HC : Dismisses challenge to Designated Authority's prima facie findings to initiate anti-dumping investigation

HC upholds initiation of investigation by Designated Authority (DA) in relation to imposition of anti-dumping duty on import of ‘non-dyed polyester staple fiber’, pursuant to application of domestic producer under Rule 5(1) of Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of Anti-dumping duty on dumped articles and for determination of Injury) Rules, 1995 (Rules); Notes assessee’s contention that DA cannot initiate an investigation pursuant to an application filed by persons deemed to be related to exporters / importers, in terms of clauses (a) and (b) of Explanation to Rule 2(b); Notes that Rule 2(b) defines “domestic industry” to mean domestic producers as a whole engaged in manufacture of like article and any activity connected therewith or those whose collective output constitutes a major proportion of total domestic production, but excludes producers related to exporters / importers of alleged dumped article; Thus, DA is required to determine whether complaint is by any domestic industry related to exporters / importers based on which he would be in a position to determine the three factors relevant to injury contained under Rule 12(1) viz. export price, normal value and margin of dumping, and record a preliminary finding; Finding force in Revenue contention that DA had only recorded a prima facie view, HC holds that assessee’s interpretation that DA has come to a conclusion that domestic producer is related to Malaysian producer and hence not part of eligible domestic industry, is incorrect and accordingly, dismisses assessee’s writ petition with a direction to DA to hear all the interested parties  : Madras HC