, and the High Court's jurisdiction was excluded. The appeal was therefore not maintainable before the High Court and was liable to be rejected. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 06 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=216081