2019 (1) TMI 1512

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ation No.34/2012-Customs (ADD) dated 03.07.2012. 2. The case of the petitioner is as follows: The petitioner firm regularly imports Soda Ash from various countries. The soda ash so imported is classifiable under Heading 2836 2010 as well as 2836 2020 of the first schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 and besides the Basic Customs Duty, it also attracts anti-dumping duty in terms of Section 9A of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, if the aforesaid product imported, is originated from People's Republic of China, European Union, Kenya, Iran, Pakistan, Ukraine and USA. In terms of Notification No.34/2012-Customs (ADD) dated 03.07.2012, anti-dumping duty at various rates were prescribed when soda ash is imported from these countries. The Des....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ation No.34/2012 and extended by Notification No.33/2017, was expired by 02.07.2018. Even though the right to collect such anti-dumping duty in terms of the said Notification got expired on 02.07.2018, the respondents continued to take a stand that the consignments of Soda Ash imported from the countries referred to in the Notification No.34/2012 will be subjected to anti-dumping duty. Hence, the present writ petition is filed seeking for the relief as stated supra. 3. A counter affidavit is filed by the respondents, wherein, it is stated as follows: The imposition of anti-dumping duty on the import of Soda Ash in terms of Notification No.34/2012 dated 03.07.2012 levied on import from the specific countries with different rates for a peri....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ated Authority for deciding the issue afresh in accordance with law. In the meantime, the DGAD rendered the final findings vide proceedings F.No.7/5/2017-DGAD dated 14.12.2018 concluding that the continuation of anti-dumping duty is not warranted and accordingly, did not recommend the extension of the anti-dumping duty on import of subject matter from the subject countries. The said order dated 14.12.2018 is an appealable order before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal. Hence, the interest of Revenue has to be protected by imposing certain conditions on the petitioner. 4. Mr.S.Murugappan, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the crux of the issue before this Court is that whether the respondents are entitle....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... on 02.07.2018. Even otherwise, as it is admitted by the respondents in the counter affidavit that the DGAD has already passed an order on 14.12.2018 holding that the continuation of anti-dumping duty is not warranted and thus, he is not recommending for the extension of the anti-dumping duty on import of subject matter from the subject countries. It is an admitted case of the respondents that as on date, no notification is in force empowering the collection of ADD. On the other hand, it is a matter of fact such power conferred on the authorities through issuance of relevant notification ceased to exist after 02.07.2018. Hence, I am of the view that there is no justification on the part of the respondents in seeking for any interim protecti....