IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11975 of 2023 =======================================================

AIA ENGINEERING LTD.

Versus UNION OF INDIA =======================================================

Appearance:

GARGI R VYAS(7983) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1,2 for the Respondent(s) No. 1,2 =======================================================

CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIPUL M. PANCHOLI and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN M. DESAI Date : 13/07/2023 ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIPUL M. PANCHOLI)

01. Draft amendment is allowed. To be carried out forthwith.

02. Heard learned Senior Counsel, Mr. Mihir Joshi assisted by learned advocate, Mr. Gargi Vyas with learned advocate, Mr. Rajesh Sharma for the petitioners and learned Additional Solicitor General, Mr. Devang Vyas assisted by learned Standing Counsel, Mr. Priyank Lodha for the respondents, who appears on advance copy being served.

03. Learned Counsel has referred to the averment made in the memo of petition and, thereafter, submitted that on 11.06.2018, the respondent no.2 conducted the first sunset review in terms of Section 9A(5) read with Rule 23(1B) of the Customs Tariff Act and issued final finding, whereby the respondent no.2 recommended to extend the imposition of anti- dumping duties, which was already in place. It is submitted that based on the said recommendation made by the respondent no.2, the respondent no.1 extended the imposition of anti-dumping duties for a period of five years vide Notification dated 13.07.2018. It is submitted that thereafter, the respondent no.2 again initiated second sunset review investigation on the imports of ‘Grinding Media Balls’ (excluding Forged Grinding Media Balls) from Thailand and China PR. It is submitted that thereafter, the respondent no.2 issued final finding and recommended to further extend the imposition of anti-dumping duties on the imports of ‘Grinding Media Balls’ (excluding Forged Grinding Media Balls) from Thailand by Notification dated 12.04.2023.

04. At this stage, learned Counsel has placed reliance upon the provision contained in Section 9A(5) of the Act and submitted that power under second proviso can be exercised under certain circumstances, whereby the power is given to the concerned respondent to extend duration for a period not exceeding one year. It is submitted that the respondent no.1 has not concluded the review and imposition of anti-dumping duties as per the recommendation vide Notification dated 13.07.2018 will expire on 12.07.2023 at midnight and, hence, the petitioner preferred present petition.

05. At this stage, learned Counsel submitted that in similar type of matter being Special Civil Application No.1399/2018 (copy of said order is produced on record), this Court, while issuing notice on 07.02.2018, has granted relief in favour of the concerned petitioner. Learned Counsel has referred to Paragraph Nos.7 & 8 of the said order, which reads as under, “7. We are of the view that as the notice is being issued for final disposal, the respondent nos.3 and 4 shall ensure that goods that may be given clearance are accounted for and there should be information to the importer that a litigation is pending in form of this petition and as the Court has issued notice, the clearance in absence of any protection would be viewed in proper prospective in light of the contention raised in this petition and subject to result of this petition.

8. This order is passed in absence of other side, it would be open to the other side to approach the Court even prior to the returnable date and it will be also open to anyone including importer and exporter of the goods in question to approach the Court in seeking modification and/or vacation of the order.”

06. Learned Counsel further submitted that recently, the Delhi High Court has passed an order in W.P (C) No.5185/2022 and allied matters (copy of said order is produced on record), whereby interim relief is granted in favour o