Anti-dumping review timelines may be extended in special circumstances where incorporated rules allow limited flexibility.

Rule 23(2) on concluding an anti-dumping review within twelve months is construed as directory, not absolute, where Rule 23(3) applies Rule 17 mutatis mutandis. The incorporation brings in the first proviso to Rule 17(1) unless excluded by the review scheme, so a limited six-month extension remains available in special circumstances. The construction is supported by the similarity between review and investigation procedures and by Article 11.4 of the WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement, which uses the term "normally" in relation to the twelve-month period.

---

---

Issues: Whether the period of twelve months prescribed for concluding a review under Rule 23(2) of the Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of Anti-Dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995 is capable of extension by six months by applying the first proviso to Rule 17(1) mutatis mutandis under Rule 23(3).

Analysis: Rule 23(3) expressly makes the provisions of Rule 17 applicable to a review mutatis mutandis, showing that the review mechanism is to be read with necessary adaptations and not in isolation. The scheme of review under Rule 23 is substantially similar to the scheme of investigation, and the incorporation of Rule 17 brings in the first proviso to Rule 17(1) unless excluded by the text or the structure of Rule 23. Article 11.4 of the WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement, which uses the expression "normally" in relation to the twelve-month period, supports a construction that the period is directory in the sense that it admits of limited extension in special circumstances. The earlier decisions on mutatis mutandis establish that the expression imports adaptation with necessary changes in points of detail, not rejection of applicable provisions where the legislative scheme warrants their application.

Conclusion: The six-month extension is permissible, and Rule 23(2) is to be read as allowing review to be concluded normally within twelve months, with the limited extension under the first proviso to Rule 17(1) available in special circumstances.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a review provision expressly incorporates investigation provisions mutatis mutandis and the treaty framework contemplates conclusion within twelve months only normally, the statutory time limit may be extended to the extent expressly permitted by the incorporated proviso.

---