Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        whatsappJoin Channel
        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        2000 (2) TMI 242 - AT - Customs

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Tribunal Upholds Anti-Dumping Duties on Styrene Butadiene Rubber The Tribunal upheld the Designated Authority's findings on the injury to the domestic industry caused by dumped imports of Styrene Butadiene Rubber (SBR). ...
                        Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                            Tribunal Upholds Anti-Dumping Duties on Styrene Butadiene Rubber

                            The Tribunal upheld the Designated Authority's findings on the injury to the domestic industry caused by dumped imports of Styrene Butadiene Rubber (SBR). It affirmed the causal link between the imports and the industry's losses, rejecting arguments of other causes. The Tribunal clarified the classification of SBR under relevant tariff headings and emphasized fixing anti-dumping duty in US dollars to counter exchange rate fluctuations, ensuring the duty's effectiveness. The appeals were disposed of accordingly, with anti-dumping duties adjusted in line with the Tribunal's decisions.




                            Issues Involved:
                            1. Material injury to the domestic industry.
                            2. Causal link between dumped imports and injury.
                            3. Classification of Styrene Butadiene Rubber (SBR) under relevant tariff headings.
                            4. Fixation of anti-dumping duty in terms of US dollars instead of Indian Rupees.

                            Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

                            1. Material Injury to the Domestic Industry:
                            The main argument by the appellants was that the import of SBR of 1500 Grade, 1700 Grade, and 1900 Grade did not cause any material injury to the domestic industry. The Designated Authority's investigation, initiated based on a petition by M/s. Synthetic & Chemicals Ltd., concluded that the dumped imports caused heavy losses to the domestic industry. The domestic industry had to reduce their selling prices due to the lower export prices from the subject countries, leading to a 25% reduction in sales realization since January 1997. The investigation revealed a noticeable increase in stock, imports, and loss in profitability compared to the financial year 1995-96, confirming the injury to the domestic industry.

                            2. Causal Link Between Dumped Imports and Injury:
                            The appellants argued that the injury to the domestic industry was due to factors like mal-administration, disadvantageous plant location, and transportation issues rather than the import of SBR. However, the Designated Authority determined that the injury was indeed due to dumped imports. The Authority fixed the cost of production considering the optimal level of capacity, and the injury margin was calculated as the difference between the fair selling price and the landed value of the imported articles. The Tribunal upheld the Designated Authority's findings, emphasizing that the domestic industry's survival against unfair trading practices necessitated the imposition of anti-dumping duties.

                            3. Classification of Styrene Butadiene Rubber (SBR) Under Relevant Tariff Headings:
                            A question arose regarding whether some grades of SBR should fall under Chapter Heading 3903.90 instead of 4002.00. The Designated Authority clarified that anti-dumping duty should apply to all grades of SBR, regardless of their classification under different headings of the Customs Tariff Act. The Tribunal noted a clerical omission in the final findings, which limited the duty to SBR under sub-heading 4002.19. It was corrected to include all grades of SBR, ensuring that customs authorities impose duties on all types of SBR irrespective of their classification.

                            4. Fixation of Anti-Dumping Duty in Terms of US Dollars:
                            The Tribunal emphasized the need to impose anti-dumping duty in US dollars to prevent erosion of the duty's effect due to fluctuations in the exchange rate. During the investigation period (1996-97), the exchange rate was Rs. 37 per US dollar, which had since increased to over Rs. 43. Fixing the duty in US dollars ensures that the anti-dumping duty remains effective despite changes in the exchange rate. The Tribunal varied the anti-dumping duty in terms of US dollars, setting specific amounts for different grades of SBR from various countries to protect the domestic industry.

                            Conclusion:
                            The Tribunal upheld the Designated Authority's findings on the injury to the domestic industry and the causal link with dumped imports. It corrected the classification issue and emphasized the need to fix anti-dumping duties in US dollars to maintain their effectiveness. The appeals were disposed of in these terms, with anti-dumping duties refixed accordingly.
                            Full Summary is available for active users!
                            Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                            Topics

                            ActsIncome Tax
                            No Records Found