Judgment

Bhan, J.—The present appeals have been filed with the leave of the Court against the final order No. 21/2000-AD and Corrigendum Miscellaneous Order No.1/2000-AD in C/322/99-AD with C/Stay/1383/99-AD dated 2nd February, 2000 and 3rd February, 2000 passed by the Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (for short "the Tribunal"). By the order dated 2nd of February, 2000, the Tribunal rejected the appeals filed by the appellant except to the extent that it held that variable anti-dumping duty greater than dumping margin could not be imposed. The order dated 3rd of February, 2000 is merely a Corrigendum correcting the clerical mistake in the order No. 21/2000-AD dated 2nd February, 2000.

2. The appellant - Rishiroop Polymers Private Limited is the authorised exclusive Intending Agents and Representatives of Messrs Korea Kumho Petrochemicals Company Limited (KKPC), Republic of Korea for the sale of their products, namely, Styrene Butadiene Rubber (SBR) and other products. The appellant has been authorised by KKPC under an authorization dated 6th May, 1998 to appear and plead on their behalf. The present appeals have been filed by the appellant in its capacity as an interested/aggrieved party and as also the representatives of KKPC.

3. Synthetics and Chemicals Limited (respondent no. 3 herein) filed an Anti Dumping Petition on 9th of September, 1997 before the Designated Authority appointed under the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (for short "the Tariff Act") against the imports of SBR originating in or exported from Japan, Korea, Turkey, Taiwan, USA, Germany and France. It was alleged therein that the import of SBR from the subject countries was causing injury to the domestic industry manufacturing SBR in India. Respondent No. 3 furnished details regarding the normal value of the products in the subject countries and the margin of dumping. It was alleged that as a result of the dumped imports of SBR the domestic industry, namely, Respondent No. 3, was incurring heavy losses on its SBR activity. It was further alleged that in spite of the cost of production in the subject countries, exporters from there were reducing their export price consistently which has forced the domestic industry to reduce its selling price of various grades of SBR. That the selling price realised by the domestic industry is so low that it is unable to recover even the cost of production. That the dumped materials had retarded the growth of domestic industry in spite of installation of new plant and machinery. The expansion programme could not be commissioned as the dumped imports threatened to cause injury for future also due to sufficient freely disposable production capacity in the subject countries.

4. The Designated Authority, on the basis of the application filed by Respondent No.3, initiated anti-dumping investigation against the subject countries concerning imports of SBR classified under custom sub-heading 4002.19 of Schedule I of the Tariff Act, originating in or exported from the subject countries. The period of investigation was fixed by the Designated Authority for 17 months, i.e., from 1st April, 1996 to 31st August, 1997.

5. The Designated Authority on the basis of the material collected, published its preliminary findings as per Notification dated 21st January, 1999. By the said Notification anti-dumping duties were imposed on different grades of SBR originating from the subject countries. The Designated Authority further invited details and comments from all interested parties including the exporters from the subject countries. The Designated Authority submitted its final findings which were accepted by the Government of India. Ministry of Commerce and accordingly issued a Notification of final findings. By the said final findings, the authority had concluded that :

(a) SBR had been exported from Japan, Korea R.P., Turkey, Taiwan, USA, Germany and France to India below its normal value resulting in dumping of SBR;

(b) The do