https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394542 Anti-dumping duty could not be demanded for imports made during the gap between a provisional notification and the later final notification fixing the levy. The Tribunal followed binding Supreme Court authority and an identical prior decision, finding no distinguishing facts or contrary precedent to justify a different result. On that basis, the differential anti-dumping duty for the interregnum period was held unsustainable and set aside. en-us Fri, 13 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 06 Nov 2024 12:33:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394542 Anti-dumping duty could not be demanded for imports made during the gap between a provisional notification and the later final notification fixing the levy. The Tribunal followed binding Supreme Court authority and an identical prior decision, finding no distinguishing facts or contrary precedent to justify a different result. On that basis, the differential anti-dumping duty for the interregnum period was held unsustainable and set aside. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 13 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=394542