spacer.gifsto247.gifspacer.gif Date of filing of ST-3 returns extended - returns for April to June, 2012 to be filed by 25th November, 2012 only.spacer.gifsto247.gifspacer.gif BREAKING NEWS : Service Tax half yearly ST-3 return to cover period from April, 2012 to June, 2012 only (ST Notification 47/2012)spacer.gifsto247.gifspacer.gif All Service Tax assessees are informed that they will not be able to file ST 3 returns in ACES now and have to wait until the modified version of ST 3 Form which is made available in a few weeks on aces.spacer.gifsto247.gifspacer.gif Penalty: Section 76: No delay in depositing service tax with Revenue: Penalty not imposable.spacer.gifsto247.gifspacer.gif Refund: Export of Services: Terminal Handling Charges also a port service.spacer.gifsto247.gifspacer.gif Penalty: Once the entire demand is set aside by Commissioner (A) and that order is not challenged by the department: Commissioner cannot impose penalty under Section 76 by passing a Review Order: Penalty set aside.spacer.gifsto247.gifspacer.gif Cargo Handling Service: The activity of transportation and stacking within the stockyard premises not covered: Demand set aside.spacer.gifsto247.gifspacer.gif Finance Act, 2012spacer.gifsto247.gifspacer.gifDefinitions introduced in Section 65C, Section 66B (Charge of Service Tax), Section 66C (Determination of Place of Provision of Service), Section 66D (Negative List), Section 66E (Declared Services), Section 66F (Bundled Services), Amendment to Section 67 (omitting of Explanation, Amendment to Section 68 (sharing of taxes between provider and receiver) would operate from 01.07.2012.spacer.gifsto247.gifspacer.gifThe notifications amending Cenvat Credit Rules, Valuation Rules, Service Tax Rules, Works Contract Composition Scheme have not been issued.spacer.gifsto247.gifspacer.gifSection 65, 65A, 66 & 66A would cease to operate from 01.06.2012spacer.gifsto247.gifspacer.gifThe clause (A), (B), (D) & (E) of Section 143 of the Finance Act,2012 will come into force from 01.06.2012 as per Notification No.18/2012 dated 01.06.2012spacer.gifsto247.gifspacer.gifNegative list based service tax will come into force from 1st july 2012spacer.gifsto247.gifspacer.gifFinance Bill, 2012; gets enacted on May 28, 2012 : Finance Act (No 23 of 2012)spacer.gifsto247.gifspacer.gif Aam aadmi becomes khaas aadmi spacer.gifsto247.gifspacer.gifCentral Excise and Service Tax returns combined into a one page form "EST-1"spacer.gifsto247.gifspacer.gifCentral Excise rates increased from 10 % to 12%spacer.gifsto247.gifspacer.gifService Tax Rate to be 12%  spacer.gifsto247.gifspacer.gif Date of filing of ST-3 returns extended - returns for April to June, 2012 to be filed by 25th November, 2012 only.spacer.gifsto247.gifspacer.gif BREAKING NEWS : Service Tax half yearly ST-3 return to cover period from April, 2012 to June, 2012 only (ST Notification 47/2012)spacer.gifsto247.gifspacer.gif All Service Tax assessees are informed that they will not be able to file ST 3 returns in ACES now and have to wait until the modified version of ST 3 Form which is made available in a few weeks on aces.spacer.gifsto247.gifspacer.gif Penalty: Section 76: No delay in depositing service tax with Revenue: Penalty not imposable.spacer.gifsto247.gifspacer.gif Refund: Export of Services: Terminal Handling Charges also a port service.spacer.gifsto247.gifspacer.gif Penalty: Once the entire demand is set aside by Commissioner (A) and that order is not challenged by the department: Commissioner cannot impose penalty under Section 76 by passing a Review Order: Penalty set aside.spacer.gifsto247.gifspacer.gif Cargo Handling Service: The activity of transportation and stacking within the stockyard premises not covered: Demand set aside.spacer.gifsto247.gifspacer.gif Finance Act, 2012spacer.gifsto247.gifspacer.gifDefinitions introduced in Section 65C, Section 66B (Charge of Service Tax), Section 66C (Determination of Place of Provision of Service), Section 66D (Negative List), Section 66E (Declared Services), Section 66F (Bundled Services), Amendment to Section 67 (omitting of Explanation, Amendment to Section 68 (sharing of taxes between provider and receiver) would operate from 01.07.2012.spacer.gifsto247.gifspacer.gifThe notifications amending Cenvat Credit Rules, Valuation Rules, Service Tax Rules, Works Contract Composition Scheme have not been issued.spacer.gifsto247.gifspacer.gifSection 65, 65A, 66 & 66A would cease to operate from 01.06.2012spacer.gifsto247.gifspacer.gifThe clause (A), (B), (D) & (E) of Section 143 of the Finance Act,2012 will come into force from 01.06.2012 as per Notification No.18/2012 dated 01.06.2012spacer.gifsto247.gifspacer.gifNegative list based service tax will come into force from 1st july 2012spacer.gifsto247.gifspacer.gifFinance Bill, 2012; gets enacted on May 28, 2012 : Finance Act (No 23 of 2012)spacer.gifsto247.gifspacer.gif Aam aadmi becomes khaas aadmi spacer.gifsto247.gifspacer.gifCentral Excise and Service Tax returns combined into a one page form "EST-1"spacer.gifsto247.gifspacer.gifCentral Excise rates increased from 10 % to 12%spacer.gifsto247.gifspacer.gifService Tax Rate to be 12%
Share

