https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211707 In anti-dumping proceedings, the successor Designated Authority was required to grant a fresh hearing where natural justice so demanded, and the absence of such hearing was treated as a procedural defect requiring corrective hearing rather than automatic quashing of the final findings. The Tribunal also had power to remand the matter for fresh consideration, and that appellate power was not cut down by expiry of the original investigation period. A remand with post-decisional hearing and continuation of the existing anti-dumping regime was therefore preferred to avoid prejudice to the domestic industry and protect public interest. en-us Thu, 11 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 13 Jan 2012 18:47:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211707 In anti-dumping proceedings, the successor Designated Authority was required to grant a fresh hearing where natural justice so demanded, and the absence of such hearing was treated as a procedural defect requiring corrective hearing rather than automatic quashing of the final findings. The Tribunal also had power to remand the matter for fresh consideration, and that appellate power was not cut down by expiry of the original investigation period. A remand with post-decisional hearing and continuation of the existing anti-dumping regime was therefore preferred to avoid prejudice to the domestic industry and protect public interest. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 11 Aug 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=211707