2026 (3) TMI 1655 - AT - Customs

Coordinate bench precedent sustained customs duty equivalent to rubber cess on imported natural rubber.

Additional Duty of Customs under section 3(1) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, equivalent to Rubber Cess under section 12 of the Rubber Act, 1947, was ... Additional duty of customs - Rubber cess - Binding precedent Additional duty of customs - Rubber cess - Coordinate Bench precedent - Levy of additional duty of customs under section 3(1) of the Customs Tariff Act equivalent to rubber cess under section 12 of the Rubber Act on imported natural rubber was held to be legally sustainable. - HELD THAT: - The Tribunal noted that both sides relied on competing decisions, but found that in the appellant's own case the Bangalore Bench had recently rejected the same challenge for an earlier period after relying on the Larger Bench ruling in TTK-LIG Ltd. [2005 (12) TMI 300 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI-LB] It further recorded that, although the appeal against the Chennai Bench decision in TTK-LIG Ltd. had been dismissed by the Supreme Court with the question of law kept open, there was no stay or interim order in any admitted appeal. In the absence of any distinguishing facts, the Tribunal followed the coordinate Bench decision in the appellant's own case and declined to take a different view. [Paras 12] The challenge to the levy failed and the demand was sustained. Final Conclusion: Following the coordinate Bench decision in the appellant's own case and finding no distinguishing feature or operative stay from the Supreme Court, the Tribunal upheld the levy of additional duty equivalent to rubber cess on the imported goods. The appeal was accordingly dismissed. Issues: Whether Additional Duty of Customs under Section 3(1) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, equivalent to Rubber Cess under Section 12 of the Rubber Act, 1947, was leviable on imported natural rubber.Analysis: The levy was examined in light of conflicting tribunal decisions and the earlier view adopted in the Appellant's own matters. The reasoning accepted that the issue had already been decided against the assessee in a later coordinate bench decision in the Appellant's own case, and that no stay or interim order from the Supreme Court displaced that view. In these circumstances, the Tribunal followed the coordinate bench decision and declined to depart from it.Conclusion: The levy of Additional Duty of Customs equivalent to Rubber Cess on imported natural rubber was held to be legally sustainable, against the assessee.Ratio Decidendi: In the absence of any contrary binding stay or superior-court interference, a coordinate bench decision on the same levy and facts should be followed, and Additional Duty of Customs may be sustained where the tribunal has already upheld the equivalent cess liability.