 

Review of Anti-Dumping Duty

The anti dumping duty shall remain in force for a period of five years from the date of imposition of duty. However, such duty can be reviewed by the Designated Authority anytime before the expiry of the said period. Such a review can be done suo moto or on the basis of a request received from an interested party in view of the changed circumstances. The review may result in the withdrawal of the duty or in the variation of the duty level depending upon the new circumstances. Generally speaking, an interested party can file a request for review only after a year from the imposition of duty. A review shall follow the same procedure as prescribed for investigation of a fresh case to the extent applicable.

The Designated Authority is also required to carry out a review for determining margins of dumping for any new exporter or producer from a country that is subject to anti-dumping, provided that these exporters or producers are new and are not related to any of the exporters or producers who are subject to anti-dumping duty on the product.

If the Central Government, in a review, is of the opinion that the cessation of such duty is likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury, it may, from time to time, extend the period of such imposition for a further period of five years and such further period shall commence from the date of order of such extension. Where a review initiated before the expiry of the aforesaid period of five years has not come to a conclusion before such expiry, the anti-dumping duty may continue to remain in force pending the outcome of such a review for a further period not exceeding one year.

As per Rule 23 of the Anti Dumping Rules, 1995 any anti-dumping duty imposed under the provision of section 9A of the Act, shall remain in force, so long as and to the extent necessary, to counteract dumping, which is causing injury. This provision empowers the Designated Authority to review the need for the continued imposition of any anti-dumping duty, where warranted, on its own initiative or upon request by any interested party who submits positive information substantiating the need for such review. Such review can be undertaken only if a reasonable period of time has elapsed since the imposition of the definitive anti-dumping duty. Upon such review, the Designated Authority shall recommend to the Central Government for its withdrawal, where it comes to a conclusion that the injury to the domestic industry is not likely to continue or recur, if the said anti-dumping duty is removed or varied and is therefore no longer warranted. Any review initiated needs to be concluded within a period not exceeding twelve months from the date of initiation of such review.

Any definitive antidumping duty levied under the Act, shall be effective for a period not exceeding five years from the date of its imposition, unless the Designated Authority comes to a conclusion, on a review initiated before that period on its own initiative or upon a duly substantiated request made by or on behalf of the domestic industry within a reasonable period of time prior to the expiry of that period, that the expiry of the said anti-dumping duty is likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury to the domestic industry.

Mid-term Review

Mid-term Review is undertaken by the Designated Authority any time during the period of 5 years when the levy Anti-Dumping duty is in force.

Sunset Review

Sunset Review is undertaken by the Designated Authority before the expiry of the period of 5 years from the date of imposition of Anti-Dumping duty to decide the continuation or other wise of the Anti-dumping duty beyond the stipulated period of five years. The purpose of a Sunset review is to investigate whether the cessation of anti-dumping duty is like to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury. The Sunset review has to address the following two aspects:

a) The existence of current injurious dumping may be a strong indicator that continuation is likely but if there are reasons to take a contrary view then exporters should provide evidence to support such a claim.

b) The term “recurrence” implies a situation where injurious dumping is no longer taking place. As such, the investigation will concentrate on establishing whether the cessation of existing measures is likely to lead to resumption of dumped and injurious exports.

