Ministry of Commerce Vs. M/S Lubrizon (India Pvt. Ltd.) and Ors.  INSC
1532 (10 September 2008)
JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5590 OF 2008 (Arising out of S.L.P.(C)
No.8540/2007) Designated Authority, Ministry of Commerce ...Appellant(s) Versus
M/s. Lubrizon (India) Pvt.Ltd. & Ors. ...Respondent(s)
In this case, the
following question of law arises for determination:
"Whether, in the
facts and circumstances of the case, the CESTAT was right in holding that
expression "like article" includes only the article which is the
subject matter of investigation after being identified for the purpose of Rule
4(1)(b) and not on any other 'like article'.
On 31st January,
2002, Initiation Notification was issued under Rule 5 of the Customs Tariff
(Identification, Assessment and Collection of Anti-dumping Duty on Dumped
Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995. A Preliminary Finding
was given on 29th July, 2002 pursuant to which the Designated Authority issued
Preliminary Notification on 5th September, 2002. The Final Finding was given by
the Designated Authority on 29th July, 2003 and, CA @ SLP(C) 8540/07..contd..
ultimately, in terms
of the said Final Findings, Final Notification came to be issued under Section
9A(1)(5) on 1st October, 2003. The effect of the Final Notification was to
impose anti-dumping duty on different types of Acyclic alcohol.
As can be seen from
the afore-stated dates, the Preliminary Notification came to be issued on 5th
September, 2002. The duty was leviable for five years. It was extendable but,
in this case, it has not been extended. This period of five years, in the
present case, ended on or about 4th September, 2007. Since then, it has not
been extended. In the meantime, we are informed that the respondent has paid
duty for five years. In the circumstances, we do not wish to go into the
question of law, quoted herein-above. Prima facie, we are of the view that the
Tribunal's decision needs proper evaluation and consideration particularly, in
the context of the connotation to be given to the words "like
article" under Rule 2(d) of the said Rules, 1995.
For the afore-stated
reasons, although on the facts of the case, we do not wish to interfere, we
keep the question of law expressly open. The said question will be decided in
accordance with law in an appropriate matter.
CA @ SLP(C)
Subject to what is
stated herein-above, Civil Appeal is disposed of with no order as to costs.
...................J. (B. SUDERSHAN REDDY)