TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (12) TMI 175
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cation dated 16.06.2017 bearing No.30/2017-Customs (ADD) issued by the respondent No.1. 3. It was found that exporters of a particular Country were flooding domestic markets with goods at rate much lower than the rates at which these exporters normally sell the same in their own Country and also much lesser than the rates at which the manufacturers of the country to which such goods shall be exported were able to sell. This was resulting in a heavy loss/injury to the domestic market. The Imposition of Anti Dumping Duty was a result of General Agreement on Tariffs & Trade (herein after referred to as GATT) to which India is a party. GATT recognized the injury caused by this dumping of goods by the exporters of the Country and sought to remedy the injury. Purpose of GATT was to balance the rights of the exporters from other Countries and at the same time protect the interest of the domestic markets. The decision of GATT translated with the introduction of Section 9A in the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. 4. Section 9 A of the Customs Tariff Act,1975 reads as under:- "Where any article is exported from any country or territory (hereinafter in this section referred to as the expo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ies cannot compete and are thereby destroyed, and after such destruction has taken place, prices are again raised. The purpose of Section 9A is, therefore, to maintain a level-playing field and prevent dumping, while allowing for healthy competition. The purpose is not protectionism in the classical sense (as proposed by the German economist Friedrich List in his famous book `National System of Political Economy' published in 1841) but to prevent unfair trade practices. The 1995 Amendment to Section 9A was apparently made in pursuance to Article VI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 (GATT 1994) which permitted anti-dumping measures as an instrument of fair competition. The concept of anti-dumping is founded on the basis that a foreign manufacturer sells below the normal value in order to destabilize domestic manufacturers. Dumping, in the short term, may give some transitory benefits to the local 8 customers on account of lower priced goods, but in the long run destroys the local industries and may have a drastic effect on prices in the long run." 7. The procedure for levying Anti Dumping Duty has been framed under the Customs Tariff (Identification,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... case may be, to the application. (4) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-rule (1) the designated authority may initiate an investigation suo moto if it is satisfied from the information received from the Commissioner of Customs appointed under the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962) or from any other source that sufficient evidence exists as to the existence of the circumstances referred to in clause (b) of sub-rule (3). (5) The designated authority shall notify the government of the exporting country before proceeding to initiate an investigation. Rule 11:- Determination of injury. - (1) In the case of imports from specified countries, the designated authority shall record a further finding that import of such article into India causes or threatens material injury to any established industry in India or materially retards the establishment of any industry in India. (2) The designated authority shall determine the injury to domestic industry, threat of injury to domestic industry, material retardation to establishment of domestic industry and a causal link between dumped imports and injury, taking into account all relevant facts, including the volume of dumped imports....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rs representing a significant percentage of the trade involved be extended by the Central Government to nine months. Rule 17:- Final findings. - (1) The designated authority shall, within one year from the date of initiation of an investigation, determine as to whether or not the article under investigation is being dumped in India and submit to the Central Government its final finding - (a) as to, - (i) the export price, normal value and the margin of dumping of the said article; (ii) whether import of the said article into India, in the case of imports from specified countries, causes or threatens material injury 13 to any industry established in India or materially retards the establishment of any industry in India; (iii) a casual link, where applicable, between the dumped imports and injury; (iv) whether a retrospective levy is called for and if so, the reasons therefor and date of commencement of such retrospective levy: Provided that the Central Government may, 5 in its discretion in special circumstances extend further the aforesaid period of one year by six months: Provided further that in those cases where the designate....