Appellant allowed to claim Notification No.20/2007-CE refunds despite inadvertent filing under Notification No.56/2003-CE as revenue did not dispute e...
CESTAT dismissed the revenue's appeal and directed refund/relief to the importer. The Tribunal held that the notification imposing anti-dumping duty was previously set aside by CESTAT and, even if the revenue's grounds were accepted, s.9A(5) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 terminates an anti-dumping duty five years after imposition unless validly extended. No valid subsequent notification extending Notification No.12/2010-ADD beyond 19.02.2015 was produced; consequently anti-dumping duty under that notification could not lawfully be levied on imports entered under B/E dated 13.06.2017. The appeal lacked merit and was dismissed.
CESTAT dismissed the revenue's appeal and directed refund/relief to the importer. The Tribunal held that the notification imposing anti-dumping duty was previously set aside by CESTAT and, even if the revenue's grounds were accepted, s.9A(5) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 terminates an anti-dumping duty five years after imposition unless validly extended. No valid subsequent notification extending Notification No.12/2010-ADD beyond 19.02.2015 was produced; consequently anti-dumping duty under that notification could not lawfully be levied on imports entered under B/E dated 13.06.2017. The appeal lacked merit and was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4821 
Join Channel 
