TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2000 (11) TMI 324
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....umping duty at the rate mentioned in the Schedule attached to it has been levied with effect from the date of imposition of the provisional anti-dumping duty, i.e., 11th October, 1999 on Thermal Sensitive Paper (hereinafter referred to as TSP) exported from European Union and Japan. M/s. Mitsubishi HITEC Paper, a manufacturer of TSP in European Union has been directed to pay anti-dumping duty at the rate of Rs. 1.61 per sq. metre and in respect of other exporters from the European Union at the rate of Rs. 1.84 per sq. metre. Exports from Japan were subjected to anti-dumping duty at the rate of Rs. 1.62 per sq. metre. 2. The above notification is questioned by M/s. Jujo Thermal Ltd. of Finland, a manufacturer of TSP in Finland, by fi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oods from Finland was not being dumped into India. But in the Final Finding the Designated Authority suggested imposition of anti-dumping duty at a higher rate than that was fixed in relation to M/s. Mitsubishi HITEC Paper, in relation to the exports from all countries forming part of European Union. This was clearly wrong. According to learned counsel, when exports from Finland were sought to be made subject to payment of anti-dumping duty, fresh notice of the intention on the part of the Designated Authority to make liable the exports from Finland should have been issued to the manufacturers in Finland. This having not been done, the Final Finding arrived at by the Designated Authority and the consequent notification issued by the Central....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....erchangeable and are used synonymously. 6. Anti-dumping investigation was initiated by issue of notification dated 10th March, 1999 as against imports of Thermal Sensitive Paper (TSP) from Japan, Finland, Germany and European Union. Finland is a country forming part of the territory known as European Union. In other words, even though Finland was independently dealt with in the proceedings, it was a country forming part of European Union. Exporters from Finland did not cooperate in the proceedings. It was so, because there was no export of TSP from Finland to India during the period of investigation, namely, 1st April, 1998 to 31st December, 1998. Being a country falling within the territory of European Union against which also proc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ined in Rule 14(d) of the Anti-dumping Rules to contend that the said provision does not take note of territories but only countries. Finland being an independent country, it was argued that the volume of exports forms that country or the potential of that country in dumping the goods should have been separately dealt with. If the imports from Finland account for less than 3% of the imports to India, then the Designated Authority should have terminated the investigation as against the goods imported from Finland. We do not find any merit in this contention. Even though Finland is a country by itself, it forms part of the territory known as European Union. When that territory is dealt with separately, the country forming part of that territo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....l Govt. violated the principles of natural justice, which mandates that the person who decides must hear. Consequently, it was contended that the order is bad. We do not find any merit in this contention either. Section 9A(6) authorised the Central Govt. to make rules for the purpose of imposing anti-dumping duty. The Rules so framed authorise the Designated Authority to recommend the anti-dumping duty on the basis of which Central Govt. is to issue notification. These Rules do not contemplate a second hearing to the foreign manufacturer or exporter. As per the Rules, the Designated Authority is invested with the power to identify the article liable for anti-dumping duty and to submit its finding on the quantum of anti-dumping duty which wo....