https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254188 The majority decision, including the opinion of Member (Technical) and the third member, held that the appellant was not entitled to the exemption from anti-dumping duty. The key points were that the rate of duty applicable is determined by the date of filing the bill of entry for home consumption, which was after the amendment introduced by Notification 24/2013 came into force, denying the exemption for authorizations made transferable by the Regional Authority. The appellant's reliance on previous case law was distinguished, emphasizing the importance of the specific wordings and dates of applicability in customs notifications. en-us Tue, 15 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 25 Jun 2015 12:21:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254188 The majority decision, including the opinion of Member (Technical) and the third member, held that the appellant was not entitled to the exemption from anti-dumping duty. The key points were that the rate of duty applicable is determined by the date of filing the bill of entry for home consumption, which was after the amendment introduced by Notification 24/2013 came into force, denying the exemption for authorizations made transferable by the Regional Authority. The appellant's reliance on previous case law was distinguished, emphasizing the importance of the specific wordings and dates of applicability in customs notifications. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 15 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254188