2016 (10) TMI 471

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s. Reena Khair, Shri Rajesh Sharma with Ms.Rita Jha, Advocates for the interested party ORDER The present appeal is against the final findings dated 27.4.2015 of the Designated Authority, Directorate General of Anti Dumping and Allied Duties, Ministry of Commerce and Industry and Notification No. 32/2015-Cus ADD dated 10.7.2015 issued by the Ministry of Finance, imposing AD duty on imports of Phenol (subject goods) 2. The above findings and the Notification are consequent upon the sunset review of anti-dumping duty on imports of subject goods originating in or exported from South Africa. The AD duties were originally recommended in a finding dated 13.2.2003 and was imposed vide Customs Notification dated 24.3.2003.The mid term revi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ven file the detailed imported questionnaire response except for some details submitted at various points of time. No supporting evidences were given by the appellant. Hence, the Id. Counsel submitted that the appellant cannot be even considered as "interested party". They have no locus to call for any document as they have not participated in the investigation after filing of detailed questionnaire response. 5.  Regarding violation of Rule 23, it is submitted that provisions of Rule 17 are made applicable to review under Rule 23 and as such the Central Government has power to extend the period of investigation. 6.  Ld. Counsel for the DA submitted that HOCL has apart from other factors also suffered due to dumping . HOCL co....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... duty. The landed value of the subject goods fom subject country is lowest compared to other countries. 10.  Regarding performance of HOCL, it was noted that they were operating at full capacity in 2010-11 and thereafter, the production as well as sales declined. The lack of working capital was given as reason. This was attributed to the reason that dumping import affected realization of fair selling price in the domestic market. We find the injury margin has been calculated as per norms by the DA. We also note that there is no violation of Rule 23 in the present case. We find that Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Fairdeal Polychem LLP vs. UOI - 2016 (334) ELT 241 (Del.) held that Rule 23(2) of AD Rules has to be harmonized with Arti....