Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 18978
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
Bhargav D. Karia, Pranav Trivedi, JJ
Commissioner – Appellant
Versus
Mehsana Construction Division Gujarat Energy Transmission Corporation Ltd. – Respondent
R/TAX APPEAL NO. 449 of 2026|R/TAX APPEAL NO. 1048 of 2024|R/TAX APPEAL NO. 25 of 2025|R/TAX APPEAL NO. 40 of 2025|R/TAX APPEAL NO. 444 of 2025|R/TAX APPEAL NO. 231 of 2026
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Deepak N Khanchandani, Hetvi Sancheti
For the Respondents: Uchit N Sheth
Appeals concerning the applicability of an Exemption Notification under the governing tax statute fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Apex Court as per Section 35L, rendering such appeals non-maintainable before the High Court under Section 35G.
Headnote:(A) Central Excise Act, 1944 - Sections 35G and 35L - Tax appeal - Jurisdiction - Dispute over applicability of Exemption Notification - Statutory framework prescribes that appeals pertaining to Exemption Notifications are cognizable by the Apex Court under Section 35L rather than the High Court under Section 35G - Judicial consistency requires adherence to the established law regarding forum selection for appellate intervention. (Paras 2, 3 and 4)
Facts of the case:
The appellant preferred appeals before the High Court, asserting jurisdiction under the revenue statutes. The respondent contended that the dispute involved the interpretation of an Exemption Notification, thereby warranting adjudication by a different appellate forum.
Findings of Court:
The Court observed that because the matter pertained to whether services provided by the respondent were covered by an Exemption Notification, the statutory forum for such an appeal is the Apex Court under the relevant legislative provision, consistent with binding judicial precedent.
Issues: Whether an appeal concerning the application of an Exemption Notification is maintainable before the High Court under Section 35G or must be preferred before the Apex Court under Section 35L.
Ratio Decidendi: Any dispute involving the interpretation or application of an Exemption Notification falls outside the appellate scope of the High Court and is exclusively within the jurisdiction of the Apex Court as mandated by the statute.
Result: Appeals disposed of with liberty to the appellant to approach the Apex Court within the specified timeline.
ORAL ORDER
(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA)
1 Heard learned Senior Standing Counsels Mr.Deepak Khanchandani and Ms.Hetvi Sancheti appearing for the appellant in respective tax appeals and learned advocate Mr.Uchit Sheth for the respondent.
2 Learned Senior Standing Counsel Mr.Khanchandani appearing for the appellant – revenue submitted that these appeals would not be maintainable under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act (for short “the Act”), 1944, as the dispute involved in these appeals pertains to Exemption Notification and the appeals would lie before the Hon’ble Supreme Court under Section 35L of the Act and not before the High Court under Section 35G of the Act.
3 It was, therefore, submitted that these appeals may be disposed of in view of the decision of this Court in the case of Commissioner of CE and CGST, Bhavnagar Vs. Krishna Construction ., reported in [2024] 125 GSTR 240 (Gujarat), with a liberty to file appeal before the Hon’ble Supreme Court raising the same questions of law which are raised in these appeals.
4 Considering the above submissions, the appeals are disposed of as the issue involved in these appeals pertains to the Exemption Notification i.e. whether the services rendered by the respondents are covered by an Exemption Notification or not, and therefore, the appeals would lie before the Hon’ble Supreme Court under Section 35L of the Act in view of the decision of this Court in the case of Krishna Construction (supra). However, we reserve liberty in favour of the appellants to prefer an appeal before the Hon’ble Supreme Court within a period of twelve weeks from today.
