<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Additional customs duty equivalent to rubber cess upheld on imported natural rubber, following coordinate Bench precedent.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98240</link>
    <description>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&#039;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.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2026 08:27:10 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2026 08:27:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=893835" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Additional customs duty equivalent to rubber cess upheld on imported natural rubber, following coordinate Bench precedent.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98240</link>
      <description>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&#039;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.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 31 Mar 2026 08:27:10 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=98240</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>