https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=431867 The Tribunal held that the Central Government's silence beyond the three-month period implied a decision not to impose anti-dumping duty. It also ruled that an appeal is maintainable under section 9C against the non-issuance of a notification by the Central Government. Additionally, the Tribunal emphasized that the Central Government must record reasons if it decides not to impose anti-dumping duty despite a positive recommendation. The matter was remitted to the Central Government for a decision on the recommendation with a requirement to record reasons if anti-dumping duty is not imposed. en-us Tue, 20 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 23 Dec 2022 16:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=431867 The Tribunal held that the Central Government's silence beyond the three-month period implied a decision not to impose anti-dumping duty. It also ruled that an appeal is maintainable under section 9C against the non-issuance of a notification by the Central Government. Additionally, the Tribunal emphasized that the Central Government must record reasons if it decides not to impose anti-dumping duty despite a positive recommendation. The matter was remitted to the Central Government for a decision on the recommendation with a requirement to record reasons if anti-dumping duty is not imposed. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 20 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=431867