<?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>2005 (11) TMI 106 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54520</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the retrospective imposition of anti-dumping duty from the date of provisional duty imposition as valid, dismissing the appeal. The duty notified on 1-5-2003 was deemed applicable from 2-11-2002 to 30-4-2003, aligning with Rule 20(2)(a) of the Customs Tariff Rules. The decision aimed to prevent injurious dumping and maintain the intended remedial effect of the legislation, emphasizing the necessity of continuity in anti-dumping measures.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Nov 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 Oct 2010 15:11:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=92997" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (11) TMI 106 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54520</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the retrospective imposition of anti-dumping duty from the date of provisional duty imposition as valid, dismissing the appeal. The duty notified on 1-5-2003 was deemed applicable from 2-11-2002 to 30-4-2003, aligning with Rule 20(2)(a) of the Customs Tariff Rules. The decision aimed to prevent injurious dumping and maintain the intended remedial effect of the legislation, emphasizing the necessity of continuity in anti-dumping measures.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Customs</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Nov 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54520</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>