Anti-dumping duty on Saccharin exported from China-All India Saccharin manufacturing Association Writ and direction of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court
F.No.354/54/ 2006-TRU (Pt-III)
Government of India
Ministry of Finance
(Department of Revenue)
Tax Research Unit
*****
Room No 156, North Block,
New Delhi, dated 25th October, 2018
To,
All Principal Chief Commissioners/Chief Commissioner of Customs/ Customs
Preventive/ Customs and Central Excise for necessary compliance.
All Principal Commissioners/ Commissioners of Customs/ Customs (Preventive) for necessary compliance.
Madam/Sir,
Kind attention is invited to the Civil Notice dated 12.02.2018 in the Special Civil Application No. 1399/2018 in the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat and subsequently letter No. 528/24/2017-STO (TU) dated 13.03.2018 in this regard (copy enclosed).
2.1 To briefly recapitulate, anti-dumping duty on Saccharin originating in and exported from China PR was imposed vide notification No. 41/2007 -Customs (ADD) dated 19.03.2007 for five years. These duties were extended vide notification No. 7/2012-Customs(ADD) dated 13.01.2012 for a period of five year following a sunset review initiated by the Director General of Trade Remedies (DGTR).
2.2 Subsequently, the petitioner Shree Vardayini Chemical Industries Pvt. Ltd had filed a petition seeking extension of anti-dumping duty. Accordingly, the DGTR had initiated the investigation vide notification No. 15/23/2016-DGAD dated 30.12.2017. After concluding investigation, the DGTR issued final findings vide notification No. 15/23/2016-DGAD dated 30.12.2017 holding that there was no justification for further continuation of anti-dumping
duty, largely because anti-dumping duty has been in force for ten years and has served the intended purpose for which anti-dumping duty was imposed.
3. The petitioner Shree Vardayini Chemical Industries Pvt. Ltd., aggrieved from the final findings of the DGTR, had filed a Special Civil Application No. 1399 of 2018 before the High Court of Gujarat. The Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat vide civil notice has directed that:
“goods that may be given clearance are accounted for and there should be information to the importer that a litigation is pending in form of this petition and as the Court has issued notice, the clearance in absence of any protection would be viewed in proper prospective in light of the contention raised in the petition and subject to result of this petition”.
4. Hence, it is therefore requested to follow the directions of the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat and letter issued by Tariff Unit by issuing a ‘Trade Notice’ wherein the observations of the Court may be quoted. The trade Notice may be given wider publication so that the trade and importers could be aware of it.
This issues with the approval of the Board.
Encl.: As above
Your’s Sincerely,
Mahipal Singh
Technical Officer, TRU
Copy to: Joint Secretary (Customs), CBIC
Assessing Officer had taken a reasonable stand that 25 kg written in WhatsApp chat/text message was 25 lakh - ITAT…
Shareholders are only owners of the shares of the company therefore, income from properties earned by the company cannot be…
When approval for reassessment was granted by unauthorised authority, such jurisdictional error cannot be shielded by the law of limitation…
ITAT on presumption of bogus purchases ought to have remanded case to AO to reconsider the whole matter instead of…
Where proceedings u/s 153C are barred by limitation, AO can not reopen the case invoking section 148 and 148A of…
Corporate guarantees executed by the corporate debtor constitute “financial debt” under IBC and banks to be recognized as financial creditors…