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d authority shall issue a public notice recording its final findings. Rule 18:- Levy of duty. - (1) The Central Government may, within three months of the date of publication of final findings by the designated authority under rule 17, impose by notification in the Official Gazette, upon importation into India of the article covered by the final finding, anti-dumping duty not exceeding the margin of dumping as determined under rule 17.7 (2) In cases where the designated authority has selected percentage of the volume of the exports from a particular country, as referred to sub-rule (3) of rule 17, any anti-dumping duty applied to imports from exporters or producers not included in the examination shall not exceed - (i) the weighted average margin of dumping established with respect to the selected exporters or producers or, (ii) where the liability for payment of anti-dumping duties is calculated on the basis of a prospective normal value/ the difference between the weighted average normal value of the selected exporters or producers and the export prices of exporters or producers not individually examined: Provided that the Central Government shall disregard for the purpo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....xporters, it may levy duty in such cases retrospectively from the date of the initiation of the review. Rule 23:- Review. - (1) The designated authority shall, from time to time, review the need for the continued imposition of the anti-dumping duty and shall, if it is satisfied on the basis of information received by it that there is no justification for the continued imposition of such duty recommend to the Central Government for its withdrawal. (2) Any review initiated under sub-rule (1) shall be concluded within a period not exceeding twelve months from the date of initiation of such review. (3) The provisions of rules 6, 7, 8, 9/10, 11, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20 shall be mutatis mutandis applicable in the case of review. 8. It is also relevant to extract various Clauses of the Agreement on Implementation of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 1994. Article 3 Determination of Injury 3.1 A determination of injury for purposes of Article VI of GATT 1994 shall be based on positive evidence and involve an objective examination of both (a) the volume of the dumped imports and the effect of the dumped imports on prices in the domestic market for like products....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Under this Agreement the term "injury" shall, unless otherwise specified, be taken to mean material injury to a domestic industry, threat of material injury to a domestic industry or material retardation of the establishment of such an industry and shall be interpreted in accordance with the provisions of this Article. 27 demonstration of a causal relationship between the dumped imports and the injury to the domestic industry shall be based on an examination of all relevant evidence before the authorities. The authorities shall also examine any known factors other than the dumped imports which at the same time are injuring the domestic industry, and the injuries caused by 20 these other factors must not be attributed to the dumped imports. Factors which may be relevant in this respect include, inter alia, the volume and prices of imports not sold at dumping prices, contraction in demand or changes in the patterns of consumption, trade restrictive practices of and competition between the foreign and domestic producers, developments in technology and the export performance and productivity of the domestic industry. 3.6 The effect of the dumped imports shall be assessed in relat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....b) injury within the meaning of Article VI of GATT 1994 as interpreted by this Agreement and (c) a causal link between the dumped imports and the alleged injury. Simple assertion, 22 unsubstantiated by relevant evidence, cannot be considered sufficient to meet the requirements of this paragraph. The application shall contain such information as is reasonably available to the applicant on the following: (i) the identity of the applicant and a description of the volume and value of the domestic production of the like product by the applicant. Where a written application is made on behalf of the domestic industry, the application shall identify the industry on behalf of which the application is made by a list of all known domestic producers of the like product (or associations of domestic producers of the like product) and, to the extent possible, a description of the volume and value of domestic production of the like product accounted for by such producers; (ii) a complete description of the allegedly dumped product, the names of the country or countries of origin or export in question, the identity of each known exporter or foreign producer and a list of known persons importi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....government of the exporting Member concerned. 5.6 If, in special circumstances, the authorities concerned decide to initiate an investigation without having received a written application by or on behalf of a domestic industry for the initiation of such investigation, they shall proceed only if they have sufficient evidence of dumping, injury and a causal link, as described in paragraph 2, to justify the initiation of an investigation. 