Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2015 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (3) TMI 992 - AT - CustomsWithdrawal of Levy of anti dumping duty on imports of Pentaerythritol, originating in or exported from Sweden to India - whereas levy was continued for import from china - It is contended that the authority was incorrect in drawing an inference of no likelihood of injury, based on the fact that there were negligible imports from Sweden - Held that:- After the imposition of duties on Sweden, there has been almost a cessation of exports from Sweden. It has been argued that the exporter needs to dump to sell substantial volumes in India. Attention was invited to the international practice, where the decline in import volumes or cessation of exports after the imposition of duties is considered to be highly probative of the likelihood of continuation of recurrence of dumping. We find that while the exports from Sweden have declined to negligible levels, the exports from Germany have increased. However, the Authority also notes that the exports from Sweden to other countries are also negligible, and therefore, cessation of exports to India is not indicative of likelihood of dumping and injury if antidumping duty was removed. Indeed, in such a situation, it can not be said, notwithstanding the contention of the appellant, that exports to India dropped to negligible level due to anti-dumping duty when exports from Sweden to other countries too were negligible. The existence of possibility does not necessarily mean the existence of likelihood . Thus, the DA was in no way contracting himself when he found the possibility but not likelihood of dumping. As has been reiterated in the recent judgment of the Delhi High Court in the case of M.P. Goenka vs. CC, (Preventive) [2015 (2) TMI 263 - DELHI HIGH COURT], it is not the task of the Court exercising appellate power to review or second guess (or even third guess, at times) the factual findings based on evidence considered by the lower authorities but only to correct an order if it is based on irrelevant or manifestly incorrect construction of the facts or if based on mis-appreciation of law or non-appreciation of mind. - No sufficient merit/ basis to warrant any appellate intervention vis-`-vis the DA s findings/ conclusion and the consequent discontinuation of antidumping duty in respect of imports of subject goods from Sweden - Decided against assessee.
|