https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389135 In a sunset review under Section 9A(5) of the Customs Tariff Act and Rule 23 of the Anti-Dumping Rules, the likelihood of continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury must be assessed prospectively from past and present facts and economic indicators, not by demanding direct proof of future events. The material showed positive dumping margins, excess export capacity, limited alternative markets, price attractiveness of the Indian market, continued vulnerability of the domestic industry, and non-participation of exporters. The Designated Authority erred in requiring proof that surplus capacity would definitely be diverted to India, so its negative recommendation was set aside and the appeal succeeded. en-us Thu, 28 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 02 Dec 2019 15:44:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389135 In a sunset review under Section 9A(5) of the Customs Tariff Act and Rule 23 of the Anti-Dumping Rules, the likelihood of continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury must be assessed prospectively from past and present facts and economic indicators, not by demanding direct proof of future events. The material showed positive dumping margins, excess export capacity, limited alternative markets, price attractiveness of the Indian market, continued vulnerability of the domestic industry, and non-participation of exporters. The Designated Authority erred in requiring proof that surplus capacity would definitely be diverted to India, so its negative recommendation was set aside and the appeal succeeded. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 28 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=389135