5.7 The evidence of both dumping and injury shall be considered simultaneously (a) in the decision whether or not to initiate an investigation, and (b) thereafter, during the course of the investigation, starting on a date not later than the earliest date on which in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement provisional measures may be applied. 5.8 An application under paragraph 1 shall be rejected and an investigation shall be terminated promptly as soon as the authorities concerned are satisfied that there is not sufficient evidence of either dumping or of injury to justify proceeding with the case. There shall be immediate termination in cases where the authorities determine that the margin of dumping is de minimis, or that the vol....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rtunities for all interested parties to meet those parties with adverse interests, so that opposing views may be presented and rebuttal arguments offered. Provision of such opportunities must take account of the need to preserve confidentiality and of the convenience to the parties. There shall be no obligation on any party to attend a meeting, and failure to do so shall not be prejudicial to that party's case. Interested parties shall also have the right, on justification, to present other information orally. 6.3 Oral information provided under paragraph 2 shall be taken into account by the authorities only in so far as it is subsequently reproduced in writing and made available to other interested parties, as provided for in subparagraph 1.2. 6.4 The authorities shall whenever practicable provide timely opportunities for all interested parties to see all information that is relevant to the presentation of their cases, that is not confidential as defined in paragraph 5, and that is used by the authorities in an anti- 27 dumping investigation, and to prepare presentations on the basis of this information. 6.5 Any information which is by nature confidential (for example,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he applicants. 6.8 In cases in which any interested party refuses access to, or otherwise does not provide, necessary information within a reasonable period or significantly impedes the investigation, preliminary and final determinations, affirmative or negative, may be made on the basis of the facts available. The provisions of Annex II shall be observed in the application of this paragraph. 6.9 The authorities shall, before a final determination is made, inform all interested parties of the essential facts under consideration which form the basis for the decision whether to apply definitive measures. Such disclosure should take place in sufficient time for the parties to defend their interests. 6.10 The authorities shall, as a rule, determine an individual margin of dumping for each known exporter or producer concerned of 29 the product under investigation. In cases where the number of exporters, producers, importers or types of products involved is so large as to make such a determination impracticable, the authorities may limit their examination either to a reasonable number of interested parties or products by using samples which are statistically valid on the basis o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o initiating an investigation, reaching preliminary or final determinations, whether affirmative or negative, or from applying provisional or final measures, in accordance with relevant provisions of this Agreement. Article 9 Imposition and Collection of Anti-Dumping Duties 9.1 The decision whether or not to impose an anti-dumping duty in cases where all requirements for the imposition have been fulfilled, and the decision whether the amount of the anti-dumping duty to be imposed shall be the full margin of dumping or less, are decisions to be made by the authorities of the importing Member. It is desirable that the imposition be permissive in the territory of all Members, and that the duty be less than the margin if such lesser duty would be adequate to remove the injury to the domestic industry. 9.2 When an anti-dumping duty is imposed in respect of any product, such anti-dumping duty shall be collected in the appropriate amounts in each case, on a non-discriminatory basis 36 on imports of such product from all sources found to be dumped and causing injury, except as to imports from those sources from which price undertakings under the terms of this Agreement have bee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....amination in accordance with the second sentence of paragraph 10 of Article 6, any anti-dumping duty applied to imports from exporters or producers not included in the examination shall not exceed: (i) the weighted average margin of dumping established with respect to the selected exporters or producers or, (ii) where the liability for payment of anti-dumping duties is calculated on the basis of a prospective normal value, the difference between the weighted average normal value 37 20 It is understood that the observance of the time-limits mentioned in this subparagraph and in subparagraph 3.2 may not be possible where the product in question is subject to judicial review proceedings. of the selected exporters or producers and the export prices of exporters or producers not individually examined, provided that the authorities shall disregard for the purpose of this paragraph any zero and de minimis margins and margins established under the circumstances referred to in paragraph 8 of Article 6. The authorities shall apply individual duties or normal values to imports from any exporter or producer not included in the examination who has provided the necessary information dur....