9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (4) TMI 73 - AT - CustomsValidity of customs notification dated 09.06.2020 issued by the Central Government for imposition of anti-dumping duty on the subject goods for a period of five years from the date of publication of the notification on the basis of the sunset review final findings dated 17.03.2020 of the designated authority recommending continuation of definitive anti-dumping duty - time limit specified under the Tariff Act for issuance of a notification - whether the Central Government could have issued the customs notification on 09.06.2020, as the period for which the existing antidumping duty had earlier been imposed by notification dated 07.04.2015 expired on 06.04.2020? - whether because of the provisions of section 6 of the Taxation and other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 relating to Relaxation of the Time Limit under certain Indirect Tax Laws , the period for issue of the notification by the Central Government under the first proviso to section 9A of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, stood extended upto 31.12.2020? HELD THAT - Under section 6 of the 2020 Act, the time limit specified under the Tariff Act for issuance of a notification falling during the period from 20.03.2020 to 29.09.2020 shall stand extended to 30.09.2020. It is the contention of the appellant that under the first proviso to section 9A(5) of the Tariff Act, the notification for imposition of anti-dumping duty, in a review, has to be issued before the date on which the anti-dumping duty earlier imposed by a notification comes to an end. In other words, according to the appellant, there is time limit within which the notification has to be issued. Thus, section 6 of the 2020 Act would extend the time limit to 30.09.2020 since in the present case, the imposition of the anti-dumping duty by an earlier notification came to an end on 06.04.2020 and this date is between the two dates, namely 20.03.2020 and 29.09.2020. The appellant cannot be permitted to contend that in the context of the first proviso to section 9A(5) of the Tariff Act, the time limit for issuing the notification for imposition of anti-dumping duty is before the last date on which the existing antidumping duty comes to an end and also contend, when it comes to the provisions of section 6 of the 2020 Act, that there is no such time limit which can be extended in terms of section 6 of the 2020 Act. If the contention of the appellant that the notification has to be issued during the life time of the existing anti-dumping duty under the first proviso to section 9A(5) is not accepted, then the notification dated 09.06.2020 would be a valid notification. If the contention of the appellant is not accepted, the notification dated 09.06.2020 would still be a valid notification because the time limit gets extended in view of the provisions of section 6 of the 2020 Act. Learned counsel for the appellant is not justified in contending that the notification has to be issued during the life time of the existing duty because of a precondition and not because of time limit. As the only contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellant for setting aside the notification dated 09.06.2020 has no merit, the appeal deserves to be dismissed and is dismissed.
Issues Involved:
1. Validity of the customs notification dated 09.06.2020 issued after the expiry of the existing anti-dumping duty on 06.04.2020. 2. Applicability of section 6 of the Taxation and other Laws (Relaxation and Amendment of Certain Provisions) Act, 2020 [2020 Relaxation Act] to extend the period for issuing the notification. Issue-Wise Comprehensive Details: Issue 1: Validity of the Customs Notification Dated 09.06.2020 The appellant argued that the Central Government could not issue the customs notification on 09.06.2020 for the imposition of anti-dumping duty as the earlier duty imposed by notification dated 07.04.2015 expired on 06.04.2020. According to the appellant, the first proviso to section 9A(5) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 mandates that the duty extension must occur before the expiry of the existing duty. The appellant relied on the Supreme Court's judgment in Union of India vs. Kumho Petrochemicals Company Limited and the Delhi High Court's judgment in Forech India Ltd. vs. The Designated Authority & Ors. The Tribunal, however, noted that the Supreme Court in Kumho Petrochemicals had clarified that a notification for imposition of anti-dumping duty could be issued even after the expiry of the five-year period or the extended period of one year, but during the interregnum period, there would be no duty. This interpretation was supported by the language of the first proviso to section 9A(5), which allows the Central Government to extend the period of such imposition from the date of the order of such extension. Therefore, the Tribunal concluded that the notification dated 09.06.2020 was valid even though issued after the expiry of the earlier duty on 06.04.2020. Issue 2: Applicability of Section 6 of the 2020 Relaxation Act The appellant contended that section 6 of the 2020 Relaxation Act did not apply to the impugned customs notification. The appellant argued that section 6 extends the time limit specified in the Customs Tariff Act for issuing notifications, but section 9A(5) does not prescribe any time limit for issuing a notification for the imposition of anti-dumping duty. The appellant asserted that section 6 does not extend the substantive precondition that anti-dumping duty must already be in existence for it to be extended. The Tribunal found merit in the respondents' argument that section 6 of the 2020 Relaxation Act extends the time limit specified in the Customs Tariff Act for issuing notifications falling between 20.03.2020 and 29.09.2020 to 30.09.2020. Since the earlier anti-dumping duty expired on 06.04.2020, which falls within this period, the time limit for issuing the notification was extended to 30.09.2020. Therefore, the notification dated 09.06.2020 was valid under the extended time limit provided by section 6 of the 2020 Relaxation Act. Conclusion The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, holding that the customs notification dated 09.06.2020 was valid both under the interpretation of section 9A(5) of the Customs Tariff Act and the extended time limit provided by section 6 of the 2020 Relaxation Act. (Order pronounced on 22.03.2023)
|
