J.CHELAMESWAR, SHIVA KIRTI SINGH, A.M.SAPRE
Union of India – Appellant
Versus
Meghmani Organics Ltd. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SHIVA KIRTI SINGH, J.
1. While hearing special leave petition against a judgment of the Delhi High Court, the Division Bench on January 27, 2009 in the case of Designated Authority, Ministry of Commerce and Industry & Anr. v. Indian Metals & Ferro Alloys Limited, (2009) 2 SCC 510 noticed that in the context of interpretation of anti-dumping provisions of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (in short “the Act”) and the Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of Anti-Dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995 (for brevity “the Rules”), the Delhi High Court had allowed the writ petition mainly by following the judgment of this Court in the case of Reliance Industries Ltd. v. Designated Authority & Others, (2006) 10 SCC 368 and also by following interpretation of Section 9-A(5) given in Rishiroop Polymers (P) Ltd. v. Designated Authority & Additional Secretary, (2006) 4 SCC 303. At the instance of counsel for the petitioners in that case, in paragraph 5 of that judgment, the Division Bench recorded its views that Reliance Industries case needed a fresh look and two questions needed to be dealt with by a larger Bench. Since the fi
Designated Authority, Ministry of Commerce and Industry v. Indian Metals & Ferro Alloys Limited
Reliance Industries Ltd. v. Designated Authority
Rishiroop Polymers (P) Ltd. v. Designated Authority & Additional Secretary
Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd. v. Designated Authority, M/o Commerce
S.N. Mukherjee v. Union of India
Krishena Kumar v. Union of India
Designated Authority (Anti-Dumping Directorate), Ministry of Commerce v. Haldor Topsoe A/S
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.