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....se may be. 10.4 Except as provided in paragraph 2, where a determination of threat of injury or material retardation is made (but no injury has yet occurred) a definitive anti-dumping duty may be imposed only from the date of the determination of threat of injury or material retardation, and any cash deposit made during the period of the application of provisional measures shall be refunded and any bonds released in an expeditious manner. 10.5 Where a final determination is negative, any cash deposit made during the period of the application of provisional measures shall be refunded and any bonds released in an expeditious manner. 10.6 A definitive anti-dumping duty may be levied on products which were entered for consumption not more than 90 days prior to the date of application of provisional measures, when the authorities determine for the dumped product in question that: (i) there is a history of dumping which caused injury or that the importer was, or should have been, aware that the exporter practises dumping and that such dumping would cause injury, and (ii) the injury is caused by massive dumped imports of a product in a relatively short time which in light o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury. The duty may remain in force pending the outcome of such a review. 11.4 The provisions of Article 6 regarding evidence and procedure shall apply to any review carried out under this Article. Any such review shall be carried out expeditiously and shall normally be concluded within 12 months of the date of initiation of the review. 11.5 The provisions of this Article shall apply mutatis mutandis to price undertakings accepted under Article 8. Article 18 Final Provisions 18.1 No specific action against dumping of exports from another Member can be taken except in accordance with the provisions of GATT 1994, as interpreted by this Agreement. 18.2 Reservations may not be entered in respect of any of the provisions of this Agreement without the consent of the other Members. 18.3 Subject to subparagraphs 3.1 and 3.2, the provisions of this Agreement shall apply to investigations, and reviews of existing measures, initiated pursuant to applications which have been made on or after the date of entry into force for a Member of the WTO Agreement. 18.3.1 With respect to the calculation of margins of du....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....; and considering the facts available on record, the Authority concludes that the product under consideration has been exported to India from the subject countries below its associated normal value, thus, resulting in dumping of the product. The domestic industry has suffered material injury in respect of the subject goods. The material injury has been caused by the dumped imports from the subject countries. O. Recommendations 102. The Authority notes that the investigation was initiated and notified to all interested parties and adequate opportunity was given to the domestic industry, exporters, importers and other interested parties to provide positive information on the aspects of dumping, injury and the causal link. Having initiated and conducted investigation into dumping, injury and the causal link thereof in terms of the AD Rules and having established positive dumping margins as well as material injury to the domestic industry caused by 41 such dumped imports, the Authority is of the view that imposition of definitive anti dumping duty is required to offset dumping and consequent injury. Therefore, the Authority considers it necessary to recommend impos....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....egarding the time limit for the New Shipper's Review and rejected the same, observing as under:- 20. As regards the period of investigation, the Authority is well within its bounds to determine a period shorter than 12 months, but longer than 6 months. In the case of a New Shipper, it is not uncommon for a shorter period of time to be considered as the period of investigation. It is pertinent to mention here that the period selected is partially retrospective and partially prospective. The Authority notes the Domestic Producer's concerns regarding the risks of selecting a prospective period of investigation and indeed, the concerns are very valid. However, the factual situation of the present case is clearly distinguishable from the factual situation of the H&R Johnson (2007) case cited by the Domestic producers. In the H&R Johnson (2007) case, the CESTAT clearly noted the 44 invalidity of the initiation of the new shipper review on the following grounds: i. The new shippers had not even begun production or exportation to India at the time of filing the new shipper review application. ii. The new shippers were found to be ineligible for initiating a new shipper review und....