https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=403891 The court dismissed the writ petition as premature, emphasizing the necessity of exhausting statutory remedies before contesting the Designated Authority's final findings in an anti-dumping investigation. The petitioners were advised to follow the statutory appeal process before the CESTAT. The court allowed the petitioners to challenge any final notification issued under Rule 18 of the Anti-Dumping Rules, 1995, preserving their right to raise the grounds mentioned in the current petition. All pending applications were disposed of. en-us Fri, 05 Feb 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 29 Oct 2024 15:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=403891 The court dismissed the writ petition as premature, emphasizing the necessity of exhausting statutory remedies before contesting the Designated Authority's final findings in an anti-dumping investigation. The petitioners were advised to follow the statutory appeal process before the CESTAT. The court allowed the petitioners to challenge any final notification issued under Rule 18 of the Anti-Dumping Rules, 1995, preserving their right to raise the grounds mentioned in the current petition. All pending applications were disposed of. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 05 Feb 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=403891