Delhi High Court - Orders
M/S National Peroxide Limited vs Union Of India & Anr on 9 July, 2025
Author: Prathiba M. Singh
Bench: Prathiba M. Singh
$~21 to 24, 27
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 13930/2022
M/S NATIONAL PEROXIDE LIMITED .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Rajesh Sharma & Mr. Nikhil
Sharma, Advs.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Ms. Arunima Dwivedi, CGSC with
Mr. Sanyam Bhardwaj, Adv. for UOI.
Mr. Anurag Ojha, SSC with Mr. Dipak
Raj, Adv. for R-2.
22 WITH
+ W.P.(C) 15356/2022
M/S ARCH PHARMALABS LIMITED .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Rajesh Sharma & Mr. Nikhil
Sharma, Advs.
versus
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Ms. Anju Gupta, SPC, Mr. Bhuvan
Goel, Mr. Roshan Lal Goel & Ms.
Priti, Adv.
23 WITH
+ W.P.(C) 3461/2023 &CM APPL. 13357/2023
UNION OF INDIA .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Anurag Ojha, SSC with Mr. Dipak
Raj, Adv. for R-2.
versus
M/S BAJAJ HEALTH CASE LIMITED .....Respondent
Through: Mr. Rajesh Sharma & Mr. Nikhil
Sharma, Advs. for R-1.
24 WITH
+ W.P.(C) 6386/2023
GUJARAT POLYFILMS PVT. LTD. .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Yogendra Aldak & Mr. Agrim
Arora, Advs.
versus
GUJARAT STATE FERTILIZERS AND CHEMICALS
W.P.(C) 13930/2022 & connected matters Page 1 of 6
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 18/07/2025 at 22:14:48
LTD & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Rajesh Sharma & Mr. Nikhil
Sharma, Advs. for R-1.
Dr. B. Ramaswamy, CGSC for R-2.
Mr. Anurag Ojha, SSC with Mr. Dipak
Raj, Adv. for R-2.
27 AND
+ W.P.(C) 11724/2023
RABIGH REFINING AND PETROCHEMICAL
COMPANY .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Yogendra Aldak & Mr. Agrim
Arora, Advs.
versus
CHEMICAL AND PETROCHEMICALS MANUFACTURERS
ASSOCIATION & ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Rajesh Sharma & Mr. Nikhil
Sharma, Advs. for R-1.
Mr. Anurag Ojha, SSC with Mr. Dipak
Raj, Adv. for R-2.
CORAM:
JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
JUSTICE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA
ORDER
% 09.07.2025
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. W.P.(C)s 13930/2022 and 15356/2022 are petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India by various entities forming part of Domestic Industry, inter alia, seeking to quash the Office Memorandums (hereinafter 'OM') issued by the Central Government.
3. W.P.(C)s 3461/2023, 6386/2023, 11724/2023 are writ petitions filed by the Petitioners i.e., Central Government, Domestic Importer and Exporter respectively inter alia seeking to quash the impugned orders passed by CESTAT, New Delhi setting aside various OMs vide which recommendations to impose Anti Dumping Duty (hereinafter 'ADD') on certain products was W.P.(C) 13930/2022 & connected matters Page 2 of 6 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 18/07/2025 at 22:14:48 rejected.
4. The brief background of W.P.(C)s 13930/2022 is that the Petitioner- Domestic Industry had approached the Directorate General of Trade Remedies (hereinafter 'DGTR') in the year 2016 seeking imposition of ADD with respect to Hydrogen Peroxide from Bangladesh and Thailand. Pursuant to the initiation of proceedings, the DGTR issued recommendations for the imposition of ADD, which were accepted by the Central Government. Consequently, ADD was imposed on the said product for a period of five years vide Notification No. 28/2017-Customs (ADD) dated 14th June, 2017. At the end of the said period of five years, a sunset review was undertaken in order to examine the effect of the ADD. In this sunset review, the DGTR came to the conclusion that ADD deserves to be continued and accordingly submitted its recommendations. However, the Central Government did not accept the same and consequently issued OM F.No.CBIC-190354/271/2021- TO(TRU-I)-CBEC dated 22nd June, 2022, denying to extend the imposition of ADD. It is this OM that is being challenged vide W.P.(C)s 13930/2022.
