VIKAS TRADING COMPANY Vs. DESIGNATED AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsels appearing for the petitioners, as well as the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the respondents. The writ petition, in W.P. No. 25304 of 2012, has been filed to call for and quash the Disclosure Statement of the first respondent Designated Authority, dated 6.9.2012, issued under the Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of Anti-Dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995, hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules', read with Section 9-A and 9-B of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', in respect of the goods classified as Plain Gypsum Plaster Boards (hereinafter referred to as the 'subject goods'), originating in or exported from China PR, Indonesia, Thailand and United Arab Emirates and consequently, to forbear the first respondent from proceeding further, based on the impugned Disclosure Statement, dated 6.9.2012, and to further direct the first respondent to reconsider the submissions made by the petitioner, in accordance with law and to issue a fresh Disclosure Statement, in terms of Rule 16 of the said Rules.

(2.) It has been stated that the petitioner is engaged in the business of Gypsum Plaster Boards of various dimensions. The petitioner has been importing the subject goods at the inland container depot located, at Chennai. The subject goods have to be cleared from the bonded customs warehouse, at Chennai, by filing the Bills of entry, as per the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962, on payment of the Anti-Dumping duties, if any, as recommended by the first respondent Designated Authority.

(3.) It has also been stated that the assessment of duties upon the clearance of the subject goods, imported by the petitioner, has been taking place, at Chennai. It has also been stated that the petitioner is having its registered office and it has been carrying on its business, within the jurisdiction of this Court. In fact, the petitioner is already paying the provisional Anti-Dumping Duties, at Chennai, subject to the final result of the proceedings in the matter. Refund of the duties paid by the petitioner, if any, shall be made, at Chennai. As such, the cause of action for the filing of the present writ petitions has arisen, within the territorial jurisdiction of this Court. Therefore, this Court may be pleased to hear and decide the present writ petitions, on merits and in accordance with law.