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rd to the submission of the Domestic Industry regarding the pricing of Clear Float Glass of 13 mm thickness, the authority notes that pricing of 13mm clear float glass has no relevance in the present investigation as the same is not part of the product under consideration. Further, prices of different thicknesses are determined based upon the market demand and supply and it is not correct to compare the price of one particular thickness with the price of other thicknesses. The claim of the domestic industry also does not bear any merit because they have not been able to demonstrate that the price of 13mm thickness clear float glass supplied by Tariq Glass is lower as compared to the price of 13mm thickness clear float glass imported from other countries. Thus, there is no reasonable basis to correlate the prices of subject goods with the Clear Float Glass of 13mm thickness supplied by the Applicant. 18 b) The Authority has examined the genuineness of the export prices reported by 47 the Applicant from the DGCI&S data for exports to India and also compared the same with prices offered by Tariq Glass to other countries during the same period. The authority notes that there no signifi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ubject matter of challenge in W.P 17696 of 2017. 11. The principle argument was that the authorities had no jurisdiction to continue the investigation beyond a period of eighteen months, from the date of initiation, for the simple reason that New Shippers Review, which deals with only one exporter could not exceed the time period, which is prescribed for investigation, under Rule 17 of the ADD Rules which is the period for investigation, for all exporters. 12. Contention was that the fact that Rule 22 does not prescribe any period of investigation, does not mean that there is no time limit for concluding the investigation. The learned Single Judge by the order impugned herein, framed the following five questions, for consideration. (i). Whether the New Shipper Review 50 Investigation commenced by the Designated Authority vide initiation Notification, dated 23/9/2015, culminating in the final findings, dated 11/4/2017 is barred by time as it has exceeded 18 months. (ii). Whether the New Shipper Review initiated under Rule 23 of ADD Rules is required to be completed within a period of 12 months from the date of initiation, failing which the same will lapse or in 18 months....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....carried out on an accelerated basis compared to a normal duty assessment to ensure that review results in a determination of dumping in respect of such procedures and Anti Dumping Duty can be left retroactively to the date of initiation of review. Therefore, according to the appellant, review under Rule 22, cannot in any event exceed the period of 18 months. The learned counsel for the appellant would also rely on the answer given by India to Korea. Where on the pointed question regarding the time period for New Shipper Accelerated Review India categorically stated that 53 the Rule 22 of Indian ADD Rules is based on Article 9.5 of WTO Anti-Dumbing Agreement. 17. The appellant would therefore, submit that if the New Shipper Review is not completed, within a period of 12 months or 18 months, in exceptional circumstances, as prescribed in Rule 17, the following prejudice would be caused to the Domestic Industry. (i). The New Shipper can seek provisional assessment and the ADD is not collected during the period of review. If the NSR results in a determination of dumping it will be imposed retrospectively from the date of initiation of the review. (ii). Therefore for such perio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s or more than what is contemplated under Rule 17 or Rule 23 of the ADD Rules, 1995. Reading any time limit into Rule 22 of the ADD Rules, 1995 would only amount to rewriting the rule which the appellant/writ petitioner cannot compel the Court to do while deciding the case and if it is done it will be hit by the Principle of Causus Omissus. 10. On the very reading of 22 of the ADD Rules, 1995, it is very clear that the rule making authority has consciously not provided the limitation though it is specifically provided for Rule 23 of the ADD Rules, 1995. Therefore, the ADD Rules, 1995. Therefore, the ADD Rules, 1995 being a domestic law will prevail over an international agreement i.e, GATT, as held by the 56 Supreme Court in the case of GRAMOPHONE COMPANY OF INDIA LTD Vs. BIRENDRA BAHADUR PANDEY {1984 (2) SCC 534}, relevant portion extracted hereunder:- "There can be no question that nations must march with the international community and the municipal law must respect rules of international law even as nations respect international opinion. ..... The doctrine of incorporation also recognises the position that the rules of international law are incorporated into nationa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ovided, under Rule 17, i.e., original Notification or under Rule 23, which is a review commonly known as sunset review. In other words, the question is as to whether the time limit whether which the investigation has to be completed should be read into Rule 22 of the ADD Rules which does not prescribe any time limit. 