https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334069 Anti-dumping duty quantification for an exporter from the UAE was challenged on the basis that the Designated Authority had erred in fixing normal value. The record, however, did not show substantive documentary evidence of dual pricing or preferential gas pricing to the producer-exporter. The Authority had considered the objections, verified the project report, and applied standard accounting norms in constructing cost, while also treating related-party sales as made in the ordinary course of trade for normal value determination. The challenge to the normal value calculation therefore failed and the duty quantification was upheld. en-us Fri, 09 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 06 Feb 2017 13:14:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334069 Anti-dumping duty quantification for an exporter from the UAE was challenged on the basis that the Designated Authority had erred in fixing normal value. The record, however, did not show substantive documentary evidence of dual pricing or preferential gas pricing to the producer-exporter. The Authority had considered the objections, verified the project report, and applied standard accounting norms in constructing cost, while also treating related-party sales as made in the ordinary course of trade for normal value determination. The challenge to the normal value calculation therefore failed and the duty quantification was upheld. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 09 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334069