9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (3) TMI 529X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 04-Cus. was extended up to 7-7-2010. She submits that once the original Notification No. 105/2004-Cus. has come to an end on expiry of 5 years the said notification cannot be extended. HELD THAT:- In the identical facts and on the legal issue, the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER VERSUS M/S. KUMHO PETROCHEMICALS COMPANY LIMITED AND ANOTHER [2017 (6) TMI 526 - SUPREME COURT] where the Hon ble Supreme Court observes that once a notification enforcing anti-dumping duty is expired and non-existent, such non-existent notification cannot be extended. In the facts of the present case, the Notification No. 105/2004-Cus., admittedly expired on 8-10-2009. Thereafter, the said notification was extended vide Notifi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ded in Section 9A(5) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. Only after expiry of the Notification on 13-10-2009 by Notification No. 117/2009-Cus., the Notification No. 105/2004-Cus. was extended up to 7-7-2010. She submits that once the original Notification No. 105/2004-Cus. has come to an end on expiry of 5 years the said notification cannot be extended. The extension of the notification imposing anti-dumping duty can be done only during the recurrence of the Notification No. 105/2004-Cus. In support of her submission, she placed reliance on the Hon ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of Union of India Anr. v. M/s. Kumho Petrochemicals Co. Ltd. - 2017 (6) TMI 526 (SC) = 2017 (351) E.L.T. 65 (S.C.). 3. On the other hand, Shri S.N. Gohi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... provision itself. Sub-section (5) of Section 9A gives maximum life of five years to the imposition of anti-dumping duty by issuing a particular notification. Of course, this can be extended by issuing fresh notification. However, the words unless revoked earlier in sub-section (5) clearly indicate that the period of five years can be curtailed by revoking the imposition of anti-dumping duty earlier. Of course, provision for review is there, as mentioned above, and the Central Government may extend the period if after undertaking the review it forms an opinion that continuation of such an anti-dumping duty is necessary in public interest. When such a notification is issued after review, period of imposition gets extended by another five ye ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... termine as to whether to exercise such a power or not. It, thus, becomes an enabling provision. 36. As noticed above, the High Court has held that once the earlier Notification by which anti-dumping duty was extended by five years, i.e. up to January 1, 2014, expired, the Central Government was not empowered to issue any Notification after the said date, namely, on January 23, 2014, inasmuch as there was no Notification in existence the period whereof could be extended. The High Court, in the process, has also held that the Notification extending anti-dumping duty by five years, i.e. up to January 1, 2014 was in the nature of temporary legislation and validity thereof could be extended, in exercise of powers contained in second ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