22. As discussed earlier, the imposition of Anti-Dumping Duty was the outcome of the General Agreement on Tariffs & Trade, 1994, to which India is a party. The purpose behind the imposition of the duty was to curb the unfair trade practices resorted to by the exporters of a particular country of flooding the Domestic Markets with goods, at the rate which are lesser than the rate at which the exporters normally sell the same in their own countries which is the effect of causing injury to the domestic market. Section 9 A was therefore, brought in, to maintain a level playing field and prevent dumping the goods into India while allowing the healthy competition. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, in Reliance Industries Ltd., Vs. Designated Authority & Ors {(2006) 10 SCC 368}, has observed that "the concept of anti-dumping is founded on the basis that a foreign manufactur....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ified countries, causes or threatens material injury to any industrial established in India or material retards the establishment of any industry in India; (iii). the casual link, where applicable, between the dumped imports and injury; and (iv). whether a retrospective levy is called for and if so, the reasons therefor and date of commencement of such retrospective levy. 26. Proviso to Rule 17 provides that the period of one year has given. Rule 17 can be extended by an another period of six months. 27. A perusal of the above Rules would show that investigation conducted by the Designated Authority, deals with a number of exporters who are exporting their goods into India. Information is called for from such exporters regarding their price of production, regarding the price at which the goods are being sold in their countries and all other information. 28. Rule 22 deals with determination of margin of dumping for exporters not originally investigated. A perusal of Rule 22 would show that it deals with determining the individual margins of dumping for an exporters, who have not exported the product to India during the period of investigation, provided that these expo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....have not exported the product to the importing member during the period of investigation. b. These exporters are not related to any of the exporters or producers in the exporting Country, who are subject to the antidumping duties on the product. c. Such a review shall be initiated and carried out on an accelerated basis, compared to normal duty assessment and review proceedings in the importing Member. d. No anti-dumping duties shall be levied on imports from such exporters or producers while the review has been carried out. e. The authorities may, withhold appraisement and/or request guarantees to ensure that should such a review result in a determination of dumping in respect of such producers or exporters, anti-dumping duties can be levied retroactively to the date of the initiation of the review. 31. A perusal of the above mentioned clause would show that these review has to be carried out on an accelerated basis, compared to normal duty assessment. The agreement therefore, clearly stipulated that the period taken for these assessment cannot exceed the original investigation. 32. The Committee on anti-dumping practices has received communications from India re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ade by the CESTAT Principal Bench in H & R Johnson (India) Limited Vs. Designated Authority {Union of India {2008 (232) ELT 390 (Del.)}, on the following observations. "12.4. It is clear from the scheme of the new shipper review provisions, requiring determination of individual dumping margin of the new shipper, that period of review (POR) has to be fixed by the designated authority for the purpose of initiating the review investigation. For determining 'dumping margin', 'normal value' and the 'export price' for such period of review, the transactions taking place during the period of review will be relevant, in an anti-dumping proceeding. A new shipper review under Rule 22 should normally cover production, exports or sales during the period of review will be relevant, in an anti-dumping proceeding. A new shipper review under Rule 22 should normally cover production, exports or sales during the period preceding the initiation of review. Fixing review period, for such investigation, that falls subsequent to the date of the application for such review is not at all warranted, and would be like spreading a red carpet to manipulations by projecting figures du....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ning to the concept of 'absurdity', using it to include virtually any result which is unworkable or impracticable, inconvenient, anomalous or illogical, futile or pointless, artificial, or productive of a disproportionate countermischief. (2). In rare cases, there are over riding reasons for applying a construction that produces an absurd result, for example where it appears that Parliament really intended it or the literal meaning is too strong." Similarly, at page No.870, it is observed as under:- The Court seeks to avoid a construction of an enactment that produces an unworkable or an enactment that produces an unworkable or impracticable result, since this is unlikely to have been intended by Parliament. Sometimes, 71 however, there are overriding reasons for applying such a construction, for example, where it appears that Parliament really intended it or the literal meaning is too strong. 