Chartered Accountant
Bookmark and Share
click here to subscribe our newsletter
 
 
Corporate News *   CBIC issues draft rules for Customs valuation *  Top Headlines: Threshold for Benami deals, green bond investors, and more *  Govt aims 1-hour clearance for goods at all ports *  Exporters Allowed To Use RoDTEP, RoSCTL Scrips To Pay Customs Duty, Transfer Them; Rules Amended *  Millions of labourers to be affected by brick producers’ strike over hike in GST, coal rates *  Inauguration of ‘kendriya GST parisar’ *  Transporter can seek Release of Conveyance alone, not Goods under GST Act: Madras HC *  GST: Quoting of DIN Mandatory for Responding to Notice, Govt Modifies Portal *  Firms can soon file claims for GST credits of ?400 cr *  CBIC issues modalities for filing transitional credit under GST. *  Mumbai: Man creates 36 fake GST firms, arrested for input tax credit fraud of Rs 23 cr *  Report to restructure Commerce Ministry under study; idea is to set up trade promotion body: Goyal *  Firms can soon file claims for GST credits of ?400 cr *  Gambling Alert! Govt May Levy Up To 28% GST; UP, Bengal Back Move *  EPFO backs raising retirement age to ease pressure on pension funds *  India Moving Up Power Scale, Set to Become Third Largest Economy By 2030 *  Airfares Get Expensive: What Changes for Flyers From Today? *  IRCTC Latest News: Passengers to Pay More For Cancelling Confirmed Rail Tickets Soon. *  IBC prevails over Customs Act, says Supreme Court. *  As GST enters sixth year, a time for evaluation and reassessment *  There’s GST on daily essentials as Centre needs money to buy MLAs: Arvind Kejriwal *  Now, GST on cancellation of confirmed train tickets, hotel bookings *  GST kitty for top States could rise 20% in FY23, says Crisil *  French customs officials seize another cargo vessel over Russia sanctions *  TradeLens builds on Asia momentum with Pakistan Customs deal *  Hike tax on tobacco, reduce affordability & increase revenue: Civil society organizations to GST council *  Bihar: ?10 crore tax evasion on tobacco products detected in raids *  Centre failed on GST, COVID; would it be anti-national? Rajan on Infosys row *  Service Tax not Chargeable on Income Tax TDS portion paid by recipient: CESTAT grants relief to TVS *  Foreign portfolio investors make net investment of Rs 7575cr in Sep so far
Subject News *  Run-up to Budget: Monetary threshold for GST offences may rise to Rs 25 cr *   GST (Tax) E-invoice Must For Businesses With Over Rs 5 Crore Annual Turnover *   Both Central GST and excise duty can be imposed on tobacco, rules Karnataka high court *   CBIC Issues Clarification On Extended Timelines For GST Compliance *   CBIC Issues Clarification On Extended Timelines For GST Compliance *  Budget 2023- 9.6 crore gas connections *  GST: Tamil Nadu Issues Instructions for Assessment and Adjudication Proceedings *  GST: CBIC Extends Last Date for filing of ITC *  GST collection in September surpasses Rs 1.4 lakh crore for straight seventh time *  Dollar smuggling case: Customs chargesheet names M Sivasankar as key conspirator. *  Hike in GST rates fuels inflation *  Assam: CBI arrests GST commissioner in Guwahati *  GST fraud worth ?824cr by 15 insurance Cos detected *  India proposes 15% customs duties on 22 items imported from UK *  Decriminalising certain offences under GST on cards *  Surge in GST collections more due to higher inflation: India Ratings *  MNRE Notifies BCD and Hike in GST Rates as ‘Change in Law’ Events But With a Condition | Mercom India *   Solar projects awarded before customs duty change allowed cost pass-through *  Rajasthan High Court Dismisses Writ Petitions Challenging Levy Of GST On Royalty *   GST revenue in September likely at Rs 1.45 lakh crore *  Govt working on decriminalising certain offences under GST, lower compounding charge *  Building an institution like GST Council takes time, trashing is easy: Sitharaman *  GST collections in Sept may touch ?1.5 lakh crore *  KTR asks Centre to withdraw GST on handlooms *  After Gameskraft, More Online Gaming Startups To Receive GST Tax Claims *  Madras HC: AAR Application Filed Under VAT Does Not Survive After GST Enactment *  Threshold for criminal offences under GST law may be raised *  Bengaluru: Gaming company faces biggest GST notice of Rs 21,000 crore *  CBIC clarifies Classification of Cranes for GST, Customs Duty *  Customs seize gold hidden in bicycle in Kerala airport  

Comments

Print   |    |  Comment

PJ/Case Law/2016-17/3441

Two issues have been addressed: 1. Mere simultaneous emergence of two products from the same process would make them joint products? 2. Can the anti-dumping duty be imposed in terms of USD instead of ₹?
Case:-DR. REDDY’S LABORATORIES LTD.VERSUS DESIGNATED AUTHORITY, DGAD, MOF
 
Citation:- 2016 (342) E.L.T. 561 (Tri. - Del.)
 
