Anti-dumping duty differential not recoverable when definitive duty exceeds provisional duty already collected, supporting stay of recovery.

Rule 21(1) of the Anti-dumping Rules treats the difference between provisional and definitive anti-dumping duty as not recoverable from the importer where the definitive duty exceeds the provisional duty already collected. On that statutory basis, the importer establishes a prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery of the differential demand pending disposal of the appeal.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant was entitled to waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery of the differential duty demand in view of the provisions governing anti-dumping duty.

Analysis: The differential demand arose because the definitive anti-dumping duty was higher than the provisional anti-dumping duty already imposed and collected. On a reading of Rule 21(1) of the Anti-dumping Rules, the amount representing the difference between the provisional and definitive anti-dumping duty is not to be collected from the importer where the definitive duty exceeds the provisional duty already collected. In the light of that statutory position, the appellant was found to have established a prima facie case for waiver of pre-deposit.

Conclusion: The appellant was entitled to waiver of pre-deposit and the recovery of the amount in dispute was stayed till disposal of the appeal.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the definitive anti-dumping duty is higher than the provisional duty already collected, the differential amount is not recoverable from the importer, and this furnishes a prima facie basis for waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery.

---