In Trade Notice No. 1/2008 dated 10.03.2008 the Ministry of Commerce & Industry issued laid down the procedure for initiating a Sunset Review. As per this Trade Notice the following procedure needs to be followed:-

i. Alert letter to the domestic industry (DI) will be issued soon after the 4th year of anti-dumping measures. The DI must inform within 40 days of the dispatch of the letter whether they intend to file an application seeking extension of anti-dumping measures. If so, an application justifying the need to continue the Anti-dumping measures in force should be received in the Directorate before six months of the date of expiry of Anti Dumping (AD) measures.

ii. The Designated Authority (DA) shall initiate SSR either on the basis of domestic industry’s application or on suo- moto basis after expiry of the time limits provided under para (i) above and in the latter case issue a questionnaire to the DI with advice to respond to the same within next 40 days substantiating the need for continued imposition of the AD measures. After its receipt, other interested parties would be advised to offer their comments within 40 days from the date of issuance of the letter regarding the need to continue or otherwise the AD measures.

iii. If the DA is satisfied after receipt of information from various parties that there is sufficient ground for continuation of the AD measures, with or without modification, it may recommend so to the Central Government. The investigation would , however, be closed, if it is found that there is insufficient ground for continuation of the measures in force.

In the Trade Notice No. 1/2010 dated 17.05.2010 the Ministry of Commerce & Industry clarified that an application for initiation of Mid-term review of Anti-Dumping Duty in force can be made to the Designated Authority in the Ministry of Commerce & Industry, Udyog Bhawan, New Delhi 110011 by an interested party including exporters, importers, domestic producers, trade representative bodies, firms or institutions, which are representative of domestic industry. The applicant should submit positive information substantiating the need for such review. Application for an interim/Mid-term review may be accepted by the Designated Authority provided that a reasonable period of time, i.e. at least one year, has elapsed since the imposition of the definitive anti dumping duty by the Central Government. The Designated Authority may review the need for the continued imposition of the duty, where warranted on its own initiative.

On the issue of levy of Anti-dumping duty after the period of five years from date of imposition, the Central Board of Excise & Customs vide Circular No. 28/2011-Cus dated 08.07.2011 has clarified that by virtue of Section 9A (2) of the Customs tariff Act, 1975, the anti dumping levy notified in pursuance of final findings is effective from the date of imposition of provisional duty and therefore the period of five years is to be computed from such date. Collection beyond that period is permissible only when the said levy is extended by a notification either for further period of five years (in pursuance of the final findings of the Designated Authority in a Sun Set Review) or for one year (during the pendency of Sun Set Review). Thus, a definitive/final anti-dumping duty can be collected beyond the stipulated period only when a notification extending the levy has been issued, before the expiry of the parent notification. Unless such revalidation or extension is carried out by a fresh notification, the collection of final anti-dumping duty should cease on the completion of five years as mentioned above. Where the findings in a review are notified after the lapse of the parent notification, the notification in such cases would be effective prospectively from the date of issue of such notification.

Information to be provided for Sunset Review

1. Does the applicant firm or any related firm produce, have the capability to produce, or have any plans to produce PUC in India or other countries?

2. Does the applicant firm or any related firm export or have any plans to export PUC to India?

3. Has the applicant firm experienced any plant openings, relocations, expansions, acquisitions, consolidations, closures or prolonged shutdowns because of strikes or equipment failure; curtailment of production because of shortage of materials; or any other change in the character of your operations or organization relating to the production of PUC since the date on which the antidumping duty under review was levied? If yes, supply details as to the time, nature, and significance of such changes.

4. Does the applicant firm anticipate any changes in the character of your operations or organizations (as noted above) relating to the production of PUC in the future? If yes, then supply details as to the time, nature and significance of such changes and provide underlying assumptions, along with relevant portions of business plans or other supporting documentation that address this issue. Include in your response a specific projection of your firm’s capacity to produce PUC.

a) Does the applicant firm have any plans to add, expand, curtail or shut down production capacity and/or production of PUC in the future? If yes, describe those plans, including planned dates and capacity/ production, quantities involved, and the reason(s) for such change(s). If the plans are to add or expand capacity or production, List (in descending order of importance) the markets (countries) to which such additional capacity or production would be directed. Provide relevant portions of business plans or other supporting documentation that addresses this issue.

5. Describe the production technology used in the production of PUC and identify major production inputs. Also explain any significant changes in production technology since the year the antidumping duty under review was levied.

6. Has the applicant firm, since the year the antidumping duty under review became effective, produced; or does your firm anticipate producing in the future, other products on the same equipment or machinery and related work force used in the production of PUC? If yes, provide yearly data on your firm’s combined production capacity and production of these products and PUC in the periods indicated.

7. What percentage of the applicant firm’s total sales in its most recent financial year was represented by sales of PUC?

8. Has the applicant firm maintained any inventories of PUC in India?

(a) Are the applicant firm’s exports of PUC subject to tariff or non-tariff barriers to trade (for example, antidumping or countervailing duty findings or remedies, tariffs, quotas, or regulatory barriers) in any countries other than India?

