2002 (1) TMI 174 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Applicability of anti-dumping duty on goods imported prior to the notification date but cleared ex-bond after the notification date.
2. Interpretation of Section 15(1)(b) of the Customs Act, 1962, in relation to anti-dumping duty.
3. Relevance of the Larger Bench decision in Vazir Sultan Tobacco Co. Ltd. v. CCE.

Summary:

Issue 1: Applicability of Anti-Dumping Duty
The core issue is whether anti-dumping duty u/s 9A of the Customs Tariff Act (CTA) is applicable to goods imported before the notification date (14-11-95) but cleared ex-bond after this date. The Commissioner (Appeals) held that anti-dumping duty is not applicable to such goods, referencing the Larger Bench judgment in Vazir Sultan Tobacco Co. Ltd. v. CCE, which was affirmed by the Apex Court. The Commissioner reasoned that the taxing event should be the date of import, not the date of ex-bond clearance.

Issue 2: Interpretation of Section 15(1)(b) of the Customs Act, 1962
The Revenue argued that the relevant date for levying duty on warehoused goods is the date of ex-bond clearance, as per Section 15(1)(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. They contended that anti-dumping duty should be levied on goods cleared after the notification date. However, the Commissioner (Appeals) found that anti-dumping duty, governed by Section 9A of the CTA, is not a duty of customs and thus not covered by Sections 12 and 15(1)(b) of the Customs Act, 1962.

Issue 3: Relevance of the Larger Bench Decision in Vazir Sultan Tobacco Co. Ltd. v. CCE
The appellant cited the Larger Bench decision in Vazir Sultan Tobacco Co. Ltd. v. CCE, which held that duties not imposed at the time of manufacture cannot be charged at the time of removal. The Commissioner (Appeals) agreed, stating that the taxing event is the importation of goods, and since anti-dumping duty was not leviable at the time of import, it cannot be imposed at the time of ex-bond clearance.

Tribunal's Decision
The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner (Appeals)'s decision, agreeing that anti-dumping duty is determined upon importation and not applicable to goods already warehoused before the notification date. The Tribunal found no merit in the Revenue's appeal and dismissed it, concurring with the Commissioner's reasoning that Section 15 applies only to customs duty and CVD, not to anti-dumping duty. The Tribunal also referenced judgments in Caprihans (India) Ltd. v. CC and NGEF Ltd. v. CCE, supporting the view that anti-dumping duty cannot be retrospectively applied to warehoused goods.