9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 396X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ably, there is a justification to do so as the duty in dispute is leviable on imported goods. An importer contracts with its supplier and, being a sale contract, it finds one entity at each end of sale and purchase. Likewise, place of export cannot be in plural and any other location before arrival can only be transshipment points. Patently, exclusion of one of the two entities listed in the exporter’s claim would shift the pertinent duty to sl. no. 10; both are required to be associated with the import transaction to be entitled to ‘nil’ rate of anti dumping duty. Therefore, there is no basis for Revenue to contend that the exemption is applicable only if the import originates from M/s Ableace; for if that were to be so, there is no rol ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of M/s Foshan Chan Cheng Jin Yi Ceramic Co. Ltd. (Jin Yi) was investigated by the designated authority and, based on its recommendation, vitrified tiles originating and exported from China, produced by M/s Foshan Chan Cheng Jin Yi Ceramic Co. Ltd. and exported by M/s Joyson Ceramic Materials Co. Ltd. (exporter in China) through M/s Ableace (M) Sdn. Bhd. (exporter in Malaysia) was declared exempt for anti-dumping duty while any other exporter combination was declared to be subject to anti dumping duty of ₹ 155/-- per sq. mtr. 2. The original authority after examining four bills of entry, viz. 9465369/4.9.13, 9442740/28.02.13, 9640740/21.3.13 and 9648939/ 22.3.03 came to the conclusion that serial no. 10 was applicable and duty o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s under dispute, that in the absence of such back-to-back transactions sl. no. 10 will apply, that the stand of the first appellate authority that there can only be one exporter is at variance with the findings of the designated authority, that the appellate authority had erred in virtually rendering the condition of exports through M/s Ableace (M) Sdn. Bhd. (exporter in Malaysia) to be redundant and that it is improper to interpret a notification such as to render any expression redundant, that in the payment having been made directly to exporter in China stipulated condition have been violated, that reliance on proforma invoice even if signed by both was improper in view of inconsistencies, that certificate of origin through Malaysian ent ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the contention of Revenue that conformity to sl. No. 9 of the notification mandates production of invoice issued by M/s Ableace, Malaysia and payment being effected by importer to the Malaysian entity who may thereafter tender payment to the entity in China. We do not find any such express condition in the said notification. Nor does international trade practice evince either the necessity or prevalence of such a documentary or consideration flow. The expression export / exporter as defined in Customs Act, 1962 cannot, either in strict terms or generally, apply in the contest of anti-dumping duty. We, therefore, restrict ourselves to the contents of the notification and, in the absence of definition of exporter in the Customs Tariff A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
