<?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>2024 (5) TMI 287 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752234</link>
    <description>The Gujarat HC dismissed a petition challenging the Central Government&#039;s decision not to extend anti-dumping duty on Chinese textured toughened glass imports. The court held that Section 9A of the Act grants administrative discretion to the Central Government to accept or reject Designated Authority recommendations, as the provision uses &quot;may&quot; rather than &quot;shall.&quot; The recommendations are not binding on the Central Government. The court ruled that the decision not to impose anti-dumping duty involves legislative power exercised in public interest, making it non-justiciable under writ jurisdiction. The petition was dismissed as devoid of merit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 24 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 May 2024 15:28:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=752137" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (5) TMI 287 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752234</link>
      <description>The Gujarat HC dismissed a petition challenging the Central Government&#039;s decision not to extend anti-dumping duty on Chinese textured toughened glass imports. The court held that Section 9A of the Act grants administrative discretion to the Central Government to accept or reject Designated Authority recommendations, as the provision uses &quot;may&quot; rather than &quot;shall.&quot; The recommendations are not binding on the Central Government. The court ruled that the decision not to impose anti-dumping duty involves legislative power exercised in public interest, making it non-justiciable under writ jurisdiction. The petition was dismissed as devoid of merit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752234</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>