TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (6) TMI 526
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....amol dated 20.8.2018 for a further period of two months i.e. upto June 24, 2019; C Ex-parte ad-interim relief in terms of para 10(A) and (B) above; and D Such other and further relief(s), as may be deemed just and proper may be kindly granted in the interest of justice, equity and good conscience." Thus, what is essentially prayed for in this application is implementation of the orders passed by this Court in the proceedings of Special Civil Application No. 5278 of 20199. 3. The original petition i.e. Special Civil Application No. 5278 of 2019 was filed containing the following prayers : A. This Hon'ble Court be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or a writ in the nature of certiorari as to quash and set aside Impugned Final Finding No. 7/16/2018-DGAD dated 29.01.2019 along with Disclosure Statement dated 15.01.2019 issued by the Respondent No. 2 and annexed at Annexure - G and H hereto; And B Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct Respondent No. 3 not to refrain from taking any steps in furtherance of the Impugned Final finding dated 29.01.2019 issued by it and anne....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ght to the notice of the authority under the objection dated 22.1.2019. The authority without there being any decision thereon, rendered its final findings, which could be seen from the page No. 261 and 262. In view thereof the Court is of the view that as there is a prima-facie breach of principle of natural justice as the decisions have been rendered prima-facie without affording appropriate material to the concerned, the Court has issued Notice for final disposal and have been expected from the other side to file reply, if any, by the returnable date, in case if notice is served within a reasonable time from today. Learned counsel further submitted that conclusions are diametrical opposite to the final findings recorded. Direct service is permitted." Thereafter, time and again the matter has been adjourned. Today, Shri Desai, learned advocate appears for the designated authority and submitted that the anxiety expressed on behalf of the petitioner that the anti dumping duty for extended period also would come to an end by 26.04.2019 and he is yet to receive instructions and reply, if any, for conducting the matter finally. In that view of the m....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tice for final disposal bearing in mind that the notification of 20.8.2018 would expire on 26.4.2019. The matter thereafter was required to be adjourned at the instance of respondent as could be seen from the order of 11.4.2019 wherein also the Court in fact had reproduced the earlier order only with a view to infuse the sense of urgency which appears to have worked but not to the fullest as though the reply has come but in a soft copy which cannot be placed on record and there is a justification on the part of the counsel for the petitioner with respect to the appropriate direction for extending the antidumping duty so that the subject matter of petition may not be rendered infructuous and irretrievable situation may be avoided. The Court is, therefore, of the view that let there be a direction to respondent No.1 that the antidumping duty as mention in Notification No.392018Custom(ADD) for the product paracetamol dated 20.8.2018 at page 119 shall be extended for a further period of two months that would take care of hearing aspect as by then the pleading would be completed. The antidumping duty as mentioned in the notification dated 20.8.2018 be extended for a further period upto ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... it returnable on 27/03/2019. The notice for final disposal was issued without any further ad interim relief as the anti dumping duty on the product "paracetamol" was extended and continuing as per notification dated 20/08/2018 till 26/04/2019. The said notification is placed on record of the main petition at page- 119. 7. The following narration of the notification deserve to be set out herein below: "2A. In pursuance of the recommendation of the designated authority in the review initiated vide notification No.07/16/2018-DGAD, dated the 24^th May, 2018, published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, Part I, Section 1, dated the 24^th May, 2018, in the matter of continuation of antidumping duty on imports of "Paracetamol" originating in or exported from China PR, notwithstanding anything contained in paragraph 2, this notification shall remain in force, unless revoked,suspended or amended earlier, up to and inclusive of the 26th April, 2019." 8. The date of March was fixed bearing in mind the fact that anti-dumping duty was extended till 26/04/2019. The Court also observed in the order of 13/03/2019 that the Court issued notice for final disposal and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....On 24/04/2019, the Court passed following order: "1.Ms. Vyas, learned counsel for the petitioner mentioned this matter in the morning indicating that the matter was listed on 22.4.2019 and the same was requested for posting on the next day I.e. today. Inadvertently instead of 24.4.2019 it was posted on 25.4.2019 and as there is an urgency the matter is requested to be taken up today with the intimation to all the parties and their counsels. Accordingly the Court granted permission and the matter listed today itself. 2. The learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2 states that he is in fact aware of the orders passed in this matter but he received soft-copy of the reply to be filed and the same could be served upon the petitioner and hardcopy duly affirmed be placed on record by tomorrow I.e. 25.4.2019 as he has been informed that the affirmed copy is already dispatched. 