Opportunity to respond to jurisdictional reports is mandatory before customs settlement duty enhancement; connected applications require consistent ad...
Specific customs headings for scaffolding components prevail over general classification, invalidating misclassification proceedings and enabling with...
Liquidator appointment under Section 34 requires consideration of creditor recommendations, valid professional authorisation, and preservation of vali...
Income-tax exemption for specified regulatory fees and government grants applies subject to non-commercial activity and continuing compliance conditio...
Page of 4811
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
781 to 800 of 96208 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Levy of additional customs duty 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 upheld as legally sustainable. The Tribunal noted that competing decisions had been cited, but it followed the coordinate Bench ruling in the appellant's own case, which had recently rejected the same challenge for an earlier period by relying on the Larger Bench decision in TTK-LIG Ltd. In the absence of distinguishing facts and with no operative stay or interim order from the Supreme Court, the Tribunal declined to take a different view and sustained the demand; the appeal was dismissed.
Levy of additional customs duty 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 upheld as legally sustainable. The Tribunal noted that competing decisions had been cited, but it followed the coordinate Bench ruling in the appellant's own case, which had recently rejected the same challenge for an earlier period by relying on the Larger Bench decision in TTK-LIG Ltd. In the absence of distinguishing facts and with no operative stay or interim order from the Supreme Court, the Tribunal declined to take a different view and sustained the demand; the appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.