Its appeal against the refusal of Revenue to repay the money was rejected by the Tax Appeals Commission (TAC).
The TAC heard the company had made 68 customs entry declarations between May 2009 and July 2012 relating to the importation of iron and steel fasteners which ostensibly originated in Malaysia, Indonesia and Taiwan.
At the time, the three countries benefited from preferential access to EU markets with their imports subject to zero or reduced rates of customs duties.
In 2009, the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) carried out an investigation into suspected fraud around the importation of iron and steel fasteners.
Producers had complained that similar products from China were being “dumped” into the EU at below-normal market prices in what constituted unfair trading.
Investigators looked into the export of such goods supposedly produced in Indonesia by a company named PT. However, the TAC noted the Indonesian authorities had no record of PT carrying out any trading activity there.
The OLAF investigation resulted in the EU introducing an anti-dumping regulation in 2009. However it was repealed in 2016 after being declared invalid by the World Trade Organisation (WTO) following a complaint by Chinese manufacturers.
A separate investigation by Revenue between 2014 and 2016 concluded the iron and steel fasteners imported by the Irish company had originated in China.
The TAC heard the company was liable for common customs tariffs as Chinese goods did not benefit from preferential access to the EU market.
TAC commissioner Conor O’Higgins said there was no dispute but that the goods at issue originated in China, and that 29 of the 68 declarations made by the company claimed the goods had originated in Indonesia.
The TAC said the customs authorities in Indonesia had issued certificates of origin based on false information.
Mr O’Higgins said the Irish company had been given these certificates of origin, which they had passed to Irish customs authorities as proof the goods originated in Indonesia.
In the TAC appeal, the company’s lawyers said it was entitled to a repayment of some or all of the customs debt as the whole amount of anti-dumping duty of more than €1.54m was never legally owed.
They said the firm was also entitled to repayment of €31,557 in common customs tariffs as its liability had arisen from an error by Indonesian customs.
But Revenue argued that the legislation repealing the anti-dumping duty prohibited those who had paid the duty from being reimbursed.
They also said Indonesia had not acted in error as its authorities had been deliberately misled by an exporter.
