Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2024 (8) TMI 1469

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . Xingzian Zhongtai Chemical Company Ltd. (hereinafter called Chemical Company ) is the manufacturer and therefore, required to be subjected to the higher rate of Anti Dumping Duty as per the same notification i.e. Notification No. 32/2019-Cus. (ADD) - appellant have contested this claim on the basis that Chemical Company was merely the exporter on record and even numbers of documents exist indicating that they were not manufacturer and therefore, the lower rate of Anti Duping Duty was correctly sought - HELD THAT:- We find that the commercial invoice issued for the consignment clearly mentions manufacturer name as that of Alkali Company. Even packing list has the name of Alkali Co. Ltd as the manufacturer. We also find that the certificate .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of Entry was filed on the basis of documents received. Therefore, on the basis of available documents, the goods have been held, to be non-offending goods. Despite the same document, differential duty has been demanded, which is incorrect approach in law, as the credence to the documentary evidence cannot be ignored for duty only, when found worthy of consideration for holding goods as non-offending. Thus, since documentary evidence in any case gets precedence over assumption/suspicion emanating from the packing specially till it is controverted, we are inclined to accept the above documentary evidence including certificate of origin as adequate evidence to accept that Alkali Company were the producers in the present instance and in the fa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... acturer and therefore, the lower rate of Anti Duping Duty was correctly sought by them. Consequently, the demand of differential duty has been incorrectly and improperly made from them. 2. The Learned AR on the other hand relies upon the name mentioned on the sacks imported which indicate the name of Chemical Company though not as manufacturer or exporter specifically. He also relies upon and reiterates the findings of the lower authorities to establish that such name mentioned is conclusive of manufacture by the Chemical company . 3. We have considered the submissions made by both the sides. Particularly, the evidence being relied upon by the appellant which are placed at page 28 to 239 of the paper book. We find that the commercial invoic .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ch states that the Alkali Company is their manufacturing unit for PVC resin SG-5 and is part of their group of Companies and Chemical Company is the World Wide Exporter of PVC resin SG-5 and M/s. Zhongtai Chemical is a brand/trade name and not the manufacturing Company s name. The Certificate is stated to be produced by the appellants even before Commissioner (Appeals) but has not been commented upon. 3.2 We find that the Certificate produced before us is unsigned so we are not inclined to attach any evidentiary value to such a certificate which is at Page 110 of the paper book. However, we find that in view of overwhelming documentary evidence which is otherwise available, Department has not been able to establish that the Chemical Company .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... rty, matter was remanded and Vide Order No. GEN/ADJ/ADC/631/2023-ADJN dated 04.10.2023, the Additional Commissioner dealing with the demand proceeding has allowed the benefit to the similar impugned product at concessional rate by holding Alkali Company as the manufacturer by noting that Chemical Company was related and allowed the benefit to the appellants by treating Alkali Company as the producer. 4. In view of the foregoing, since documentary evidence in any case gets precedence over assumption/suspicion emanating from the packing specially till it is controverted, we are inclined to accept the above documentary evidence including certificate of origin as adequate evidence to accept that Alkali Company were the producers in the present .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates