Tribunal rules in favor of appellants in anti-dumping duty challenge, sets duty amounts in US dollars

The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants in the challenge against the imposition of anti-dumping duty in Indian rupee terms instead of US dollars. The Tribunal modified the notification to specify the duty amounts in US dollars for different countries and territories, aligning with the appellants' argument for maintaining protection against exchange rate fluctuations. The decision was based on the principle that anti-dumping duty should be fixed in dollar terms to safeguard domestic industries from erosion of protection due to changes in exchange rates. The objections raised by the Interested Parties were dismissed as beyond their competence in the appeal proceedings.

---

---

Issues:
Challenge against imposition of anti-dumping duty in Indian rupee terms instead of US dollars.

Analysis:
1. The appeal challenges the imposition of anti-dumping duty on imports of 'Sodium Cyanide' in Indian rupee terms under notification No. 83/2000, dated 6-6-2000. The duty is calculated as the difference between the amount specified in the notification and the landed value of imported sodium cyanide per metric tonne.

2. The main contention raised by the appellants is regarding the currency in which the anti-dumping duty has been imposed. They argued during the investigation proceedings that the duty should be in US dollars to prevent erosion of protection to the domestic industry due to fluctuations in the Indian rupee. However, both the Designated Authority and the Ministry of Finance imposed the duty in Indian rupee terms, contrary to the appellants' request.

3. The appellants relied on previous decisions of the CEGAT which emphasized fixing anti-dumping duty in dollar terms to maintain the intended protection to domestic industries. The Tribunal's past orders highlighted the importance of preventing erosion of protection due to exchange rate fluctuations, supporting the appellants' argument for duty imposition in US dollars.

4. While the Government's senior counsel supported the appellants' plea, counsels representing the Interested Parties raised concerns about the variable duty structure leading to potential violations of the law if the duty exceeds the injury or dumping margin. However, the Tribunal rejected these objections, stating that the Interested Parties were beyond their competence in this matter.

5. The Tribunal, considering the previous decisions and the necessity to prevent erosion of protection, ruled in favor of the appellants. Consequently, the Table in notification No. 83/2000 dated 6-6-2000 was modified to specify the duty amounts in US dollars for different countries and territories, aligning with the appellants' argument for maintaining protection against exchange rate fluctuations.

6. The Tribunal's decision to allow the appeal on merit was based on the principle that anti-dumping duty should be fixed in dollar terms to safeguard domestic industries from erosion of protection due to changes in exchange rates. The objections raised by the Interested Parties were dismissed as beyond their competence in the appeal proceedings.

---