Exporter-specific anti-dumping exemption confined to exports by the named exporter, not goods merely manufactured by it.

An anti-dumping exemption notification was held to be exporter-specific, because the excluded Romanian entity was named as the exporter in the relevant column and not merely as the manufacturer. The exemption therefore applied only when the export itself was made by that named exporter. Goods shipped from Dubai by a different exporter did not qualify, even though they were manufactured by the excluded Romanian producer, so the anti-dumping duty levy was sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether the exemption from anti-dumping duty under Notification No. 78/2001-Cus. applied to goods merely because they were manufactured by the excluded Romanian manufacturer, or only when the export itself was made by the excluded exporter.

Analysis: The notification was construed as exporter-specific because column (3) identified the excluded entity as the exporter and not the manufacturer. The exclusion for M/s Petrotub S.A. therefore operated only when the export was made by that exporter. Where the goods were exported from Dubai by Offshore Engineering and Marketing Ltd., UAE, the fact that they were manufactured by Petrotub did not bring the consignment within the exemption. The cited precedent did not assist the importer because, on its facts, the exporter there was different from the shipper.

Conclusion: The exemption did not apply to the impugned consignment, and the anti-dumping duty levy was sustained against the assessee.

Final Conclusion: The import was held liable to anti-dumping duty under the notification because the exclusion was confined to exports made by the named exporter.

Ratio Decidendi: Where an anti-dumping notification grants exclusion to a named exporter, the exemption is confined to exports made by that exporter and cannot be extended merely on the basis that the goods were manufactured by it.

---