Anti Dumping Duty on Pentaerythritol from China
PROVISIONAL Anti Dumping Duty was imposed on Pentaerythritol originating in, or exported from China PR and Sweden by Notification No. 93/2005–Customs, dated the 20th October 2005 valid up to 19th April 2006.
Definitive Anti Dumping Duty on the product was imposed by Notification No. 37/2006–Customs, dated the 20th April 2006 valid up to 19th October 2010.
This was extended up to 28th March 2011. Therefore, the notification expired on 29th March 2011.
On 25th March 2011, the Designated Authority has recommended that the quantum of anti dumping duty in force needs to be revised so far as China PR is concerned and needs to be discontinued from Sweden.
The Revenue Department took three more months to issue their notification and now a new notification is issued freshly imposing anti dumping duty on this product originating in or exported from China PR for a period of five years from 14th June 2011.
This time they have not gone for a resurrection.
But what about the period from 29th March to 13th June 2011? Was there no dumping from China during this period? But the Designated Authority had on 25th March 2011 recommended the duty! Who is responsible for the dumping and loss that took place during those 75 days?
Many Customs officers are furious with DDT for its caustic remarks on resurrection of dead anti dumping notifications. “Why don't you blame the Designated Authority, who always gives the recommendation at the last moment or after a notification has expired?”, they ask me. The question is not who is to blame, but why resurrection at all? Government should speak in one voice to the stakeholders and inter-departmental rivalry should not cause harassment to the taxpayer and loss of revenue to the Government.
Notification No. , Dated : June 14, 2011