Association Of Synthetic Fibre Industry vs Union Of India And Ors.

Association of Synthetic Fibre Industry, the appellant has filed this appeal feeling aggrieved by the failure of the Central Government to levy anti-dumping duty on the imports of "All Fully Drawn or Fully Oriented Yarn/ Flat Yarn of Polyester", the subject goods originating in or exported from China PR and Thailand, the subject Countries, even though the designated authority, in its final findings notified on 23.11.2020, had recommended imposition of anti-dumping duty for a period of five years.

The relief claimed in this appeal is for setting aside the Office Memorandum dated 30.12.2020 issued by the Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue) by which the Notification dated 21.10.2015 earlier issued imposing anti-dumping duty has been rescinded, except as respects things done or omitted to be done before such rescission. A further relief that has been claimed is for issuance of a direction to the Central Government to issue a notification for imposition of anti-dumping duty, based on the recommendation made by the designated authority in the final findings dated 23.11.2020.

It transpires from the records that earlier, by a notification dated 11.11.2009, the Central Government imposed anti-dumping duty on the subject goods originating in or exported from the subject countries. The imposition of anti-dumping duty was initiated for sunset review by a notification dated 24.03.2014 and ultimately the Central Government issued a notification dated 22.09.2015 for continuation of anti-dumping duty on goods originating in or exported from the subject countries. Thereafter, another sunset review was initiated by notification dated 15.04.2020 for imposition of anti-dumping duty on the subject goods originating in or exported from the subject countries. The designated authority, in its final findings notified on 23.11.2020, recommended for imposition of anti-dumping duty.

Shri Sunil Kumar, learned authorised representative appearing for the Union of India has placed the comments submitted by the Government of India that mention that the recommendation made by the designated authority in the final findings notified on 23.11.2020 was not accepted by the Central Government and thereafter the notification dated 30.12.2020 was issued rescinding the earlier notification dated 21.10.2015, by which anti-dumping duty was imposed, except as respects things done or omitted to be done before such rescission.

Learned authorised representative has not placed any Office Memorandum, as in the other cases, conveying the decision of the Government of India not to accept the recommendation made by the designated authority and only reliance has been placed on the comments which mention that the Government of India did not accept the recommendation made by the designated authority and so the notification dated 30.12.2020 was issued.

The issues raised in this appeal are issues which were considered by the Tribunal in Jubilant Ingrevia Limited vs. Union of India and five others, Anti-Dumping Appeal No. 50461 of 2021 decided on 27.10.2021 The decision taken by the Central Government not to impose anti-dumping duty, despite a recommendation having been made by the designated authority for an imposition of anti-dumping duty, was set aside by the Tribunal and the matter was remitted to the Central Government to take a fresh decision on the recommendation made by the designated authority. The operative part of the order passed by the Tribunal in Jubilant Ingrevia Limited is reproduced below:

"46. Thus, for all the reasons stated above, it is not possible to sustain the decision taken by the Central Government, contained in the Office Memorandum dated 14.12.2020, not to impose anti-dumping duty despite a recommendation having been made by the designated authority for imposition of anti-dumping duty. The matter would, therefore, have to be remitted to the Central Government to take a fresh decision on the recommendation made by the designated authority.

Though rule 18 provides that the Central Government has to take a decision within three months of the date of publication of final findings by the designated authority, but as the matter is being remitted to the Central Government for taking a fresh decision, this limitation would not apply, as was observed by the Tribunal in M/s S. I. Group India Private Limited vs. Designated Authority, Directorate General of Antidumping and Allied Duties, Anti-dumping Appeal No. 50430 of 2019 decided on 21.02.2020.

The Office Memorandum dated 14.12.2020 is, accordingly, set aside and the matter is remitted to the Central Government to reconsider the recommendation made by the designated authority in the light of the observations made above. The appeal would, therefore, have to allowed and is allowed to the extent indicated above."

In the present case, as noticed above, the stand of the Central Government is also that it had decided not to accept the recommendation made by the designated authority.

Accordingly, the decision said to have been taken by the Central Government not to impose anti-dumping duty, despite a recommendation having been made by the designated authority for imposing of anti-dumping duty, is set aside and the matter is remitted to the Central Government for taking a fresh decision on the recommendation made by the designated authority. The notification dated 30.12.2020 issued by the Central Government shall abide by the decision to be now taken by the Central Government. The appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above.

(Pronounced on 01.11.2021)