TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (6) TMI 1377
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Hon'ble Tribunal's decision is legally correct in rejecting Cross objection filed by the Department and in No. setting aside Order-In-Original KDL/AC/PGM/672/Ref/2016-17 dated 20.03.2017 that rejected refund claim of ADD as time barred under Section 9AA of CTA, 1975 read with Rule 4(2) of ADD Rules, 2012? (ii) Whether the Hon'ble Tribunal was legally correct in not correctly appreciating the difference between Section 9AA of Custom Tariff Act and Section 9A in the context of facts of present case? (iii) Whether the Hon'ble Tribunal was legally correct in overlooking the limitation provided under Rule 4(2) of Refund of ADD Rules, 2012? (iv) Whether the Hon'ble Tribunal order was legally correct in allowing the appeal of the Respondent herein considering the same as covered under general provisions of Refund under Section 27 of the Customs Act, 1962 read with Section 9A of CTA, 1975? (v) Whether Hon'ble Tribunal finding was legally correct in holding that the refund arising on account of Tribunal order is covered as a Special Case under Section 9A but not covered under Section 9AA of CTA, 1975? (vi) Whether the Hon....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....educed from the findings recorded by the designated authority in the mid term review conducted by him wherein he had concluded as under: "21. On the basis of examination of the issues raised by various interested parties including the petitioner in oral hearing held on 14.3.2011 followed by their written submissions and rejoinders and the evidence submitted by the petitioner vide their 55 letters dated 23rd November 2009 and dated 14th July 2011 and on the basis of examination of post disclosure submissions of interested parties, the Authority has held that: a) The subject goods of width beyond 1250 mm were rightly excluded from the ambit of anti-dumping duty as held in the Authority's original findings No.14/6/2008-DGAD dated 24.11.2009. The said exclusion is maintained in view of the foregoing examination by the Authority. b) As regards the exclusion of other specific grades, the Authority has followed the broad principles set out in the original final findings of the subject investigation dated 24.11.2009 and has taken into account the evidence of actual manufacture/supply placed on record by the petitioner including the evidence furnished by the p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat too in a full-fledged mid-term review done by designated authority. 9.3 Thirdly, we also find that an identical issue was raised in the case of Mascot international vs Commissioner of Customs (Exp.)-2013.TIOL 1426-cestat-Mum, wherein co-ordinate Bench in the said case was considering the very same issue and has held in the favour of the assessee therein. With respect, we reproduce the relevant paragraphs. "8) On hearing both sides, we find that the issue before us is that whether stainless steel cold rolled Colls having width of 1256 MM to 1259 MM are covered under Notification 86/2011 for imposing anti-dumping duty or not. To know whether the goods are leviable to anti-dumping duty we have to go to Notification 14/2010 dated 20.02.2010 wherein anti-dumping duty was leviable on cold rolled flat products of stainless steel of width of 600 MM upto 1250 MM of all series further worked than cold Rolled (cold reduced) with a thickness of upto 4 MM. From the said Notification It means that cold rolled flat products of stainless steel of width of 600 MM up to 1250 MM are leviable for anti-dumping duty. A mid-term was taken by the Designated Authority on 8.6.2011 in t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ound that in the absence of tolerance in the recommendation of corresponding Notification the products of width 1250 MM or lower are being declared as having width of 1251 MM to 1300 MM and thereby the antidumping duty is circumvented. It is further found that larger number of consignment where the width has been declared as 1251 MM or marginally above the 1250 MM limit specified in the final finding, thereby escaping anti-dumping duty. Therefore, this Notification came to levy for tolerance of (+) 30 MM in the width. 11. From the above, it is clear that in intent of Designated Authority was not to levy anti-dumping duty on the products having width more than 1250 MM. The amending Notification on mid-term review was for the consignment wherein the actual width is less than 1250MM who declared the consignment as 1251 MM or more to escape antidumping duty. In those cases tolerance of (+) 30 MM was granted. Therefore tolerance is to be applied on the products having width less than 1250 MM and declared as 1251 MM to 1300 MM. It is not the intent of the Designated Authority to levy duty on 1280 MM. If it is so, In th Notification it would have been declared that the product up....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....05/2012-Customs (NT) would not be applicable but Section 27 of the Customs Act would be applicable, which has been borrowed in the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 by Section 9A(8) which indicates that even Customs Tariff Act envisages the situations where refund could arise even in anti dumping otherwise in listed situations, as per the provision of Section 9AA of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. 9. The CESTAT while allowing the appeal, has observed as under: "4. Considered, we find that the notification relied upomby the AR remains confined to enlisted refund cases as are mentioned in Section 9AA, which are typically in the nature of refund cases, which arise due to differential duty being imposed at preliminary and final stages. In fact the title of the Notification itself says this goods may be called the refund of anti dumping duty (paid in excess of actual margin of dumping). 4.1 We therefore find that the Section 9AA Customs Tariff Act deals only with those specified cases of refund where done the limitation is governed by the aforesaid Notification No. 05/2012-Customs (Non-Tariff). However there is no bar on the refund arising otherwise in distinct situations to b....