Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. Jindal Stainless Ltd. Versus Designated Authority., Directorate General of Anti-Dumping and Allied Duties/Ministry of Finance

2016 (10) TMI 81 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Method for quantification for calculation of Anti Dumping Duty - cold rolled flat products of stainless steel of specified dimension - import from Korea R P, E U and USA - provisions of Rule 4 (d) of Anti Dumping rules - landed value - assessable value - AD duty fixed as amount equal to the difference between a fixed reference price and the landed value of the subject goods - Held that: - Rule 4 (d) recommended the amount of AD duty equal to the margin of dumping or less which if levied, would r .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nding of the Designated Authority were based on material facts and the same cannot be overturned based on purported subjective grievance of the appellant - appeal dismissed - decided against petitioner. - AD/4023/2012 - Final Order No. 53280/2016 AD - Dated:- 30-8-2016 - Mr. Justice (Dr) Satish Chandra, President, Mrs. Archana Wadhwa Judicial Member and Mr. B. Ravichandran, Technical Member Present Shri Sharad Bhansali and Shri Jitendra Singh, Advocates for the Appellant Present Shri Amit Singh, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ng in/ or exported from Korea R P, E U and USA. The appellant is engaged in the manufacture of, inter alia, subject goods in India. The grievance of the appellant is restricted to the point that AD duty recommended and imposed was connected to a reference price rather than a fixed quantum of such duty. In other words, while the appellants supported imposition of AD duty on subject goods, they are aggrieved by the method for quantification of calculation of such duty. 2. Learned Counsel on behalf .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

eness of such imposition. The learned counsel submitted that the AD duty linked to reference price does not fully solve the problem of dumping and injury to domestic industry as it does not take into consideration rising price of the inputs and finished goods. In view of the wide fluctuation of these parameters, the reference based AD duty will not serve the intended purpose. 3. The learned Counsel for the Designated Authority and learned AR for the Revenue defended the Final Finding of the Desi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the Customs Notification only to the effect of methodology of calculating AD duty. We note that AD duty in the present case was fixed as amount equal to the difference between a fixed reference price and the landed value of the subject goods in case the landed value at the time of importation is below the said reference price, The landed value means the 'assessable value' in terms of Customs Act, 1962. 5. We have perused carefully the Final Findings of the Designated Authority. We note .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version