https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767725 In an anti-dumping investigation, an initial disclosure statement was not liable to be rescinded merely because the interested party objected to the mode of consideration of its response or alleged non-compliance with verification requirements. Rule 8 required the designated authority to satisfy itself about the accuracy of the information relied on, and the disclosure statement recorded specific deficiencies while keeping objections open before final determination. The operating manual did not make physical verification mandatory in every case, and consideration of material submitted in PDF rather than Excel format did not vitiate the process. The challenge was rejected, with limited procedural relief allowing resubmission of the same data in Excel format and comments within the extended time. en-us Wed, 19 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 24 Mar 2025 08:45:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767725 In an anti-dumping investigation, an initial disclosure statement was not liable to be rescinded merely because the interested party objected to the mode of consideration of its response or alleged non-compliance with verification requirements. Rule 8 required the designated authority to satisfy itself about the accuracy of the information relied on, and the disclosure statement recorded specific deficiencies while keeping objections open before final determination. The operating manual did not make physical verification mandatory in every case, and consideration of material submitted in PDF rather than Excel format did not vitiate the process. The challenge was rejected, with limited procedural relief allowing resubmission of the same data in Excel format and comments within the extended time. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 19 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=767725