Anti-dumping duty may cover a country within a notified territory and be fixed in US dollar terms to preserve effectiveness.

Anti-dumping proceedings may treat a country as part of a notified territory for levy purposes where the statutory notice and investigation covered that territory, and the scheme does not require a separate hearing before the final government notification; on those facts, Finland could be included within the European Union territory and the challenge to the levy failed. The duty schedule may also be modified so the anti-dumping duty is expressed in US dollar terms rather than Indian rupees where currency denomination is necessary to preserve the effective value of the measure; on that issue, the domestic industry succeeded.

---

---

Issues: (i) whether exports from Finland, being part of the European Union territory and not having exported the subject goods during the period of investigation, could be subjected to anti-dumping duty without separate notice or a fresh hearing; (ii) whether the anti-dumping duty could be imposed in Indian rupees or had to be expressed in US dollar terms.

Issue (i): whether exports from Finland, being part of the European Union territory and not having exported the subject goods during the period of investigation, could be subjected to anti-dumping duty without separate notice or a fresh hearing.

Analysis: The expression "country or territory" in section 9A(1) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 was treated as interchangeable, so a country forming part of a larger notified territory could be covered within that territory for anti-dumping purposes. Finland was part of the European Union territory notified in the proceedings, and the record showed that there were no exports from Finland during the period of investigation. The statutory scheme under section 9A(6) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 and the Anti-Dumping Rules contemplated a report by the Designated Authority followed by notification by the Central Government, and did not require a second hearing before issuance of the notification. Rule 14(d) of the Anti-Dumping Rules did not compel separate treatment of Finland in the facts of the case.

Conclusion: The challenge by the exporters failed. The anti-dumping duty as notified was upheld in relation to Finland and the European Union territory.

Issue (ii): whether the anti-dumping duty could be imposed in Indian rupees or had to be expressed in US dollar terms.

Analysis: The duty was meant to neutralize dumping and protect the domestic industry. The Tribunal followed its consistent view that fixation in Indian rupees would erode the effective value of the duty because international transactions are benchmarked in US dollars. For that reason, the schedule attached to the notification required modification so that the duty was expressed in US dollar terms.

Conclusion: The domestic industry's appeal succeeded, and the notification was directed to stand modified by converting the duty into US dollar terms.

Final Conclusion: The exporters' challenge to the levy was rejected, while the domestic industry obtained modification of the notified duty from rupee denomination to US dollar denomination, resulting in a partly allowed disposal.

Ratio Decidendi: In anti-dumping proceedings, a country forming part of a notified territory may be treated within that territory for levy purposes, and the statutory scheme does not require a second hearing by the Central Government before issuing the final notification; where necessary to preserve the real value of the levy, the duty may be fixed in a currency aligned with international trade.

---