<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2002 (10) TMI 305 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102872</link>
    <description>Anti-dumping proceedings require normal value and any separate dumping margin to rest on reliable, actual and properly verified cost data reflecting the exporter&#039;s true production and sale costs. Where the records furnished are defective, relate to a different accounting period, are not based on actual data, and are supported by an inadequate verification exercise, the questionnaire response cannot justify a lower separate duty. In such circumstances, the exporter may be treated as non-cooperating for duty determination and subjected to the same anti-dumping duty as other exporters from China. The differentiated duty was therefore unjustified, and the notification required amendment to apply the uniform higher duty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 28 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Feb 2012 16:09:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=139918" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2002 (10) TMI 305 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102872</link>
      <description>Anti-dumping proceedings require normal value and any separate dumping margin to rest on reliable, actual and properly verified cost data reflecting the exporter&#039;s true production and sale costs. Where the records furnished are defective, relate to a different accounting period, are not based on actual data, and are supported by an inadequate verification exercise, the questionnaire response cannot justify a lower separate duty. In such circumstances, the exporter may be treated as non-cooperating for duty determination and subjected to the same anti-dumping duty as other exporters from China. The differentiated duty was therefore unjustified, and the notification required amendment to apply the uniform higher duty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 Oct 2002 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=102872</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>