<?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>2000 (7) TMI 1001 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287444</link>
    <description>In anti-dumping investigations, the designated authority may determine normal value from available comparable material and draw adverse inference when an interested party withholds relevant information; the inquiry is not confined to material produced by the respondent. The expression &quot;country or territory&quot; may include an economically integrated market such as the European Union for selecting comparable price data. Different anti-dumping duties may be sustained for the same product where customs treatment and end-use create different dumping margins. Extension of the investigation period under the Rules did not require prior notice, as no such requirement was expressed and no prejudice was shown.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 20 Jul 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Apr 2020 10:12:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=610222" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (7) TMI 1001 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287444</link>
      <description>In anti-dumping investigations, the designated authority may determine normal value from available comparable material and draw adverse inference when an interested party withholds relevant information; the inquiry is not confined to material produced by the respondent. The expression &quot;country or territory&quot; may include an economically integrated market such as the European Union for selecting comparable price data. Different anti-dumping duties may be sustained for the same product where customs treatment and end-use create different dumping margins. Extension of the investigation period under the Rules did not require prior notice, as no such requirement was expressed and no prejudice was shown.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Jul 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=287444</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>