2016 (10) TMI 444 - AT - Customs

Imposition of ADD - PVC paste resin - imported from E.U. - classification of goods after sunset review - whether imposition of ADD on the basis of eight digit classification and the inconsistency emanating thereafter in identifying the subject goods with reference to such classification maintainable? - Held that - when the notification mentions and identifies the subject goods by name and specific tariff classification, any change in such parameters ought to be done within the ambit of law. In the present impugned findings as well as the consequent Customs Notification dated 03.07.2013, the subject goods have been identified by name as well as by classification heading upto four digit only. In other words, heading 3904 Poly Vinyl Chloride Paste Resin have been subjected to AD duty as per the rates specified therein. Admittedly, the present findings and the Customs Notification has no room for ambiguity. The matter relating to eight digit classification and the inconsistency emanating thereafter is no more a point of dispute or relevant in the present appeal proceedings. The Tribunal remanded the matter to the DA for a fresh consideration and the appellants have been given liberty to raise all the issues before the DA. Upon such direction and complying the same, the present findings were issued, as such no merit found in the appeal on this issue. Injury margin and quantification of AD duty - Held that - the import of subject goods increased significantly and in direct consequence thereof the domestic industry lost market share. The DI lost sales volume and there is undercutting of prices. The DI was prevented from increasing the prices in line with increase in cost of production due to availability of low priced dumped import goods. It is concluded that the deterioration in profits, return on capital are apparently as a result of dumped imports - the levy of AD duty justified - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.

Summary

Issues:
1. Violation of remand order by Designated Authority
2. Classification dispute of subject goods
3. Causal link between import of subject goods and injury of domestic industry
4. Injury margin and quantification of Anti-Dumping duty

Analysis:

Issue 1: Violation of remand order by Designated Authority
The appeal challenged the imposition of Anti-Dumping (AD) duty on PVC paste resin following a sunset review investigation. The Tribunal had previously set aside the findings and Customs Notification, remanding the matter back to the Designated Authority (DA) for a fresh decision. The DA's subsequent order, resulting in the AD Notification, was contested for allegedly violating the remand order. However, the Tribunal found that the DA complied with the remand directions, and the appeal lacked merit on this issue.

Issue 2: Classification dispute of subject goods
The dispute centered around the classification of PVC paste resin under the Customs Notification. The appellant argued that the introduction of a new tariff heading post-sunset review was legally untenable. The DA, in compliance with the Tribunal's direction, restricted the Customs classification to a four-digit main heading to avoid inconsistency. The Tribunal noted that the subject goods were identified by name and a four-digit classification, resolving the earlier eight-digit classification dispute. Consequently, the issue of classification dispute was deemed irrelevant in the present appeal proceedings.

Issue 3: Causal link between import of subject goods and injury of domestic industry
The DA's findings on injury margin and quantification of AD duty were carefully examined. The DA concluded that the import of subject goods led to a significant increase, causing the domestic industry to lose market share, sales volume, and face price undercutting. The DA attributed the deterioration in profits and return on capital to dumped imports, justifying the recommendation for AD duty. The Tribunal found no specific issues in the appeal to interfere with the DA's findings on the causal link.

Issue 4: Injury margin and quantification of Anti-Dumping duty
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, affirming the DA's conclusions on injury margin and the quantification of AD duty. The appeal was found to lack merit based on the analysis and discussion provided in the impugned findings. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the associated Miscellaneous application was disposed of accordingly.

In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the imposition of Anti-Dumping duty on PVC paste resin, finding no grounds to interfere with the DA's decision on the issues raised in the appeal. The judgment was pronounced on 12/09/2016 by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT NEW DELHI.