https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794650 Writ interference against final anti-dumping findings and the consequential notification is confined to exceptional cases despite the statutory appeal under Section 9C of the Customs Tariff Act. The article notes that Article 226 review may be invoked only for gross violation of natural justice, breach of mandatory statutory procedure, or absence of jurisdiction; where interested parties were heard, non-confidential material was disclosed, and submissions were considered, those exceptions are not made out. Questions on methodology, valuation, landed value, non-injurious price, injury margin, and lesser duty assessment are matters for the Tribunal. A pending challenge before the Tribunal by another interested party also weighs against writ intervention. en-us Tue, 07 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Jul 2026 08:35:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794650 Writ interference against final anti-dumping findings and the consequential notification is confined to exceptional cases despite the statutory appeal under Section 9C of the Customs Tariff Act. The article notes that Article 226 review may be invoked only for gross violation of natural justice, breach of mandatory statutory procedure, or absence of jurisdiction; where interested parties were heard, non-confidential material was disclosed, and submissions were considered, those exceptions are not made out. Questions on methodology, valuation, landed value, non-injurious price, injury margin, and lesser duty assessment are matters for the Tribunal. A pending challenge before the Tribunal by another interested party also weighs against writ intervention. Case-Laws Customs Tue, 07 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794650