9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (3) TMI 1345X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onship between the two are either malafide or perverse. The quantum of anti-dumping duty recommended by the DA and imposed by the Government has also not been assailed before us - levy of anti dumping duty sustained. - AD/11-13/2007 and AD/1/2008 - - - Dated:- 31-3-2011 - Mr. Justice R.M.S. Khandeparkar, Dr. Chittaranjan Satapathy, Mr. D.N.Panda, JJ. Present for the Appellant : Shri Shailender Saini Ms.Rashmi Malhotra, Advocates (in appeal AD/11,12/07 01/08) Present for the Respondent: Shri Ameet Singh, Advocate for the DA Present for the interested Parties: Ms. Reena Khair Sh.Rajesh Sharma, And appellants in Appeal No.AD/13/07, Advocates PER: Dr. Chittaranjan Satapathy Appeal Nos.AD/11,12,13 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessment and Collection of Anti-dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995 known as the Ant-Dumping Rules. ATIA and ACOGOA have furnished no such information regarding their eligibility to be considered as Interested Parties despite specific objections raised by the Domestic Industry. She states that ATIA and ACOGOA can not also be considered as aggrieved persons before the Tribunal having not produced any information regarding their credentials including registration under any law and their objects and purpose. She states neither the associations nor the majority of their members have filed the importer questionnaire. 4. In reply, the learned Advocate, Shri Saini merely produces a copy of letter dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts ATIA and ACOGOA and the foreign exporters by their common advocate, Shri Saini. He is not basically challenging the DA s findings on dumping. His challenge is against the findings on injury and causal relationship. He states that the share of imports compared to total consumption is insignificant and cannot be a cause of injury to the domestic industry. He also states that many of the economic indicators taken into consideration by the DA reveals that the domestic industry has not suffered any injury and some of the other negative indicators are due to other factors and not attributable to subject imports. He argues that sales, production, ability to raise capital investments, employment and productivity of the Domestic Industry has incr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ranage of 233% to 294% (para 56). (iii) Imports of subject goods from the subject countries have increased in absolute terms as well as in relation to imports into India and in relation to total demand in India. Resultant increase in market share of dumped imports show adverse volume effect (para 61). (iv) Effect of dumped imports on the price in the domestic market has been adverse for the reason stated in para 62 of the Final Findings. (v) Various economic factors have been analysed by the DA in paragraph 63 onwards and arguments against injury have also been considered by the DA in paragraph 77 onwards before coming to an overall conclusion in para 79 of the Final Findings that the Domestic Industry has suffered material inju ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he selling price and non injurious price of domestic industry, existence of price under-cutting, consistent decline in landed price of dumped imports, decrease in market share of domestic industry, decline in profit of the domestic industry per unit of sales and deterioration in return on capital employed etc. As such D.A. s overall conclusions on material injury is justified. Similarly, the conclusion of the DA on causal link in paragraph 83 follows a fair analysis and cannot be faulted with. 9. No arguments have been advanced before us to demonstrate that the finding of the DA in regard to determination of dumping, injury and causal relationship between the two are either malafide or perverse. The quantum of anti-dumping duty recommen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
