Anti-Dumping Duty on Polyester Yarn - Resurrection Again?
DDT had been hammering the Government on the unfair, unjust illegal resurrection of dead notifications to impose anti dumping duty through the backdoor. And of late, the Government had stopped resurrecting dead anti dumping notifications. The Board had even issued a Circular No. , Dated: July 8, 2011 that there would be no retrospective imposition of anti dumping duty. Board had clearly stated:
Thus, a definitive/final anti-dumping duty can be collected beyond the stipulated period only when a notification extending the levy has been issued, before the expiry of the parent notification.
Unless such revalidation or extension is carried out by a fresh notification, the collection of final anti-dumping duty should cease on the completion of five years.
– 12.07.2011 mentioned, "Board deserves all praise for this very logical and reasonable clarification. So, now for the failure of the Board, the importer will not be punished."
Unfortunately, the Board does not retain for long the reasons for praising it. DDT has often commented about the utter lack of respect the field officers have for Board instructions. Now it seems that even the Board has no respect for its own orders.
Anti Dumping Duty was imposed on Polyester Yarn provisionally by Notification No. 82/2006-Cus dated 21.08.2006. This provisional anti dumping duty had expired on 20.02.2007. The Government woke up just in time and imposed definitive anti dumping duty by Notification No. 15/2007-Cus dated 20.02.2007. This notification specifically stated that the anti-dumping duty imposed under this notification shall be levied with effect from the date of imposition of the provisional anti-dumping duty, i.e. the 21st August, 2006. This notification expired on 20.08.2011 and now after six months of its death, the notification is extended till 20.08.2012.
What about the Board's clarification that a definitive/final anti-dumping duty can be collected beyond the stipulated period only when a notification extending the levy has been issued, before the expiry of the parent notification?
This kind of smuggling of notifications should be treated as more dangerous than smuggling of goods.
Notification No. , Dated: March 5, 2012