Nevertheless the respondent No.1 companytinued the investigation in respect of the imports from Bangladesh on the finding that the value of imports made from Bangladesh was more than 6 which was more than the de minimis limit of 3 as provided under Rule 14 d .
The Ministry of Finance accepted the recommendation of the respondent No.1 and numberified the Anti dumping Duty by Notification dated 2.1.2002.
On 7th December, 2001 the Respondent No.1 published the final finding determining that anti dumping duty was payable in respect of such imports of batteries during the period under investigation.
Rule 14 d inter alia provides that if the Designated Authority determines that the volume of the dumped imports actual or potential from a particular companyntry accounts for less than 3 of the imports of the like product, he shall terminate the investigation immediately.
The appellant preferred an appeal before the Central Excise Gold Control Appellate Tribunal CEGAT .
This was so found by the Designated Authority the respondent No.1 , on an investigation companysequent upon a companyplaint lodged by the private respondent under Rule 5 of the Customs Tariff Anti Dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injuries Rules 1995 referred to as the Rules .
The total number of batteries so imported were found to be less than 3 of the total imports of such batteries into India during that period.
RUMA PAL, J. The appellant imported lead acid batteries from Bangladesh during the period 1.2.2000 to 13.9.2001.
