<?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>2006 (9) TMI 179 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47713</link>
    <description>SC held the notification dated 22-5-2002 was prospective, not retrospective, and could impose anti-dumping duty only on lead-acid batteries originating from specified countries and imported into India. The proviso excluded industrial lead-acid batteries manufactured by named manufacturers. The duty was limited in duration, effective until 21 Nov 2002. The Court set aside the impugned judgment and allowed the appellant&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Sep 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Sep 2025 11:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=86231" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (9) TMI 179 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47713</link>
      <description>SC held the notification dated 22-5-2002 was prospective, not retrospective, and could impose anti-dumping duty only on lead-acid batteries originating from specified countries and imported into India. The proviso excluded industrial lead-acid batteries manufactured by named manufacturers. The duty was limited in duration, effective until 21 Nov 2002. The Court set aside the impugned judgment and allowed the appellant&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Sep 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=47713</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>