2011 (8) TMI 735
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lleged dumping of PVC Paste Resin. The D.A. notified the final finding dated 20-8-2004 recommending anti-dumping duty on PVC Paste Resin falling under Customs Tariff Heading 3904.2110 originating in or exported from European Union. Pursuant thereto anti-dumping duty was imposed under Customs Notification No. 104/2004 dated 7-10-2004. The present appeal is against the sunset review leading to D.A.'s final finding dated 26-4-2010 recommending continuation of anti-dumping duty on PVC Paste Resin falling under Customs Tariff Heading 3904.2210. Pursuant thereto, anti-dumping duty has been imposed under Customs Notification No. 17/2010 dated 25-6-2010. 3. The learned Advocate Shri Roy contends that the D.A. can only continue the anti-dumping duty already imposed earlier as a result of sunset review, but cannot impose anti-dumping duty afresh on a new product by enlarging the scope of the product under consideration. He states that in this case, the original anti-dumping duty was imposed on PVC Paste Resin falling under Customs Tariff Heading 3904.2110 whereas consequent to the sunset review, it has now been imposed on PVC Paste Resin falling under Customs Tariff Heading 3904.2210 w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ct under consideration has remained the same for the purpose of the Sunset Review as it was in the original case. 6. Shri Ameet Singh, learned counsel appearing for the D.A. supports the final finding and the Customs Notification stating that the product under consideration in the Sunset Review is the same as was in the original investigation and that mention of a different Customs Tariff Heading in the final finding dated 20-8-2004 was only a typographical error. Subsequent to conclusion of the hearing in this case on 16-6-2011, the learned counsel Shri Ameet Singh for the D.A. has filed a detailed written submission on 17-6-2011 to the following effect : - (1) Kind attention is invited to the initiation Notification dated 22nd August 2003 vide which an anti-dumping investigation on the subject goods, namely, PVC Paste Resin was originally initiated. (2) The para 1 of the initiation notification, while describing the product under consideration clearly specifies that the product under consideration in the present case is Poly Vinyl Chloride Paste Resin also known as Poly Vinyl Resin (Emulsion Grade) or PVC Paste Resin. (3) This para further goes on to state....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oms Tariff No. 39042110 was clearly on account of a typographical error as the entire investigation was carried out in respect of PVC Paste Resin Emulsion Grade also referred to as PVC Paste resin only. (9) Kind attention is also invited to para 11 of the final findings of the SSR investigation dated 26th April 2010 that, inter alia, mentions submissions of M/s. Chemplast Sanmar Ltd. (the domestic industry in his case at whose request the investigation was initiated) as follows : (i) It is classified under subheading no. 39042210 in the Customs Tariff Act though the imports have been cleared in a number of classifications. (ii) The Poly Vinyl Chloride (suspension grade) classified under 39042110 is different from the subject goods and is not included under product under consideration. (10) The Authority in its final findings of the SSR investigation dated 26th April 2010 in para 14 has categorically stated as follows :- "The Authority notes that the product under consideration in the original case was "Poly Vinyl Chloride Paste Resin' also called as Emulsion PVC Resin and also referred to as PVC Paste Resin. The p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....indings dated 2004 and has reiterated the same during the course of the findings itself that the product under consideration remains the same viz. Poly Vinyl Chloride Paste Resin also known as Poly Vinyl Resin (Emulsion Grade) or PVC Paste Resin. (16) Last but not the least, let us assume that there is an anti-dumping duty on a particular product and the Customs Tariff-head changes after two years of the duty in force. Consequently, the product that attracted anti-dumping duty now has a new customs tariff-head and the old customs tariff-head has a new product description. In such a case, would any anti-dumping duty be payable on the old customs tariff-head? And would the old product description but with a new customs tariff-head attract no anti-dumping duty? The learned Advocate for the D.A. has stated that in view of the submissions made above the instant stay application may be dismissed. 7. We have considered submissions from both sides made before us as well as written notes of submissions filed on behalf of the domestic industry on 18-7-2011 and we have also perused the relevant final finding and the Customs Notification issued after the original anti-dumping inve....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s also brings out that PVC Resin (Emulsion Grade) is classifiable under the plasticized category under the Heading 39042210. The extract of the classification Table submitted by the learned Advocate for the appellants is reproduced below : - 3904 21 - Non-plasticized 3904 21 10 - Poly (vinyl Chloride) resins 3904 21 90 -- Other 3904 22 - Plasticized 3904 22 10 -- Poly (vinyl chloride) (PVC) Resins (emulsion grade) 3904 22 90 -- Other 9. It is thus prima facie seen that the final finding and the Customs Notification issued pursuant to the Sunset Review correctly indicates the classification of PVC Paste Resin which is of Emulsion Grade under Customs Tariff Heading 39042210. On the other hand, in the final finding and the Customs Notification issued pursuant to the original anti-dumping investigation, the Customs Tariff Heading for the PVC Paste Resin which is of Emulsion Grade has been incorrectly indicated as 39042110. The learned Advocate for the D.A. has sought to explain the mistake away as a typographical error at this late stage well after the original anti-dumping regime has completed its full tenure of five ye....