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. SI Group India Pvt. Ltd. Versus Designated Authority and others

2017 (10) TMI 467 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Maintainability of appeal - continuation of ADD - sunset review - acetone, imported from Japan and Thailand - extension of period - N/N. 16/2015-Cus-ADD dated 22.04.2015 - orders by the Department of Revenue missing - Held that: - In the absence of any order or Notification issued by the Department of Revenue in terms of Customs Tariff Act or the Anti-Dumping Rules, 1995, no appeal lies with the Tribunal - similar issue decided in the case of Panasonic Energy India Co. Ltd. & Others [2017 (9) TM .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d Mr. B. Ravichandran, Member (Technical) Smt. Reena Khair, Advocate and Shri Rajesh Sharma, Ritu Jha, Advocates for the appellant Shri Govind Dixit, DR for Dept. of Revenue, Respondent Shri Ameet Singh, Advocate for the Designated Authority, Respondent-No.2 Shri M.P. Devnath, Advocate for Domestic Industry/Respondent parties. ORDER Per: B. RAVICHANDRAN These two appeals are by M/s. SI Group India Pvt. Ltd. against two different final findings of the Designated Authority, Directorate General of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

they approached their Counsel for filing appeal against the same. The Counsel advised them on the legal provisions of Section 9C of the Customs Tariff Act, 1972. Later they approached the Ministry of Finance by filing an application under RTI Act to know the decision of the Ministry on such final findings. On receipt of reply, they filed these appeals. The ld. Counsel prayed for condonation of delay and admission of these appeals. 3. On preliminary hearing of the matter, we find that though ther .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

from Japan and Thailand. The D.A. had earlier investigated the issue of possible dumping of acetone coming from subject countries. On completion of the investigation, he issued the final finding on 19.01.2011 recommending imposition of definitive anti-dumping duty on acetone. Notification No.36/2011 - Cus - ADD dated 18.04.2011 was issued imposing ADD on the subject goods from subject countries for 5 years. The period was extended upto 18.04.2016 vide Notification No.16/2015-Cus-ADD dated 22.04. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

y reveals that the recommendation of the D.A. for not continuing A.D. Duty was accepted by the Ministry of Finance. 6. In appeal No.AD/50457/2017, almost identical situation is with reference to Anti-Dumping Duty on phenol originating in or exported from Japan and Thailand. The DA vide his final finding dated 08.10.2010 recommended imposition of definitive ADD on the subject goods which were notified under Customs Notification No.120/2010-CUS/ ADD dated 01.12.2010 for 5 years extended further up .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

A. for not continuing A.D. Duty on import of phenol was accepted by the Ministry of Finance. 8. The ld. Counsel for the appellant submitted that they are aggrieved by non-continuation of A.D. Duty on the subject goods in both the above cases. It is prayed that the D.A. has erred in arriving at his conclusion. The appellants contested the findings of the D.A. on various grounds. 9. The ld. Counsel for the D.A. and the ld. A.R. for the Revenue contested the maintainability of these appeals on the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e basically against final findings of the D.A. recommending that there is no need for continued imposition of ADD on the import of acetone/phenol. There are no orders by the Department of Revenue regarding imposition of ADD. The appellants apart from contesting the final findings in sunset review by D.A., submitted replies received under RTI Act from the Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue. We have considered the submissions of the ld. Counsel and the objections raised by the ld. Counsels .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

in the present case, the Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue who is the Competent Authority to impose any ADD on goods in terms of Section 9A, did not issue any order either imposing or reviewing the imposition of ADD on subject goods. Though the DA initiated investigation in terms of the statutory powers conferred on him, on conclusion of the investigation he issued the final findings stating that there is no case for imposition of ADD. Thereafter no order has been .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

partment of Revenue. The said note was approved by the Chairman, CBEC. Apart from this office file note sheet, no order issued by the Department of Revenue formed subject matter of this appeal. 10. This brings us to the main question, whether present appeals are maintainable under Section 9C of the Customs Tariff Act. The Tribunal in Indian Spinners Association Vs. Designated Authority reported in 2000 (119) E.L.T. 299 (Tribunal) held that the DA is purely a recommending authority. The determina .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Deepak Fertilizers and Petrochem Vs. Designated Authority reported in 2006 (203) E.L.T. 370 (Del.) held that the DA only assists the Central Government in making the determination and his recommendation is not binding on the Central Government. The Hon ble High Court further held that the report of the DA being only a recommendation does not create any rights or liabilities. 11. When the final finding of the DA alone cannot be a subject matter of appeal under Section 9C, as held in the above jud .....

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