• Divyashree Suri

Quick Summary: CESTAT Order in Magotteaux Co. Ltd. v. DGTR

In an Order dated 14th July 2020 in the case of M/s. Magotteaux Co. Ltd., Thailand & Anr. v. The Directorate General of Trade Remedies through the Designated Authority & Ors., CESTAT rejected an appeal filed by a Thai exporter. The appeal was filed in the Sunset Review Investigation concerning imports of ‘Grinding Media Balls (excluding Forged Grinding Media Balls)’ originating in or exported from China PR and Thailand. The Thai exporter challenged the final findings recommending an extension of duties issued by the designated authority and the Notification imposing such duties issued by the Central government. The arguments, counter-arguments, and the Tribunal’s analysis are as follows:


*There is a typographical error in the CESTAT Order. The CESTAT Order refers to ‘GATT’ instead.


The domestic industry also argued that the foreign exporter should have been treated as non-cooperative, since it did not give all the information in the form and manner as prescribed by the Authority. In this regard, it was held that the Designated Authority has exercised its discretion in the recorded findings on the basis of the best facts available to it. The argument of the domestic industry was rejected.

102 views

Any views or opinions represented in this blog are personal and belong solely to the author. They do not represent the opinions and views of people, institutions or organizations that the author may or may not be associated with in professional and personal capacity, unless explicitly stated.

©2020 by WTO-Boutery. Proudly created with Wix.com

WTO-Boutery