9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 900X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the absence of any period of investigation prescribed in the law, for the sunset review, we do not find any merits in the contention of the learned advocate that the period of 15 months for sunset review, adopted by the Designated Authority, was unjustified. In case of doubt of export price during POI, DA is free to look into the other corroborative evidence and to arrive at a finding. During the course of sunset review, the rate of duty cannot be enhanced - Held that: - We have perused the provisions of Rule 23 of the Anti Dumping Rules, which relates to Midterm review and sunset review. It is the contention of the assessee that only rate of duty can be enhanced in Mid term review and not during sunset review. By drawing our attention to the said Rule 23 of the Rules, it stands contended that sub-rule 1A, which provides for variation in the Anti Dumping duty applies to only mid-term review and Rule sub section 1 (B) which relates to sunset review does not provides any variation in the rate of duty and only relates to the extension of period. Reliance placed on the decision of Indian Graphite Manufacturers Association vs. Designated Authority [2006 (4) TMI 274 - CESTAT, N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ional Trading Company Ltd, incorporated in Hong Kong, co-operated with the Designated Authority through out the course of Sunset review and filed a detailed response for exporter's questionnaire attended the public hearing, filed written submissions as also rejoinder and filed comments on the disclosure statement. 4. After following the due process of law, the Designated Authority observed that during the period of investigations, the exports by the appellant to India was very low and at higher prices. As per facts on record during the period of investigation, there were only two exports of 5 MT to one M/S. Eljay Impex at USD 14 per Kg and export of 1 MT of peppermint traders through M/S. Majestic International Trading Company Ltd at USD 8.35 per Kg. By taking note of the low exports during the period of investigation at higher transaction values, the DA had come to a finding that the exports during POI were stage managed and were not reflecting the correct factual position. Accordingly, the DA took into consideration the entire data including the concerned exporters from third country exports at the average price and the exports to India during pre POI period and post POI p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndia till several months later. Regular orders started coming only after August, 2010 and the regular exports started and continued during September, October and November, 2010. By that time the Designated Authority had not initiated the Sunset review and no one could have thought that August November, 2010 would not form part of POI for the sunset review. Inasmuch as the Sunset review was initiated six months earlier than the expiry itself, for which the exporter could not have foreknown or anticipated there is no justification for adopting the period from April, 2009 - end of June, 2010. The learned Advocate also contested that during the sunset review, the rate of duty could not be increased and the Designated Authority, if at all satisfied about the continuation of imposition of Anti Dumping duty, should have recommended continuation of the earlier rate. 7. We have heard Ms. Reena Khair, Shri Rajesh Sharma and Ms. Rita Jha, learned advocates for the interested party, Shri Dhruv Gupta, learned Advocate appearing for the Appellant and Shri Amit Singh, learned Advocate appearing for the Designated Authority and Shri Govind Dixit, learned DR appearing for the Revenue. 7. A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to observe that regulatr exporters are well aware that sunset review would be undertaken prior to expiry of the notification in question. As such, that in mind, there is every likelihood of the exporters to stage manage the exports during the period of investigation of sunset review. It has not been rebutted before us that fact of low exports at higher price during the POI is not correct reflection of the facts. The explanation of the exporters that they could not get the orders during POI period on account of enhancement of duty during Mid-term review are self-contradictory to their own stand that post POI, there was increase in the exports. It cannot be held to be a mere coincidence that prior to POI and subsequent to POI, there were exports ranging in the higher volume bracket and it is only during POI that the exports were low and at higher price. Consequent reduction in the export prices during the pre POI and post POI are suggestive of the fact that prices were not in the normal course of business but were rather stage managed with a preliminary motive to obtain the favourable results from sunset review. As such, we fully agree with the Final Finding of the Designated Authori ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
