2014 (11) TMI 736 - AT - Customs

Levy of Anti dumping duty - mode of calculation - import of casing pipes - Notification No. 91/2000-Cus dated 21.6.2000 - Held that - Anti Dumping Duty has not been imposed based upon the margin of dumping but Anti Dumping Duty has been imposed less than that and is based upon the reference price of the domestic producers. We also note that para 18 of the recommendation of the designated authority very clearly states that the landed value of imports is proposed to be determined after charging the actual level of Customs duty prevalent. We also note that the present appellant as also other parties connected with oil exploration/exploration business had also participated in the proceedings for imposition of Anti Dumping Duty and has provided lot of details to the designated authority. Casing pipes are mainly imported by the appellants and other units connected with the oil and gas exploration work. Notification provides exemption not only Basic Customs Duty but also from additional duty/CVD leviable. Therefore the appellant will continue to get the benefit of exemption in respect of additional/countervailing duty. Secondly, the Anti Dumping duty Notification is specific to the imports of casing pipes and some other varieties of seamless pipes, while Notification No. 16/2000-Cus is a generalized Notification covering large number of goods required for oil and gas exploration/exploitation work. Moreover, the Anti Dumping Duty Notification is applicable only when the imports are made from specific sources/countries and not from all sources. In view of these facts and circumstances, the provisions of Notification No. 91/2000-Cus would prevail over the provisions of Notification No. 16/2000-Cus. Moreover, we also note that since the Anti Dumping Duty has not been imposed on the margin of dumping, but at a rate less than of margin of dumping and is with Reference price . In our view any other interpretation will defeat the purpose of Anti Dumping Duty Notification. - Decided against assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Calculation of Anti Dumping Duty on casing pipes.
2. Computation of landed value of imports for the purpose of Anti Dumping Duty.

Analysis:
1. The case involved a dispute regarding the calculation of Anti Dumping Duty on casing pipes cleared at nil rate of duty under Notification No.16/2000-Cus. The appellants paid the duty but contested the method of calculation used by the department. The issue centered around the correct computation of the landed value of imports, as prescribed by Notification No. 91/2000-Cus. The appellants argued that Basic Customs Duty should be calculated based on the general rate applicable to the goods, not specific to individual importers or end-use, to prevent nullification of the exemption granted under the Notification.

2. The Tribunal considered past judgments and the designated authority's recommendations on Anti Dumping Duty imposition. It was noted that the duty was not solely based on dumping margin but also on reference price of domestic producers. The Tribunal emphasized that the landed value of imports should include actual Basic Customs Duty paid, not a theoretical or notional value. The Tribunal held that the specific Anti Dumping Duty Notification (No. 91/2000-Cus) would prevail over the general exemption Notification (No. 16/2000-Cus) due to its specific application to certain imports. The purpose of the Anti Dumping Duty Notification would be defeated by any other interpretation, as it was based on a reference price and not the dumping margin. Therefore, the appeals were dismissed based on these considerations.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key legal issues, arguments presented by both parties, relevant legal provisions, past precedents, and the final decision reached by the Tribunal, providing a comprehensive understanding of the case.