(b) Are the applicant firm’s exports of PUC subject to current investigations in any countries other than India that might result in tariff or non-tariff barriers to trade?

9. Identify export markets (other than India) that the applicant have developed or where the applicant have increased sales of PUC as a result of the antidumping duty order on PUC from India. Please identify and specify.

10. Describe the significance of the existing antidumping duty order covering imports of PUC in terms of its effect on the applicant firm’s production capacity, production, home market shipments, exports to India and other markets, and inventories. the applicant may compare your firm’s operations before and after the imposition of the anti-dumping order.

11. Would the applicant firm anticipate any changes in the production capacity, production, home market shipments, exports to India and other markets, or inventories relating to the production of PUC in the future if the antidumping duty order on PUC from COUNTRY were to be revoked? Supply details as to the time, nature, and significance of such changes and provide underlying assumptions, along with relevant portions of business plans or other supporting documentation, for any trends or projections.

12. Please furnish data on installed capacity, production, shipments, and inventories of PUC produced by the applicant firm since last five years.

13. To what extent has changes in the prices of raw materials affected the applicant firm’s selling prices for PUC since last five years? Also discuss any anticipated changes in the applicant raw material costs in the future, identify the time period (s) involved and the factor(s) that you believe would be responsible for such changes. Provide any underlying assumptions, along with relevant portions of business plans or other supporting documentation, that address this issue.

14. What percentage of the applicant firm’s sales of PUC to Indian customers are on a contract (per cent) vs. spot sales (percent) basis? If the applicant sell on a contract basis, please answer the following questions with respect to provisions of a typical contract.

(a) What is the average duration of a contract?

(b) How frequently are contracts renegotiated?

(c) Does the contract fix quantity, price or both?

(d) Does the contract have a meet or release provision?

(e) What are the standard quantity requirements, if any?

(f) What is the price premium for sub-minimum shipments?

15. Have individual Indian producers, importers, purchasers, or foreign producers/exporters of PUC influenced market price of PUC in India since the year the antidumping duty under review became effective?

16. Is there any supply factor(s) (e.g. changes in availability or prices or raw materials, energy, or labour; transportation conditions; production capacity and/or methods of production; technology; export markets; or alternative production opportunities) that affected the availability of PUC in the Indian market since the year the antidumping duty under review became effective? If so, please identify the same and explain the time period(s) of any such changes, the factor(s) involved, and the impact such had on the applicant firm’s shipment volumes and prices.

17. Please discuss any anticipated changes in the supply factors noted above that may affect the availability of PUC in the Indian market in the future, identifying the time period(s) involved and the factor(s) that you believe would be responsible for such changes. Provide any underlying assumptions, along with relevant portions of business plans or other supporting documentation, that address this issue.

18. Is the PUC range, PUC mix, or marketing of PUC in the applicant firm’s home market significantly different from the PUC range, PUC mix, or marketing of PUC for export to India or to third country markets? Have there been any significant changes in the PUC range, PUC mix or marketing of PUC in the applicant firm’s home market, for exports to India, or for exports to third country markets since the year the antidumping duty order under review became effective?

19. Please discuss any anticipated changes in terms of the PUC range, PUC mix, or marketing of PUC in your home market, for export to India, or for export to third country markets in the future, identifying the time period(s) involved and the factor(s) that the applicant firm believe would be responsible for such changes. Provide any underlying assumptions, along with relevant portions of business plans or other supporting documentation, that address this issue.

20. What other Products may be substitutes for PUC, and how frequently does such substitution occur?

21. Have there been any changes in the number or types of Products that can be substituted for PUC since the year the antidumping duty order under review became effective?

22. Please discuss any anticipated changes in terms of the substitutability of other Products for PUC in the future, identifying the time period(s) involved and the factor(s) that you believe would be responsible for such changes. Provide any underlying assumptions, along with relevant portions of business plans or other supporting documentation, that address this issue.

23. Discuss any changes in the end uses of PUC since the year the antidumping duty order under review became effective by market and time period.

24. Please provide transaction wise details of exports of PUC to third country markets, i.e., markets other than India.

25. What is the current level of production and demand of the subject goods in your country? Please provide the information in the table given below:

Financial years prior to POI Particulars 3rd Year 2nd year 1st year POI Estimate Next 1st year Estimate Next 2nd year
Country’s production
Your Co’s
             
 
              
www.customsindiaonline.com
 
 
                               
 
Copyright 2010, AntiDumpingLaws.com. All rights reserved.
This is a Beta Version.