Issue:- Two issues have been addressed:
1.    Mere simultaneous emergence of two products from the same process would make them joint products?
2.    Can the anti-dumping duty be imposed in terms of USD instead of ₹?
Brief facts:- The appeal had been filed against final finding of the Designated Authority (DA), Directorate of Anti-Dumping and Allied Duties, Ministry of Commerce and Industry and Ministry of Finance. Through these proceedings, Anti-Dumping Duty (AD duty) was imposed on Methylene Chloride (subject goods) originating in or exported from E.U., USA and Korea RP.
 
Appellant’s contention:- Ld. Counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is a domestic user of the subject goods suffering AD duty. They mainly contested the imposition of AD duty on the following grounds:
 
(a)   The domestic demand was more than the full production capacity of the Domestic Industry (DI) even when operating with full capacity.
(b)  During the manufacture of subject goods other two products, namely, Chloroform and Carbon Tetrachloride (CTC) also emerged. While constructing the cost of the subject goods the DA failed to recognize the importance of CTC as a co-product. Erroneous calculation was made on cost allocation between various final products.
(c)   The AD duty should not have been imposed in terms of US $. Subsequent to the levy the dollar had strengthened resulting in much higher incidence of AD duty. Also different rates should have been fixed for loose and packed form of subject goods.
 
Respondent’s contention:- Ld. Counsel for the Domestic Industry (DI) submitted that in spite of specific request, the user industry did not provide the data regarding impact of downstream product on AD duty investigation. No detailed comments were also given regarding treatment of various products simultaneously emerging during the production of subject goods.
Ld. Counsel submitted that methylene chloride, chloroform and CTC emerged during the manufacture. Based on sales realisation the economic importance of these products are at the ratio of 50:45:5. It is apparent that CTC can never be considered as a joint or co-product for cost analysis. Further, CTC is an ozone depleting substance which is controlled for use in agrochemical industry. The said product is governed by Montreal Protocol. It was further submitted that “production value ratio” method of cost analysis has been challenged by the appellant. It was clear that the said analysis was based on sales realisation of various products emerging during the manufacture of subject goods. She further submitted that the costing of subject goods and subsequent determination of non-injurious price were all done as per the accepted standards of accounting.
Regarding imposition of duty in terms of US $ it was submitted that the same is an accepted practice and the injury margin is calculated covering POI. The subject goods are considered for injury analysis. The manner of packing is not directly relevant in such investigation.
Also, Ld. Counsel for the DA supported the findings of the DA. He submitted that after careful consideration, the DA concluded that even though the performance of DI had improved in various parameters, there had been a decline in profits, return on investment and cash flows. The DA noted that low priced imports had caused injury to the DI who could sell its product only when the same was done at the price comparable to that of import price.
 
Reasoning of judgement:- The appellants challenged the imposition of AD duty only on the ground that the costing of subject product in the DI had not been properly made. This allegation was on the ground that the CTC which was co-produced along with the subject goods should have been treated as a co-product and not as a by-product. It was noted that it was not correct to assume that all products co-produced (simultaneously emerging during process) should be considered as co-products for accounting purposes. In other words, simultaneous emergence of a product does not make it a joint product or a co-product for cost accounting purposes. For this, one has to consider the economic importance of various co-produced products. In the present case, it is clear that CTC contributes only 5% of sales realisation when compared to the other two main products which contribute 50% and 45% in sales realisation. When asked specifically as to how a product of such least economic importance can be considered as a joint product, the ld. Counsel for the appellant only reiterated that since this product is co-produced and accordingly should be considered as a co-product. Such argument was found as misleading and wrong. Ld. Counsel could not point out any legal provision or specific cost accounting standards applying to the relevant time to treat the CTC as a joint product. No merits were found in the appellant’s arguments challenging the costing of subject goods on these grounds.
 
Also, merits were found in submissions made by the ld. Counsels for the DI and DA regarding other issues raised in the appeal like fixing of AD duty in US $ term and treatment of subject goods without reference to manner of packing. The comparison during analysis had been made with like goods only and hence no merit was found in the appeal on these grounds.
Decision:- Appeal rejected.
 
Comment:- Products emerging from the same process can’t be treated as co-products merely because of the fact that they emerge from the same process. Their economic importance in terms of monetary value is an important factor to determine their classification as co-products or by-products.
Also, objection cannot be raised in context of levying duty in terms of USD instead of INR, if the same is in accordance with the accepted practice and the injury margin is calculated covering POI.
 
Prepared By:- Sharad Bang
Department News


Query

 
PRADEEP JAIN, F.C.A.

Head Office : -

Address :
"SUGYAN", H - 29, SHASTRI NAGAR, JODHPUR (RAJ.) - 342003

Phone No. :
0291 - 2439496, 0291 - 3258496

Mobile No. :
09314722236

Fax No. :0291 - 2439496


Branch Office : -

Address:
1008, 10th FLOOR, SUKH SAGAR COMPLEX,
NEAR FORTUNE LANDMARK HOTEL, USMANPURA,
ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD-380013

Phone No. :
079-32999496, 27560043

Mobile No. :
093777659496, 09377649496

E-mail :pradeep@capradeepjain.com