Home
Issues:
The issue involved is whether the appellant is liable to pay anti-dumping duty on imported Vitrified Tiles of Chinese origin u/s Notification No. 73/2003 dated 1-5-2003. Summary: Issue 1: Liability to pay anti-dumping duty The appellant imported Vitrified Tiles of Chinese origin in April '03 and cleared them on payment of Customs duty. A Show Cause Notice (SCN) was issued contending that Vitrified Tiles attracted anti-dumping duty under Notification No. 73/2003. The appellant argued that no anti-dumping duty was imposed at the time of import and tax can only be collected based on levies in force then. However, the lower authorities rejected this contention, citing that Notification No. 73/03 provided for retrospective levy of anti-dumping duty from the date of imposition of provisional duty. The Tribunal referred to the case of NITCO Tiles Ltd. v. Designated Authority, where it was held that definitive anti-dumping duty relates back to the imposition of provisional duty, covering even the interregnum period. Despite contrary views in other cases, the Tribunal upheld the retrospective applicability of anti-dumping duty, stating that the decision in NITCO Tiles case is binding on all Benches of the Tribunal. Consequently, the appeal was rejected.
|