Supreme Court of India

DESIGNATED AUTHORITY, MINISTRY OF COMMERCE & INDUSTRY & ANR.versusINDIAN METALS & FERRO ALLOYS LTD.

Citation: 2009 INSC 76
Decided: 27 January 2009
Disposal: Matter referred to larger bench
Bench: ARIJIT PASAYAT

Holding

The Court referred the above questions to a larger bench for fresh consideration.

Summary

The petitioners challenged the Delhi High Court's order that allowed a writ filed by Indian Metals & Ferro Alloys Ltd., which had adopted the interpretation that anti‑dumping duty is country‑specific rather than exporter‑specific, relying on the Reliance Industries judgment. The Supreme Court observed that the issues involved complex questions of customs law with far‑reaching commercial implications. It identified two specific questions: (1) whether the country‑specific view of anti‑dumping duty aligns with Rules 12, 15, 17(3), 18, 19(3) and Annexure 1 of the 1995 Rules, and (2) whether the interpretation of Rule 7 unduly curtails the statutory confidentiality provision. The Court held that these questions merit reconsideration by a larger bench. Consequently, the matter was referred to the Chief Justice of India for referral to a larger bench, and no substantive decision on the merits was rendered.

Issues considered

Whether the interpretation that anti‑dumping duty is country‑specific rather than exporter‑specific is consistent with Rules 12, 15, 17(3), 18, 19(3) and Annexure 1 of the Custom Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of Anti‑Dumping Duty) Rules, 1995.
Whether the interpretation of Rule 7 of the Rules, which allegedly diminishes the statutory confidentiality protection, is correct.

Legislation cited

Customs Tariff Act, 1975s. Section 9A(5)

Subjects

anti‑dumping dutycustoms lawconfidentialityinterpretation of statuteslarger bench referralinternational tradeCustoms Tariff Act

Judgment

                             [2009] 1 S.C.R. 653


         DESIGNATED AUTHORITY, MINISTRY OF COMMERCE &                     A
~
                       INDUSTRY & ANR.
                                       V.
                 INDIAN METALS & FERRO ALLOYS LTD.
               (Special Leave Petition (c) No. 1795 of 2009)
                                                                          B
                             JANUARY 27, 2009
               [DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT AND ASOK KUMAR
. .;.
                            GANGUL Y, JJ.]

             Reference to larger Bench:                                   c
              Questions as to whether the interpretation that Anti
        Dumping Duty is country specific rather than exporter specific
        is in consonance with the provision of Rules 12, 15, 17(3), 18,
         19(3) and Annexure 1 to Custom Tariff (Identification,           D
 ....   Assessment and Collection of Anti-Dumping on Dumped
        Articles and For Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995; and
        whether the interpretation placed upon Rule 7 of Rules is
        correct in so far as it diminishes the Rule of confidentiality
        statutorily provided for under Rule 7 - Referred to larger
                                                                          E
        Bench - Customs Tariff Act, 1975.

              CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Special Leave
        Petition (C) No 1795 of 2009.

             From the final Judgment and Order dated 1.11.2007 of the     F
        High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Writ Petition (C) No, 16893
        of 2006.

             Gopal Subramaniam, A.S.G, Brijender Chahar, Rashmi
        Malhotra. Jyoti Chahar, D.S. Mahra and Anil Katiyar for the
        Petitioners.                                                      G

            The Judgement of the Court was delivered by

            DR. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.1. Challenge in this petition is to
                                     653                                  H
    654          SUPREME COURT REPORTS               [2009] 1 S.C.R.


A the order passed by the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court
  allowing the writ petition filed by the respondent. The issue
  before the High Court was with regard to interpretation of Anti
  Dumping provisions of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (in short
  the 'Act') and the Custom Tariff (Identification, Assessment and
B Collection of Anti-Dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and For
  Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as
  the 'Rules').

          2. The writ petition was allowed primarily relying on
C Reliance Industries Ltd. v. Designated Authority and Ors.
    (2006 (10) SCC 368) and the interpretation placed on Section
    9A(5) of the Act in the matter and scope of Section 9A(5) of
    the Act as considered by this Court in Rishiroop Polymers (P)
    Ltd. v. Designated Authority and Ors. (2006 (4) SCC 303).

D       3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that
    the issues are of complex nature and will have wide
    ramifications on domestic and international business and
    commerce.

E       4. We are of the view that the view expressed in Reliance
    Industries case (supra) needs a fresh look and following
    questions need to be dealt with by a Larger Bench:

          (1)   Whether the interpretation that Anti Dumping Duty
                is country specific rather than exporter specific in
F               consonance with the provision of Rules 12, 15,
                17(3), 18, 19(3) and Annexure 1 to the Rules.

          (2)   Whether the interpretation placed upon Rule 7 of the
                Ru 1es is correct in so far as it diminishes the Rule
G               of confidentiality statutorily provided for under Rule
                7.

         5. The records be placed before the Hon'ble the Chief
    Justice of India for necessary orders.

H D.G.                             Matter referred to larger Bench.

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Try "anti‑dumping duty"Sign in to search