2025 (2) TMI 597 - HC - Customs

Challenge to respective orders of CESTAT which set aside the respective Office Memorandums by which the ADD was not accepted by the Central Government - whether an Office Memorandum is capable of being assailed before CESTAT? - HELD THAT - In terms of the submissions made before the Supreme Court ld. Counsel for the domestic industries who are the Respondents in these cases submit that they have already written to the Government that they do not press their rights in terms of the recommendation given by the Designated Authority DGTR. In effect thereof the domestic industry no longer presses for imposition of ADD. The respective Office Memorandums therefore are no longer challenged by the domestic industry. The question of law raised by the Union of India i.e. as to whether CESTAT has jurisdiction to set aside an Office Memorandum or not would therefore become moot in this background. The stand of the Respondents i.e. the domestic industry is accepted. The present writ petitions are disposed of as having been rendered infructuous in view of the stand of the Respondents-domestic industry.

Summary

The Court considered a series of petitions challenging the setting aside of Office Memorandums by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), which had not been accepted by the Central Government. The core legal question raised was whether an Office Memorandum could be challenged before CESTAT. However, due to developments where the domestic industries withdrew their support for the imposition of Anti-Dumping Duty (ADD), the petitions were rendered infructuous, and the legal issues were kept open for future adjudication.The Respondents, domestic industries, had initially sought the imposition of ADD through applications to the Directorate General of Trade Remedies (DGTR). The DGTR recommended provisional and final ADD, which was imposed through Customs notifications. Subsequently, a sunset review was conducted, and the DGTR recommended continuing the ADD. However, the Central Government did not accept these recommendations, leading to challenges before CESTAT, which set aside the Office Memorandums.In a related case before the Supreme Court, the domestic industries indicated they no longer pressed for the imposition of ADD, rendering the petitions before the High Court infructuous. Consequently, the Court accepted the stand of the Respondents, disposing of the writ petitions. The legal issues raised were kept open for future adjudication, and any interim orders were vacated.Overall, the judgment addressed the challenge to the setting aside of Office Memorandums by CESTAT, which became moot due to the withdrawal of support by the domestic industries for the imposition of ADD. The Court acknowledged the developments and disposed of the petitions while keeping the legal issues open for consideration in future cases.