On 28th December 2024, the Designated Authority, through its Final Finding, recommended the imposition of anti-dumping duty (ADD) on HIIR from Japan, Russia, Singapore, the United Kingdom and the United States of America. The Authority found that there was significant dumping from the subject countries. Such dumping was causing injury to the domestic industry. The Authority noted that since the domestic industry is not yet established in the present case, the injury being caused was in the nature of material retardation to the establishment of industry.
One of the exporters, ExxonMobil, challenged the findings through a writ petition before the High Court of Delhi. The Petitioner contended that the Authority calculated a significant dumping margin. However, the Authority did not share the detailed calculations of the margins with the Petitioner, despite such calculations being based on its own data. The Petitioner, accordingly, alleged that the manner of determination of margins was arbitrary and unreasonable.
Without going onto the merits of the case, the Court noted that the Central Government is yet to take a final decision regarding the imposition of anti-dumping duty under Rule 18 of the Anti-Dumping Rules. The Court emphasized that once the Government decides, the affected parties can seek appellate remedies before the CESTAT under Section 9C of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The counsel for the Petitioner argued that there is ambiguity regarding the appellate remedy against the final findings. However, the Court found that the challenge was premature, as no decision regarding imposition had been taken by the Central Government yet.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
