9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (7) TMI 646X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nbsp;There is no representation for the appellants despite notice, nor any request of theirs for adjournment. We are inclined to dispose of this old case after giving careful consideration to the grounds of this appeal and hearing the SDR. 2. The short question which arises for consideration in this appeal is whether Cess was leviable on "Natural Rubber Latex" imported by the appellants and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uthorizes the Customs to levy rubber cess. Various judgments of the Tribunal has made this position very clear by ignoring the CEGAT's decisions, the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), has misled himself to issue a wrong order." 3. We have heard the ld. SDR, who has relied on the Tribunal's Larger Bench decision in the appellants' own case reported as T.T.K.-LIG Ltd. v. Commissioner of Custo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on against the Revenue on the question of leviability of Cess on imported rubber by way of CVD under Section 3 of the Customs Tariff Act was upheld by the Apex Court. We further noted that the Apex Court's order in the case of M.M. Rubber Co. had not been cited before the Tribunal's Larger Bench. We followed the view taken by the Apex Court in preference to that taken by the Tribunal's Larger Benc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
