2017 (10) TMI 830 - HC - Customs

Anti-Dumping Duty - Soda Ash - sunset review - section 9A of the Custom Tariff Act, 1975 - time limitation - Held that: - the time was granted to the authorities to complete the proceedings from the statement of disclosure and it was expected the purpose was only within two months from the date of receipt of copy of the judgment. As record indicates, the authorities received this order somewhere on 30th March 2017 and pursuant thereto the hearing was fixed on 25th April 2017. Ultimately, the said proceedings had not culminated into any order and the original notification dated 3rd July 2012 was coming to an end on account of lapse of time on 2nd June 2017. Hence, the concerned affected parties like the petitioners mopped the authorities for seeking appropriate review, which is known as Sunset Review for continuing the Anti Dumping Duty on account o reasons mentioned threunder, which request came to be accepted with effect from resultant order dated 16th June 2017.

There is a rival contention on account of the observations of paragraph D as well as in para 7 by both the sides that the said notification of initiation of Sunset Review was after recording a satisfaction which would render the Mid Term Review or OTS infructuous whereas the counsel for the respondent relying upon para 17 contended that the same was specifically made subject to the result of the MTR which was in fact an undertaking and which could not be completed on account of pendency of the litigation before this Court.

The Notification of 3rd July 2012 got extended up to 2nd July 2018 or till it is revoked by another order or notification. It is requierd to be noted at this stage that this notification is issued by the Governmetn of India, which is the competent authority and not respondent no.2 who has no power to issue any such extension notification.

There being an order available with the authorities and despite there being a time limit existed in it and if the proceedings are not completed within the time limit then the authorities after having recording Sunset Review then a question arises as to how the authorities are justified in simultaneously proceeding with both the review. In our view, the same was not permissible and it deals a serious blow to its competence to undertake and continue with Mid Term Review without there being any clear mandate from the court after the time granted by the Court had elapsed.

No prejudice is likely to be caused to the respondents in case if the status quo as on date is ordered to be continued under which the Union of India is restrained from acting upon the order dated 22.7.2017 under which the final findings have been rendered and Sunset Review is annulled.