5. Insofar as the remaining matters are concerned, they arise from applications filed by entities forming part of Domestic Industry before the DGTR, seeking the imposition of Anti Dumping Duty on various products, as identified in the table below, in terms of the Act and the Customs Tariff Rules, 1995 (hereinafter 'the Rules'). Pursuant to the said applications, final findings were issued by the DGTR recommending the imposition of ADD on the import of these goods from certain countries. The recommendations for imposition of ADD on the following products originating from specific countries were rejected vide the OMs listed below :
W.P.(C) 13930/2022 & connected matters Page 3 of 6This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 18/07/2025 at 22:14:48 OM Reference Nos. and Product and Countries Concerned Dates Writ Petitions F.No.CBIC- Hydrogen Peroxide W.P.(C) 190354/271/2021- from Bangladesh and 13930/2022 TO(TRU-I)-CBEC dated Thailand 22nd June, 2022 F.No. CBIC- (4R-Cis)-l,l-Dimethylethyl- W.P.(C) 190354/265/2022-TRU 6-cyanomethyl-2,2- 15356/2022 Section-CBEC dated 20th dimethyl-1,3-dioxane-4-
October 2022 acetate also known as ATS-8
from China PR
F.No.CBIC- Vitamin C from China PR W.P.(C)
190354/221/2021- 3461/2023
TO(TRU-I)-CBEC dated
27th October, 2021
F. No. CBIC- Caprolactam W.P.(C)
190354/247/2021- from European Union, Korea 6386/2023
TO(TRU-I)-CBEC dated RP, Russia, and Thailand 8th December, 2021 F. No. CBIC- Low Density Polyethylene W.P.(C) 190354/211/2021-TRU from Qatar, Saudi Arabia, 11724/2023 Section-CBEC dated 6th Singapore, Thailand, United June 2022 Arab Emirates and United States of America
6. However, the Central Government did not accept the said recommendations and ADD was not imposed in the above cases. Some of the said OMs namely -
• F.No. CBIC-190354/265/2022-TRU Section-CBEC dated 27th October, 2021 W.P.(C) 13930/2022 & connected matters Page 4 of 6 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 18/07/2025 at 22:14:48 • F. No. CBIC-190354/247/2021-TO(TRU-I)-CBEC dated 8th December, 2021 • F. No. CBIC-190354/211/2021-TRU Section-CBEC dated 6th June 2022 were challenged by the Domestic Industry before CESTAT. The said appeals were allowed and these OMs were set aside vide the impugned orders dated 30th August, 2022 and 19th December, 2022. It is these orders that have been challenged by Petitioners vide W.P.(C) 3461/2023, 6386/2023 and 11724/2023. Whereas the remaining OMs are challenged by the Domestic Industry directly by way of writ petitions which are W.P.(C)s 13930/2022, and 15356/2022.
7. However, today, the Court is informed that the Domestic Industry in all these matters, no longer wish to press for the imposition of ADD. A similar position was also recorded by the Supreme Court in SLP (C) Diary No. 31452/2023 titled Union of India v. Plastic Machinery Manufacturers Association of India through its Director and Ors., vide order dated 9th December, 2024 which reads as under:
"It is pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the domestic industries have given up their right in terms of the recommendation made by the designated authority, as well as, their claims on the basis of the order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi.
In view of the statement made, the special leave petition is dismissed as infructuous."
8. Since in all these matters, the Domestic Industry does not wish to press the prayer for imposition of ADD, W.P.(C) 13930/2022 & connected matters Page 5 of 6 This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 18/07/2025 at 22:14:48
(i) the recommendations of the DGTR in the Sunset review
(ii) the OM issued refusing to impose ADD and
(iii) the CESTAT Order dated 27th October, 2021 would not survive and, in fact, shall be rendered infructuous.
9. The stand of the domestic industry is accepted. Accordingly, W.P.(C) 13930/2022, and W.P.(C) 15356/2022 are dismissed as not pressed.
10. W.P.(C) 3461/2023, 6386/2023 and 11724/2023 are rendered infructuous as the respective CESTAT orders itself has been declared to be infructuous.
11. Pending applications, if any, are also disposed of.
PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J.
RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA, J.
JULY 9, 2025 Rahul/Ar.
W.P.(C) 13930/2022 & connected matters Page 6 of 6This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 18/07/2025 at 22:14:48