https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45949 The Tribunal's anti-dumping reasoning rested on its earlier view that duty was exporter-specific and manufacturer-specific, so prices of comparable goods from other exporters or manufacturers could not be used to determine normal value. That foundation was later reversed by a subsequent binding Supreme Court decision. In light of that later precedent, the proper course was fresh reconsideration of the appeals on merits rather than sustaining the impugned judgment. The impugned judgment was set aside and the matters were remitted to the Tribunal for fresh disposal on merits. en-us Tue, 31 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Jul 2010 16:57:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45949 The Tribunal's anti-dumping reasoning rested on its earlier view that duty was exporter-specific and manufacturer-specific, so prices of comparable goods from other exporters or manufacturers could not be used to determine normal value. That foundation was later reversed by a subsequent binding Supreme Court decision. In light of that later precedent, the proper course was fresh reconsideration of the appeals on merits rather than sustaining the impugned judgment. The impugned judgment was set aside and the matters were remitted to the Tribunal for fresh disposal on merits. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 31 Jul 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=45949