LexSTEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD. versus DESIGNATED AUTHORITY, DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF ANTI-DUMPING & ALLIED DUTIES & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A . \. \ [2017] 6 S.C.R. 598 STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LTD. v. DESIGNATED AUTHORITY, DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF ANTI-DUMPING & ALLIED DUTIES & ORS. B (Civil Appeal No. 241 of20l7) APRIL 17, 2017 [RANJAN GOGOi AND ASHOK BHUSHAN, JJ.] Customs Act, 1962: C s. J 30E(b) - Appellate jurisdiction under, of Supreme Court - Conditions to be satisfied for exercise of - Appellant, steel manufacturer used graphite electrodes which it imported from China - Union of India on the basis of final report of Designated Authority acting under the 1995 Rules, issued a notification imposing D anti-dumping duty on import of graphite electrodes from specific importers operating within China - Notification challenged by appellant before appellate tribunal (CESTAT) - Tribunal dismissed the challenge - On appeal, held: None of the parameters on the basis of which an appeal is to be admitted by Supreme Court u/ s. J 30E(b) are satisfied in the present case - Findings recorded by E the appellate tribunal are findings of fact arrived at, on due consideration of all relevant materials on record - Further, as per · ratio of decision of Supreme Court in Swastic Woollen case, no occasion to have a re-look into the matter in exercise of Supreme Court's appellate jurisdiction u/s.J 30E(b) - Appeal not admitted - F Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of Anti- Dumpting Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995. G H s.J 30E(b) - Appellate power under. of Supreme Court - Limitation upon - If any Held: Section 130E(b) provides for a direct appeal to Supreme Court against an order of appellate tribunal, on a question involving government revenue - The order that would be under appeal may go beyond the inter se dispute between the parties and would have effect upon a large number of assesses and thus surely will be one of generql/public importance - Therefore .. the question raised or arising may require interpretation of the 598 STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA v. DESIGNATED AUTf!:ORITY, 599 DIRECTORATE GEN. OF ANTI-DUMPING provisions of the Constitution - It is only such questions of A importance, alone, that are required to be decided by Supreme Court - This is the limitation that is inbuilt in s. J 30E(b), though it omits to specifically mention any such limitation, which would also be consistent with the role and jurisdiction of Supreme Court as envisaged under the Constitution. s.130E(a) and 130E(b) -Appellate power under, of Supreme Court - If any difference - Held: Appellate power of Supreme Court u/s.130E(b) against the order of appellate tribunal should not be construed in a manner different from contours of appellate power uls.130E(a) against the order of High Court. s. l 30F - Whether the provisions of s. J 30F would be applicable to appeals filed before Supreme Court- against orders B c of the High Court as well as against orders of the appellate tribunal- Held: The language used by legislature in s.l 30F prescribing the con(f)urs of the jurisdiction of Supreme Court while hearing appeals either against the decision of High Court in its appellate or reference D jurisdiction or while hearing an appeal against the order of appellate tribunal is same - Section J 30F, would therefore be applicable to both sets of appeals filed before Supreme Court. Dismissing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1.1 Before admitting an appeal under Section 130E(b) of the Customs Act, 1962 (the Act) the following conditions must be satisfied: · .(i) The question raised or arising must have a direct and/or proximate nexus to the question of determination of the applicable rate of duty or to the determination of the value of the goods for the purposes of assessment of duty. This is a sine qua non for the admission of the appeal before this Court under Section 130E(b) of the Act. E F (ii) The question ra~sed must involve a substantial question . G oflaw which has not been answered or, on which, there is a conflict of decisions necessitating a resolution. (iii) If the tribunal, on consideration of the material and relevant facts, had arrived at a conclusion which is a possible H 600 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2017] 6 S.C.R. A conclusion, the same must be allowed to rest even if this Court is inclined to take another view of the matter. B c D E F (iv) The tribunal had acted in gross violation of the procedure or principles of natural justice occasioning a fa
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.