Sanjay Kacheria Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Mumbai)
CESTAT Mumbai held that demand of anti-dumping duty in terms of notification no. 15/2014-CUS(ABD) cannot be sustained since no evidences established that the goods were either manufactured or supplied from China or were routed through Taiwan after being supplied from China.
Facts- The Appellant is manufacturer of alloy wheels and clears manufactured goods for home consumption as well as exports. The appellant also imports semi-finished aluminum alloy wheels of different sizes and designs. On 11.04.2014 through notification no. 15/2014-CUS(ABD) anti-dumping duty of USD 2.15 per KG was imposed on aluminum alloy wheels imported from China on provisional basis.
Post investigation, it was alleged that appellant had imported aluminum alloy wheels from China by routing them through Taiwan with an intention to evade payment of anti-dumping duty at the rate of USD 2.15 per KG. Therefore, by invoking extended period of limitation under Sub-section (4) of Section 28 of Customs Act, 1962 through the said show cause notice a demand of anti-dumping duty amounting to Rs. 4,62,19,999/- (around Rs. 4.6 Crores) was raised.
The Original Authority through impugned Order-In-Original dated 04.11.2019 confirmed that the entire demand of anti-dumping duty alongwith interest and equivalent penalty. Aggrieved by the said order, appellant is before this Tribunal.