3. The learned counsel appearing for petitioner submitted that in fact looking to the fact that the notification of 20.8.2018 would come to an end by 26.4.2019 in case if sometime is taken in filing rejoinder, if any, or the hearing of the matter is spilled over and not completed by th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t the applicant has been informed and the counsel for the authority also came to know with appropriate inquiries with the concerned that the notification impugned in this application dated 16/04/2019 has already been passed rescinding the notification dated 20/08/2018 which in fact an effect of rendering the main petition infructuous. 11. The counsel for the applicant submitted that though the order of 24/04/2019 passed by the Court was passed after rescinding of the notification, but, at that time, as it is clearly emerging from what had transpired in the proceedings that neither the counsel for the authority or the petitioner had in knowledge of the rescinding notification dated 16/04/2019 and therefore, the same has not been even reflected in the reply affidavit of the authority. Perhaps the reason being the notification of 16/04/2019 was issued by the authority of the Union of India other than the Designated Authority and, therefore, on account of some lack of communication, this matter happened. 12. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that in fact the Court may pass appropriate order whereunder the imports that may be made after 16/04/....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nbsp; :Office Memorandum: Subject : Order of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in SCA No. 5278 of 2019 regarding the Sunset Review of Anti-dumping investigation concerning imports of "Paracetamol" originating in or exported from China PR-reg. The undersigned is directed to refer to the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court orders dated 24th & 26^th April, 2019, in the Special Civil Application No. 5278 of 2019 (copies enclosed). 2. To briefly recapitulate, M/s. Farmson Pharmaceuticals Gujarat Private Limited had filed Special Civil Application No. 5278 of 2019 in the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court, challenging the sunset review final findings of Directorate General of Trade Remedies (DGTR), Directorate General of Trade Remedies, Department of Revenue and CBIC are respondents in the case. 3. The anti-dumping duty was imposed vide notification No. 25/2013-Customs dated 26.10.2013 for a period of 5 years. The Directorate General of Trade Remedies (DGTR) initiated sunset review vide notification dated 7/16/2018-DGAD dated 24.5.2018 and recommended extension of anti-dumping duty till 26.4.2019. Accordingly, vide notification No. 3....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s in sunset review, this notification was rescinding on 16.04.2019. The suspension of rescinding notification by the Hon'ble High Court would not extend the validity of Notification No. 39/2018-customs (ADD) beyond 26.04.2019. In the circumstances no further action remained at end of DoR, in the matter. As regards further course of judicial remedy, if any, the matter is being forwarded to your office with the approval of Revenue Secretary, for appropriate examination on merit and action." 12. The counsel for the applicants strenuously urged that authorities could not have flouted the order of this Court and application is essentially for seeking implementation of the order, as the authorities cannot be permitted to flout the order with impunity. The decision in case of The Commissioner, Karnataka Housing Board Vs. C. Muddaiah, reported in AIR 2007 SC 3100, is relied upon with special emphasis upon para nos. 30, 31, and 32, which are reproduced as under: 30. Bare reading of the above order makes it more than clear that the salary to be paid to the writ petitioner was from October 27, 1997 to February 28, 1998. It was expressly stated that the writ-petitioner would no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....benefits which he would have obtained had he not been illegally deprived of them. Is it open to the Authorities in such case to urge that as he has not worked (but held to be illegally deprived), he would not be granted the benefits? Upholding of such plea would amount to allowing a party to take undue advantage of his own wrong. It would perpetrate injustice rather than doing justice to the person wronged. We are conscious and mindful that even in absence of statutory provision, normal rule is 'no work no pay'. In appropriate cases, however, a Court of Law may, nay must, take into account all the facts in their entirety and pass an appropriate order in consonance with law. The Court, in a given case, may hold that the person was willing to work but was illegally and unlawfully not allowed to do so. The Court may in the circumstances, direct the Authority to grant him all benefits considering 'as if he had worked'. It, therefore, cannot be contended as an absolute proposition of law that no direction of payment of consequential benefits can be granted by a Court of Law and if such directions are issued by a Court, the Authority can ignore them even if they had been ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t been challenged in any forum and when the original notification dated 20.8.2018 was ordered to be extended for further period upto 24.6.2019 and when the rescinding notification of 16.4.2019 had been suspended by this Court, there was only one course open to the authority is to extend the anti-dumping duty notification. We are of the view that the possibility of submission qua the notification not being revived on account of interim order etc. also would be not available on account of the fact that a party to the litigation cannot be permitted to take advantage of its own omission to render the entire matter infructuous to the prejudice and the other party. 15. The Court is of the view that nothing prevented the respondents from approaching this Court for seeking appropriate relief / clarification. Unfortunately, close perusal of Office Memorandum dated 6.5.2019 reproduced hereinabove rather indicates the authority's conduct in avoiding the compliance with the Court's order. The author of the Office Memorandum clearly reveals uncanny and enigmatic recalcitrant approach on the part of the authority in complying with the order of this Court when these orders being not su....