Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether levy of 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 on imported natural rubber was legally sustainable.
Analysis: The dispute was confined to the sustainability of the levy on imported natural rubber. The competing authorities cited by the parties were considered, and the later coordinate Bench order in the appellant's own case was followed. As no stay or interim order of the Supreme Court was shown to dislodge the coordinate Bench view, and as the Tribunal found no distinguishing facts, the levy was treated as sustainable.
Conclusion: The levy of Additional Duty of Customs equivalent to Rubber Cess on the appellant was held legally sustainable.