9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 1465X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ass in sheets from China PR classified under Tariff Item 70049099 is without jurisdiction and without authority of law. 3. The facts stated briefly are that the petitioner company is engaged in the business of manufacturing quartz analog clocks and time pieces. The clock manufacturers require high clarity, non-coloured, non-tinted, non-opaque glass in sheets which falls under Tariff Item 70049099 of Chapter 70 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). Pursuant to an application filed by one Bharat Glass Tube Limited on behalf of the domestic industry, the designated authority initiated anti-dumping investigations concerning sheet glass under the provisions of the Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of Anti- Dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as "the rules"). The petitioner appeared and made its submissions before the designated authority, inter-alia, submitting that the glass imported by the petitioner was different from the window glass manufactured by the domestic manufacturers in India, and that the domestic manufacturers were not manufact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rom the fourth respondent stating that the glass imported by the petitioner vide Bill of Entry No.8601656 dated 16.3.2015 fell under Tariff Item 70049099 and demanding anti-dumping of Rs. 1,97,820/- with interest at the rate of 18% per annum within ten days. The petitioner has also placed an order procuring further consignment of clear glass in sheets and apprehends that the respondents will demand anti-dumping duty for such goods. It is in these circumstances, that the petitioner has filed the present petition seeking the reliefs noted hereinabove. 7. Mr. Mihir Joshi, Senior Advocate, learned counsel with Ms. Amrita Thakore, learned advocate for the petitioner invited the attention of the court to the provisions of rule 4 of the rules to point out that duties of the designated authority include to recommend to the Central Government the amount of antidumping duty equal to the margin of dumping or less, which if levied, would remove the injury to the domestic industry, after considering the principles laid down in the Annexure III to the rules. Reference was made to rule 17 which bears the heading "Final findings" and more particularly, to clause (b) of sub-rule (1) thereof, which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... overnment in exercise of powers under rules 18 and 20 of the rules. It was submitted that under the circumstances, it is not open for the respondents to collect anti-dumping duty in respect of items other than the Tariff Items specifically mentioned in the notification issued by the Central Government. It was submitted that the items imported by the petitioner fall under Tariff Item 70049099, which is not included in the notification issued under rules 18 and 20 of the rules and hence, the respondents have no authority in law to seek to recover anti-dumping duty in relation to such imports from the petitioner. 7.2 In support of his submissions, the learned counsel placed reliance upon the decision of this court in the case of Alembic Ltd. v. Union of India, 2013 (291) E.L.T. 327 (Guj.), for the proposition that the designated authority under rule 3 of the rules, acts for and on behalf of the Government while carrying out the investigation to determine the existence, degree and effect of any alleged dumping. In that view of the matter, the findings of the designated authority with respect to such issues may not be open to question by the Central Government. However, in the opinion ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d that imported sheet glass, irrespective of how and where it is classified, would be liable to imposition of antidumping duty and ordered to initiate demand proceedings against all importers who had imported sheet glass and cleared them without payment of anti-dumping duty. It was submitted that it is in these circumstances that the demand notices have been issued to the respective importers. It was, accordingly, urged that in the notification dated 13.3.2015 there is an anomaly in the specified CTHs and definition of specified goods. Under the circumstances, with a view to safeguard the interest of the revenue as the Notification No.07/2015-Customs (ADD) dated 13.3.2015 is issued on the basis of final findings notified vide Notification No.14/22/2013- DGAD dated 19.12.2014 issued by the Director General of Anti- Dumping Duty and there being an anomaly in the specified CTH and definition of specified goods, the letter dated 30.3.2015 and demand notice dated 24.4.2015 came to be issued. It was submitted that the intention of the respondents was to safeguard the interest of the revenue pending clarification of the matter and as such, there is no warrant for interference by this cour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... US$ Do Do China PR Any Any Any 63 MT US$ * The subject goods are also being imported under other tariff headings such as 70031290, 70031990, 70033090, 70042099, 70049019, 70049099, 70052110, 70053090, 70091090, 70091010, 70099100, 70119090 etc. However, the customs classification is indicative only and is not binding on the scope of this investigation." 10. Pursuant to the recommendations of the designated authority, the Central Government, in exercise of powers conferred by sub-sections (1) and (5) of section 9A of the Customs Tariff Act read with rules 18 and 20 of the rules, after considering the final findings of the designated authority, imposed definitive anti-dumping duty on the subject goods, the description of which is specified in column 3 of the Table set out in the notification falling under the tariff item of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act. A perusal of the table indicates that definitive anti-dumping duty has been imposed on the goods being sheet glass bearing Tariff Item No.70042011 or 70042019. It may be noted that while in the final findings, the designated authority had made a note below the duty table stating that the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3 and 19 of the rules, the respondent authorities do not have any authority in law to demand or collect any anti-dumping duty in relation to the goods not covered by the notification. Under the circumstances, the impugned demand notice as well as the communication dated 30.3.2015 are without any authority of law and therefore, cannot be sustained. 12. In the opinion of this court, the very premise on which the respondents seek to recover anti-dumping in respect of sheet glass falling under Tariff Item 70049099 viz. to safeguard the interest of the revenue, is itself fallacious, having regard to the fact that anti-dumping duty is levied for the protection of domestic industry and not to safeguard the interest of the revenue. 13. In the light of the above discussion, this court is of the view that the respondent authorities have no authority in law to demand definitive anti-dumping duty in relation to the goods imported by the petitioner which do not fall under the Tariff Items mentioned in the Notification No.07/2015-Customs (ADD) dated 13.3.2015. Under the circumstances, the impugned demand notice as well as the communication dated 30.3.2015 cannot be sustained. 14. For the fore ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
