KOTHARI FILAMENTS Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Kolkata Bench of this Tribunal by order dated 17 -5 -2005 after hearing both the sides, directed the Registry to forward the matter to the Bench competent to hear anti -dumping duty matters. It is recorded in the order that the learned advocate for the appellant has submitted that the Bench had no jurisdiction to hear the appeal as it was a case of anti -dumping under Section 9C of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 which could be heard by the Special Bench. Since the matter was sent back to the Registry for being placed before the Bench competent to hear such matters, this matter has come up before us on judicial side to decide whether an appeal of this nature is contemplated under Section 9C of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, or that it should be heard as an appeal under the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962 by virtue of Section 9A(8) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, which provides that the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962 and the rules and regulations made thereunder, relating to non -levy, short levy, refunds and appeals shall, as far as may be, apply to anti -dumping duty chargeable under Section 9A as they apply in relation to the duties leviable under that Act.

(2.) THIS appeal has been filed against the order dated 19 -11 -2004 of the Commissioner (Appeals) disposing of the appeal which was preferred against the assessment order passed by the Deputy Commissioner on 2 -7 -2004.

(3.) IT is clear from the record that this is not an appeal under Section 9C of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 since no order of determination regarding existence, degree and effect of dumping in relation to import of any article is challenged in the appeal. An appeal under Section 9C would lie against an order of determination or review thereof regarding existence, degree and effect of any subsidy or dumping in relation to import of any article. The learned Counsel states before us that this is not an appeal challenging existence, degree or effect of dumping. He makes it clear that the appellant does not want, directly or indirectly, to challenge the imposition of the anti -dumping duty under the Final Findings of the designated authority or under the Notification issued by the Central Government imposing such duty. He submitted that due to some misunderstanding, the order records as if the learned Counsel had objected to the jurisdiction on the ground that the appeal would lie under Section 9C of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975.