9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (1) TMI 306X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by M/s. Prestige General Trading, Dubai, U.A.E. to the applicants herein during the period November 2002 to February 2003 arises out of the order of the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) Mumbai. 2. The brief facts required for prayer appreciation and understanding of the issue in dispute are as under :- On 2nd May 2002, Central Government issued Notification No. 50/2002-Cus. imposing provisional anti dumping duty in respect of Vitrified/Porcelain Tiles originating in, or exported from China U.A.E.. This notification was valid upto 1-11-2002. During the period 6-11-2002 to 27-2-2003, the applicants imported such tiles from China under cover of Bills of Entry. On 1-5-2003, the Central Government issued Notification No. 73/2003-Cus. impo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... filed a representation before the Deputy Commissioner that no anti dumping duty can be imposed in terms of Section 9A(1) the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 could be imposed on imports made by them from M/s. Nanhai, China, in view of the finding of the designated authority in the Anti Dumping Duty Directorate, that there was no dumping by M/s. Nanhai Ltd. (the anti dumping duty leviable on import from M/s. Nanhai amounts to Rs. 4.59 crores approximately). However, the entire demand was confirmed by the Dy. Commissioner s order dated 31-3-2006; the applicants filed an appeal and stay application before the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) who vide stay order dated 23-8-2006, dispensing with pre-deposit of the duty demanded on imports made from M/s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ipper Review, and the designated authority vide notification dated 30-6-2004 concluded that exports by Nanhai during the period under investigation were above the normal value and recommended that no anti dumping duty be imposed on such exports. As a consequence, notification No. 80/04 was issued by the Ministry of Finance amending Notification No. 73/03 by which anti dumping duty was imposed on imports from M/s. Nanhai, by inserting the following explanation thereto:- Provided that no Anti Dumping Duty shall be imposed on imports into India of subject goods falling under Chapter 69 of the first Schedule to the said Customs Tariff Act produced by M/s. Nanhai...... and exported by M/s. Prestige General Trading, Dubai, U.A.E. . 6. As per ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ring the period after expiry of the provisional duty and prior to the levy of final anti dumping duty which liability was upheld by the Tribunal which also rejected the challenge to Rule 20(2) (a) of the Customs Tariff (Identification........Anti Dumping Duty on Dumped Articles..................) Rule 1995. 7. In the light of the above discussion, we are of the view that the applicants have made out a strong prima facie case for waiver and hence dispense with pre-deposit of duty of Rs. 4.59 crores being the duty levied on exports from M/s. Nanhai during the period November 2002 to February 2003 and stay recovery thereof pending the appeal. As regards exports from Al Khaleej we accept the payment of 25% out of the demand of approximately R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
