Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2023 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (6) TMI 798 - AT - CustomsContinuation of anti-dumping duty under Section 9A of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 - notification for continuation of anti-dumping duty not issued - imports of Hot-Rolled flat products of alloy or non-alloy steel from China PR, Japan, Korea RP, Russia, Brazil and Indonesia - domestic industry suffered material injury and unutilized capacities and surplus production - requirement of compliance of principles of natural justice - HELD THAT:- The maintainability of the appeal under Section 9C of the Tariff Act was examined at length by this very Bench in M/S APCOTEX INDUSTRIES LIMITED AND OTHERS VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [2022 (11) TMI 1096 - CESTAT NEW DELHI] and it was held that the appeal would be maintainable against the decision of the Central Government contained in the office memorandum not to impose anti-dumping duty. The Bench also examined whether the determination by the Central Government was legislative in character or quasi-judicial in nature and after examining the relevant provisions of the Tariff Act, the 1995 Anti-Dumping Rules and the decisions of the Supreme Court and the High Courts observed that the function performed by the Central Government would be quasi-judicial in nature. The Bench also, in the alternative, held that even if the function performed by the Central Government was legislative, then too the principles of natural justice and the requirement of a reasoned order have to be complied with since the Central Government would be performing the third category of conditional legislation contemplated in the judgment of the Supreme Court in STATE OF T.N. SECRETARY HOUSING DEPTT. MADRAS VERSUS K. SABANAYAGAM & ANR. [1997 (11) TMI 520 - SUPREME COURT]. The Gujarat High Court in REALSTRIPS LIMITED & 1 OTHER (S) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & 1 OTHER (S) [2022 (9) TMI 1171 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] examined whether quasi-judicial process was involved in issuance of the notification by the Central Government and after analyzing the decision of the Supreme Court in INDIAN NATIONAL CONGRESS (I) VERSUS INSTITUTE OF SOCIAL WELFARE & ORS. [2002 (5) TMI 847 - SUPREME COURT], the Gujarat High Court held that the notification issued by the Central Government would be quasi-judicial in nature. The inevitable conclusion, therefore, that follows from the aforesaid discussion is that the decision taken by the Central Government not to impose anti-dumping duty despite a recommendation having been made by the designated authority for imposition of anti-dumping duty, cannot be sustained as it does not contain reasons nor the principles of natural justice have been complied with and the matter would have to be remitted to the Central Government for taking a fresh decision on the recommendation made by the designated authority. The matter is remitted to the Central Government to reconsider the recommendation made by the designated authority in the light of the observations made - Appeal allowed by way of remand.
|