<?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>2018 (9) TMI 1877 - SC Order</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282918</link>
    <description>Countervailing duty may be imposed alongside anti-dumping duty where the anti-dumping exercise addresses normal value and domestic subsidy, while export subsidisation is not captured in that assessment. The combined duties were accepted as not exceeding the injury margin, and the lesser duty rule was treated as satisfied. On that basis, the challenge to the customs notification and final findings was rejected and the appeal was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 10 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 31 Aug 2019 07:41:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=585468" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (9) TMI 1877 - SC Order</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282918</link>
      <description>Countervailing duty may be imposed alongside anti-dumping duty where the anti-dumping exercise addresses normal value and domestic subsidy, while export subsidisation is not captured in that assessment. The combined duties were accepted as not exceeding the injury margin, and the lesser duty rule was treated as satisfied. On that basis, the challenge to the customs notification and final findings was rejected and the appeal was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 10 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=282918</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>