Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2016 (9) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Plus+
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2016 (9) TMI 1123 - AT - Customs


Issues:
Appeals against Final Finding of Designated Authority in Anti-Dumping duty investigation concerning Sodium Tripoly Phosphate (STPP) imports from China PR, withdrawal of Anti-Dumping duty with retrospective effect, Designated Authority's power to recommend retrospective withdrawal.

Analysis:
The appeals were directed against the Final Finding of the Designated Authority dated 10.2.2012 in a Mid-term Review investigation related to Anti-Dumping duty on STPP imports from China PR. The Designated Authority had recommended the imposition of Anti-Dumping duty based on an earlier Final Finding from 3.5.2011 and subsequent Customs Notification No. 58/2011-Cus dated 8.7.2011. However, after a mid-term review initiated due to the stoppage of production by Indian manufacturers, the Designated Authority recommended the withdrawal of Anti-Dumping duty as there was no justification for its continuation without any domestic industry producing the goods. The Government rescinded the earlier notification based on this recommendation.

During the proceedings, the Appellant argued that the withdrawal should have been retrospective, challenging the exception clause in the notification. However, the Tribunal noted that the facts were not in dispute, with Indian manufacturers having stopped production before the first investigation without informing the Designated Authority. The Designated Authority's observations about the lack of disclosure by the manufacturers were considered, but it was concluded that there was no provision empowering the Authority to recommend retrospective withdrawal of Anti-Dumping duty. The Designated Authority's Final Finding from the original investigation had attained finality and could not be overturned during the mid-term review, which was conducted under Rule 23 of the Anti-Dumping Rules for reviewing changed circumstances and making prospective recommendations.

The Tribunal found that the Designated Authority had acted within its powers, and there was no legal basis for retrospective withdrawal of the duty. The Designated Authority's decision to recommend discontinuation of the duty only prospectively was upheld, and the appeals were rejected. The judgment was pronounced on 1.9.16 by the Tribunal comprising Mr. Justice (Dr.) Satish Chandra, President, Mrs. Archana Wadhwa, Judicial Member, and Mr. B. Ravichandran, Technical Member.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates