9911796707
TMI Blog1983 (11) TMI 280X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... S.D.R., for the Appellant. Smt. Rainu Walia, Advocate, for the Respondents. ORDER By the present reference application purporting to be under Section 35G and 35H of the Central Excises and salt Act, 1944, the applicant, namely the Collector of Central Excise, Indore, requires of the Tribunal that a statement of the case decided in the Tribunal's Order No. 392D/1983, dated 15-6-1983 be drawn up ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a relation to the rate of duty of excise. The questions framed by the applicant Collector also related to the interpretation of an exemption notification involving the application of different rates of duty of excise. In our previous Orders in similar cases (vide our Order No. 586/1983D, dated 21-9-1983 on an application from M/s. Ceekay Rubber Industries, and Order No. 629/1983D, dated 13-10-1983 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r Section 35G, if the Tribunal was of opinion that on account of conflict in the decisions of High Courts, it was expedient that a reference should be made direct to the Supreme Court. Thus, in order to have Section 35H invoked, there had first to be a reference under Section 35G. If that reference itself was not maintainable, there could be no question of entertaining it and of making a reference ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
