RISHIROOP POLYMERS PVT LTD Vs. DESIGNATED AUTHORITY AND ADDL SECRETARY
LAWS(SC)-2006-3-90
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Decided on March 23,2006

RISHIROOP POLYMERS PVT. LTD.,KOREA KUMHO PETROCHEMICALS,PUNIT RESINS LTD.,KOREA KUMHO PETROCHEMICALS CO. LTD. Appellant
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA,DESIGNATED AUTHORITY AND ADDL. SECRETARY,MINISTRY OF FINANCE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) The present appeals have been filed with the leave of the Court against the final order No. 21/2000-AD and Corrigendum Miscellaneous Order No. 1/2000-AD in C/322/99-AD with C/Stay/1383/99-AD dated 2.02.2000 and 3.02.2000 passed by the Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (for short "the Tribunal"). By the order dated 2.02.2000, the Tribunal rejected the appeals filed by the appellant except to the extent that it held that variable anti-dumping duty greater than dumping margin could not be imposed. The order dated 3.02.2000 is merely a Corrigendum correcting the clerical mistake in the order No. 21/2000-AD dated 2.02.2000.
(2.) The appellant - Rishiroop Polymers Private Limited is the authorised exclusive Intending Agents and Representatives of Messrs Korea Kumho Petrochemicals Company Limited (KKPC), Republic of Korea for the sale of their products, namely, Styrene Butadiene Rubber (SBR) and other products. The appellant has been authorised by KKPC under an authorization dated 6.05.1998 to appear and plead on their behalf. The present appeals have been filed by the appellant in its capacity as an interested/aggrieved party and as also the representatives of KKPC.
(3.) Synthetics and Chemicals Limited (respondent no. 3 herein) filed an Anti Dumping Petition on 9.9.1997 before the Designated Authority appointed under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (for short "the Tariff Act") against the imports of SBR originating in or exported from Japan, Korea, Turkey, Taiwan, USA, Germany and France. It was alleged therein that the import of SBR from the subject countries was causing injury to the domestic industry manufacturing SBR in India. Respondent No. 3 furnished details regarding the normal value of the products in the subject countries and the margin of dumping. It was alleged that as a result of the dumped imports of SBR the domestic industry, namely, Respondent No. 3, was incurring heavy losses on its SBR activity. It was further alleged that in spite of the cost of production in the subject countries, exporters from there were reducing their export price consistently which has forced the domestic industry to reduce its selling price of various grades of SBR. That the selling price realised by the domestic industry is so low that it is unable to recover even the cost of production. That the dumped materials had retarded the growth of domestic industry in spite of installation of new plant and machinery. The expansion programme could not be commissioned as the dumped imports threatened to cause injury for future also due to sufficient freely disposable production capacity in the subject countries.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.