TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (8) TMI 925
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ts that the Designated Authority did not give public hearing before deciding the matter inasmuch as while the hearings were given by one person in his capacity as Designated Authority, the Final Findings were delivered by another person in his capacity as Designated Authority. There is also a related issue raised in the matter that once the principles of natural justice stand violated and the period prescribed under the law for completion of the investigation expires then question of remand of the matter for further investigation and compliance of the provisions of law beyond the prescribed period under the statutory provisions does not arise. It is contended that in such circumstances, only course open to the Tribunal is to quash the notification along with the Final Findings. The challenge in that regard is strongly opposed on behalf of the respondents. 2. The undisputed fact in all these appeals is that the public hearings in terms of Rule 6(6) of the Anti Dumping Rules was given by one officer in his capacity as the Designated Authority whereas the Final Findings have been given by another officer in his capacity as the Designated Authority. The incumbent in the office ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....used. Apart from the facts of the case and the legal provisions, an assessment of the demeanour and countenance of an accused or a witness helps him in his decision making, and in determining penalties. Levy of anti-dumping duty requires cold calculations, as it equals the injury margin. However, there is a provision of public hearing provided in Rule 6(6) of the Anti-dumping Rules. By all accounts, such a hearing is usually crowded, not perhaps by the exporters and importers - but by their representatives, accountants and lawyers and also by the representatives of domestic industry, as all have to be present arguing against each other. The submissions, as noted earlier, have to be subsequently made in writing before they can be taken into account. 8. These appeals relate to cases, where public hearing was held before one DA, but before the investigations were concluded and final findings issued, there was a change in the incumbent and the successor DA issued the Final Finding after further investigation. He did not hold another public hearing before doing so as it was not the practice in the Commerce Ministry nor it was a specific requirement in the Rules. 9. No lo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ft to suffer irreparable injury caused by dumping for no fault attributed to it which would be the outcome if the prayers in these and similar pending appeals are granted by merely setting aside the final findings and consequently removing the anti-dumping duties imposed by the Government baaed on such findings in regard to dumping and injury caused by such dumping. 13. We do not think such an outcome will be just for the domestic industry which is not at fault nor it will be in the public or economic interest of the country as a whole. We think it would be just and fair for everyone if the appeals are allowed by way of remand to the DA for affording post-decisional hearings to the appellants and for making such modifications to the final findings as may be necessary as a result of such post-decisional hearings. It would also be fair if the respondent-domestic industry and other interested parties, if any, are allowed to participate in such post-decisional hearings. It goes without saying that any modifications made in the final findings would be considered by giving effect to the same by the government by carrying out the necessary amendments to the impugned notifications ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....information, or impedes the investigation. (iv) The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Kranti Associates v. Sh. Masood Khan in SLP (C) No. 12766 of 2008, decided on 8-9-2010, has held that in India the judicial trend has always been to record reasons, even in administrative decisions, if such decisions affect anyone prejudicially. The requirement to record reasons emantes from the broad doctrine of fairness in decision making. Insistence on recording of reasons is meant to serve the wider principle of justice that justice must not only be done it must also appear to be done as well. Recording of reasons also operates as a valid restraint on any possible arbitrary exercise of judicial and quasi-judicial or even administrative power. Reasons reassure that discretion has been exercised by the decision maker on relevant grounds and by disregarding extraneous considerations. Reasons have virtually become as indispensable a component of a decision making process as observing principles of natural justice by judicial, quasi-judicial and even by administrative bodies. Reasons facilitate the process of judicial review by superior courts. We find that the DA has indeed ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t abuse of its process or to secure the ends of justice. The words "secure the ends of justice" are wide enough to clothe the Tribunal with powers to pass order of remand as it may deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the case. In addition to this, the power of Appellate Tribunal to confirm, modify or annul the decision or order appealed against also takes in its fold to pass such orders as are necessary in order to aid the main relief sought for in the appeal following the ratio laid down in the case of Collector of Customs, Madras v. Madras Electro Castings P. Ltd. - 1994 (71) E.L.T. 646 (Mad.). It has been settled by the Apex Court in the case of ITO, Cannanore v. M.K. Mohammed Kunhi reported in AIR 1969 SC 430 that powers incidental or ancillary are to render justice. (x) In the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Central, Calcutta v. National Taj Traders - (1980) 1 Supreme Court Cases 370, it has been held that the limitation provided for a Commissioner to revise an order will not affect the powers of the "Appellate Tribunal to remand a case when the Legislature did not prescribe the period within which the Tribunal has to dispose of an appeal, and w....