TMI Blog2017 (6) TMI 194X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the domestic countries has suffered material injury during the period of investigation. The magnitude of injury margin is arrived at by comparing the non-injurious price of the subject goods produced by the DI with the landed value of the export from subject countries and thereafter the injury margin has been arrived at in percentage terms. The final recommendation of imposition of definitive AD Duty on import of subject goods of subject country has been arrived at after due consideration of all relevant factors. The final findings of the DA cannot be interfered with - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - Anti-Dumping Appeal No. 52805 of 2015 - Final Order No. 53344/2017 - Dated:- 16-5-2017 - (Dr.) Satish Chandra, President, Mr. S. K. Mohanty, Member (Judicial) and Mr. B. Ravichandran, Member (Technical) Sh. Amit Singh, Advocate for D.A. and Sh. Govind Dixit, DR for the Revenue Sh. Adarsh Ramanujan, Advocate for Respondent No. 3 4. ORDER Per B. Ravichandran: The appeal is against final finding of the Designated Authority (DA), Directorate General of Anti-Dumping and Allied Duties, Department of Commerce, Ministry of Commerce and Indu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onstraints they, as authorised representative, have received instructions to file only written submission before the Tribunal with a prayer to decide appeal on merits. Accordingly, they have made the written submission for consideration. 5. The appellants in their appeal have stated that they are partially aggrieved by the final finding of the DA and the Customs Notification mentioned above. Various grounds were mentioned in the appeal. We have gone through the grounds and note that the grounds are mostly on general principle of procedure involved in investigation by the DA with no specific reference or specific data. The prayer in the appeal is to modify the final findings and Customs Notification, to the extent challenged in the appeal. We are not clear what type of modification and to what extent is sought to be made by the appellant in the impugned final findings. The grounds of appeal, as already noted mainly elaborated on various general principles like acceptance of excessive claims of confidentiality, consideration of additional documents of exporters without following the procedure, consideration of information submitted by the exporters which is deficient, lack of deta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng for the DA supported the final findings and the Customs Notification. He drew our attention to specific findings recorded by the DA regarding construction of normal value for the subject goods in Singapore. He also submitted that the present appeal is vague and mostly on procedural/ academic issues which will have no effect on the final findings of the DA. The grievances were not identified and the mere prayer for modifying the final finding is devoid of merit. 9. Shri Govind Dixit, ld. AR represented the Customs Department and submitted that there is no infirmity in the final finding of the DA and consequent notification issued imposing AD Duty on the subject goods. He also pleaded that the present appeal is devoid of merit on the ground that no specific grievance has been identified against the impugned findings. 10. We note that the DA have examined in detail all the relevant parameters before arriving at the normal value, export price and dumping margin. Three exporters/ producers from Singapore have submitted response to the questionnaire issued by the DA. The submissions made by the DI were also considered. On determination of normal value, we note that, the DA has f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he investigation concerning Saccharin, the Authority notes that the exporter s related parties had failed the MET and Exporters Questionnaire response at much belated stage, which were not accepted. Whereas in the instant case, the Authority has sought additional documents/ information in support of the claims made by SEPL/SETL in their response . 12. We note that the DA has determined the normal value for Singapore based on the international prices of raw material as noted above. The appellant also have specifically submitted that the DA should use international prices of major raw material such as PO and ethylene oxide as the only responding producer from Singapore failed to provide complete details of the cost of the raw material of their related parties. We note that it is not the contention of the appellant that the export price of PO from Singapore was not reliable or not representing the international prices of the said product. Neither there is a contention that export price of PO from Singapore is not comparable with the import price from Saudi Arabia. We have also noted that the DA has followed an accepted, consistent practice of relying on the international price of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