42. The Hon'ble Apex Court, in Shailesh Dhairyawan vs. Mohan Balkrishna Lulla {(2016) 3 SCC 619 has stated that the principle of purposive interpretation is based on the understanding that the Court is supposed to attach that meaning to the provision which serve the pu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ry interpretation, and in its place they offered purposivism, this principle is now widely applied by the Courts not only in this country but in many other legal systems as well. 43. Similarly, at paragraph Nos.31 to 33 of the Indian Performing Rights Society Limited vs. Sanjay Dalia {(2015) 10 SCC 161, it is held thus:- 31. In Busching Schmitz Private Ltd. v. P.T. Menghani [1977 (2) SCC 835], it has been observed that purposive interpretation may be made having regard to the object of the provisions and to avoid any obvious lacuna. 32. The learned author Justice G.P. Singh in Interpretation of Statutes, 12th Edn. has also observed that it is the court's duty to avoid hardship, inconvenience, injustice, absurdity and anomaly while selecting out of different interpretations. The doctrine must be applied with great care and in case absurd inconvenience is to be caused that interpretation has to be avoided. Cases of individual hardship or injustice have no bearing for enacting the natural construction. The relevant discussion at pages 132-133 and 140-142 is extracted hereunder : "(a) Hardship, inconvenience, injustice, absurdity and anomaly to be avoided In selecting out o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....not only be great but should also be what he calls an "absurd inconvenience". Moreover, individual cases of hardship or injustice have no bearing for rejecting the natural construction, [Young & Co. v. Leamington Spa Corporation, (1993) 8 AC 517], and it is only when the natural construction leads to some general hardship or injustice and some other construction is reasonably open that the natural construction may be departed from. It is often found that laws enacted for the general advantage do result in individual hardship; for example laws of Limitation, Registration, Attestation although enacted for the public benefit, may work injustice in particular cases but that is hardly any reason to depart from the normal rule to relieve the supposed hardship or injustice in such cases. [Lucy v. Henleys Telegraph Works, (1969) 3 All ER 456]. "It is the duty of all courts of justice", said LORD CAMPBELL, "to take care for the general good of the 76 community, that hard cases do not make bad law". [East India Company v. Odichurn Paul, 7 Moo PC 85]. 'Absurdity' according to WILLES, J., should be understood "in the same sense as repugnance that is to say something which would b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....legal operation of the statute to inadvertence. [Kariapper v. Wijesinha, (1967) 3 All ER 485]. The Courts should as far as possible avoid a construction which results in anomalies. [N.T.Veluswami Thevar v. G.Raja Nainar, AIR 1959 SC 422]." 33. Bennion on 'Statutory Interpretation' has mentioned law to same effect under section 312 and has observed that there is a presumption that absurd result is not intended and in section 314 it has been observed that the court has to avoid an inconvenient result while interpreting a provision. It was stated that it can be presumed that Parliament intends that while construing an enactment the court will avoid a construction that is unworkable or impracticable, inconvenient, anomalous or illogical as the same is unlikely to be intended by the Parliament. In Rosali V. v. Taico Bank and Ors. [2009 (17) SCC 690], this Court referring to Halsbury's Commonsense construction rule held that it is a well-settled principle of law that common sense construction rule should be taken recourse in certain cases. 44. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore Vs. G.M.Exports and Ors {2015 (324) ELT 209 (SC), has observed as ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ia at less than its normal value. Such duty can, in the Central Government's discretion, be imposed at a rate that does not exceed the margin of dumping, which only means the difference between the export price and the normal value of such article in international trade. It is clear that sub- section (1) refers to a "final" or "definitive" duty, and has to be read with sub-section (3) thereof, which authorises the levy of the "final" or "definitive" anti-dumping duty retrospectively in the circumstances mentioned in sub-section (3). The scheme therefore of Section 9A(1) and (3) is that an anti-dumping duty is normally to be imposed with prospective effect unless, inter alia, because of massive dumping of an article in a relatively short time the remedial effect of the antidumping duty to be levied would be seriously undermined. This would therefore require a retrospective duty being levied, but not beyond a period of 90 days, to undo the effect of undermining the antidumping duty to be levied. Short of sub-section (3), no other part of Section 9A authorises the Central Government to levy an anti-dumping duty with retrospective effect. 25. Section 9A(2) speaks of an anti-dumping ....