9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Levy of anti-dumping duty under Section 9A of the Customs Tariff Act based on the origin of goods. Analysis: The case involved the Commissioner of Customs (Imports) imposing anti-dumping duty on polished porcelain tiles imported by the appellants, alleging that the goods were exported from China. The appellants contended that the goods were of Malaysian origin based on a certificate of origin issued by the Chamber of Commerce of Malaysia and Singapore. The Commissioner relied on various pieces of evidence, including confirmation by agents and tracking programs, to establish that the goods originated from China. The appellants' argument that the tracking program was not part of the show cause notice was dismissed, as the Commissioner's reliance on it was unchallenged. Despite the importer's proprietor retracting his statement, the documentary evidence supported the department's case. The Tribunal heard both sides and concluded that the department had successfully proven that the goods were indeed exported from China, justifying the levy of anti-dumping duty. The decision upheld the impugned order and dismissed the appeal, emphasizing that the burden of proof had been met by the department. The judgment highlighted the importance of concrete evidence in determining the origin of goods for the purpose of imposing anti-dumping duties, underscoring the significance of documentary support and tracking mechanisms in such cases.
|
