9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (7) TMI 666X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nation of Injury) Rules, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as "the Rules") in respect of Nylon Tyre Cord Fabric (NTCF) originating in or exported from Peoples' Republic of China. 3. The Authority issued a public notice dated 29.10.2003 initiating Anti-dumping investigations concerning the aforesaid commodity originating in or exported from China PR. The Authority forwarded the copy of the public notice to the known importers/exporters of NTCF and gave them an opportunity to make their views known in writing within forty days from the date of the letter. Information was also obtained from the authorities like the Central Board of Excise and Customs, DGCIS etc. The Authority also sent a questionnaire to elicit relevant information ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eing addressed separately by the Authority, who may make known their views, within forty days of the despatch of this notification. Any other interested party may also make known its views within forty days from the date of publication of these findings; c. The Authority would provide opportunity to all interested parties for oral submissions. d. The Authority would disclose essential facts before announcing the final findings. 4. The aforesaid notification is challenged on the ground that the notification proceeds on certain incorrect factual aspects as recorded in paragraphs 22, 24 and 25 of the notification, more particularly, it is asserted that the Authority has referred to the web site of Kingrin Group Company which is a different ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that when the impugned notification dated 30.6.2004 specifically provides an opportunity to all interested parties to submit their views and the Authority has specifically mentioned that it would provide opportunity to all interested parties for oral submissions and that the Authority would disclose essential facts before announcing the final findings, there is no warrant for interfering with the impugned notification at this stage. What the petitioners are challenging in this petition are the preliminary findings given by the Designated Authority under Rule 12 of the Rules on the ground that certain factual inaccuracies have crept into the reasoning. In this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, this Court would not entertain s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 29.10.2003 and, therefore, in any case, the final findings are expected to be given by the Designated Authority by 29.10.2004. Till then, the levy of provisional dumping duty would obviously be on provisional basis and, therefore, refundable in case ultimately the final findings are in favour of the exporters from China. 8. For the foregoing reasons, we do not think it fit to entertain this petition at this stage, when all interested parties including exporters and importers are provided an opportunity to submit their views and are also assured of oral hearing. 9. We, accordingly dispose of this petition with an observation that it will be open to the petitioners to request the Designated Authority to consider their representations date ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
