TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 607X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ut by DA devoid of any limitations - CVD rightly imposed - appeal rejected - decided against appellant. - Anti Dumping Stay No. 50726 of 2016 and Anti Dumping Appeal No. 51295 of 2016 - Order No. 53401/2016 - Dated:- 7-9-2016 - Mr. Justice (Dr.) Satish Chandra, President, Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) and Mr. B. Ravichanclran, Member (Technical) Appellant By: Sh. S. Seetharamlan. Sh. Aman B, Ms. Radhika Sharma and Sh. Ankur Sharma, Advocates Sh. Amit Singh, Advocate for DA Revenue By: Sh. Govind Dixit, DR Ms. Reena Khair. Sh. Rajesh Sharma. Ms. Rita Jha, Ms. Richa Shukl, Ms. Shreya Dahiya, Advocates for the interested party. ORDER Per: B. Ravichandran: The appeal is to challenge the imposition of Countervailing Duty (C VD) by Notification No. 1/20 16-Cus (CVD) dated 19.01.2016 as per Final Findings of the Designated Authority (the DA), Directorate General of Anti-Dumping and Allied Duties, Ministry of Commerce and Industry. 2. The brief facts of the case are that M/s Larsen Toubro Limited (Petitioner/DI approached the DA for initiation of anti-subsidy Countervailing Duty investigation concerning imports of Castings for Wind Oper ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e opportunity was not given to the appellant to clarify and defend their position before the DA. 8. The ld. Counsel for DI took preliminary objection about the maintainability of appeal starting the Association is not representing interested parties. Further, the appellant cannot challenge the Finding which is based on Financial/ material transactions between public body and producer / exporter in China. 9. On the merits of present appeal the Id. Counsel for DI submitted that neither the Government of China nor the producers in China (except Jiali) co-operated fully with the DA by furnishing complete details. She drew our attention to Rule 7(8) of CVD Rules which provides the DA to record his Findings on the basis of available information. It was further argued that programs for grant cannot be denied as details are ascertained by the DI and furnished to the DA. When the producers / exporters not co-operated in any manner, it is not open to the appellant who has apparently no access to any material data nor submitted any contrary challenge the veracity of the Finding. 10. Ld. Counsel for DA submitted that the Government of China did not allow access to any relevant documen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... connected to actionable subsidies. 14. It is relevant to note here that full and comprehensive information on all the related parameters -like existence of such program. connection to producer/ exporter, connection to subject goods, quantum of financial / material support, the status and role of institution providing such support, countervailability of such subsidy as per the terms of CVD Rules and international agreements etc. is of paramount importance to arrive at a finding. In the present case, we note that Government of China neither provided the complete information, nor consented for the on the spot verification offered by the DA. The Chinese Government did not permit the DA to visit China to conduct on the spot verification of data/ information furnished by the sole respondent producer/ exporter. In para 6 of the Findings the DA records: 6. The Authority notes that despite adequate opportunities provided to the Government of China(GOC) through the deficiency letters and otherwise, to provide detailed information concerning the various alleged subsidy schemes, the bene Its provided to the Chinese producers/ exporters under the same and the countervalability o the sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ule 13(1) of the Countervailing Duty Rules states: 13. Determination of Injury - (l) In the case of imports from specified countries, the designated authority shall give a further finding that the import of such article into India causes or threatens material injury to any industry established in India, or materially retards the establishment of any industry in India . 113. Annexure I to the Countervailing Duty Rules, 1995, as amended in 2006 deals with the principles governing the determination of injury. Paragraph 1(l), (2) and (3) o the Annexure read as follows. 1. (l) A determination of injury for purposes of rule 13 shall be based on positive evidence and involve an objective examination of both (a) the volume of the subsidized imports and the effect of the subsidized imports on prices in the domestic market for like products and (b) the consequent impact of these imports on the domestic producers of such products. (2) With regard to the volume of subsidized imports, the designated authority shall inter alia consider whether there has been a significant increase in subsidized imports, either in absolute terms or relative to production or consumption in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
