Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the imported goods, described as styrene butadiene copolymer resin, were covered by the anti-dumping duty notification issued in respect of styrene butadiene rubber and were therefore liable to anti-dumping duty.
Analysis: The duty notification and the designated authority's findings were confined to styrene butadiene rubber of specified grades. The imported goods were separately examined and both chemical reports stated that the sample was styrene butadiene synthetic resin and did not conform to the relevant Chapter 40 note. The adjudicating authority itself accepted that the goods did not fall under Chapter Heading 40.02, but duty was imposed only on the assumption that all goods under the relevant tariff heading were covered. There was no reliable material to show that the imported product was styrene butadiene rubber of the notified kind.
Conclusion: The imported goods were not liable to anti-dumping duty, and the levy was unsustainable; the appeals were allowed and the goods were directed to be released without such duty.
Ratio Decidendi: Anti-dumping duty can be levied only when the imported product is shown, on acceptable material, to fall within the specific goods covered by the notification and not merely because it is placed under the same tariff heading.