23 October 2024
Read More3 October 2024
Read More26 September 2024
Read MoreWe are a family of strong 800+ people including 470+ professionals working from 14 locations across India.
We have a rich heritage and enduring legacy which are pivotal in shaping trust, excellence, and unparalleled legal expertise, thus building a strong reputation and a trusted brand.
Read MoreWe started in 1985 in a single room set up by the two founders with no prior experience of working in a law firm. Both the founders had outstanding academic records and focused on their deep understanding of the law to form the foundation of the firm.
Integrity, Knowledge and Passion are the principles that resonate with every member of our LKS family and the work that we do. These values drive us to build a community of legally sound professionals and well-serviced clients.
Everything we have accomplished over the last four decades is a result of our unique way of thinking which is deeply influenced by our core values and principles that define us.
Read MoreWe and our professionals consistently garner appreciation for the quality of our services and the depth of our legal expertise. This consistent acknowledgment serves as a testament to our unwavering commitment to exceed expectations.
The article in this issue of International Trade Amicus analyses a recent CESTAT decision relating to the threshold for considering a product within the scope of the product under consideration (‘PUC’) in anti-dumping investigations. The Hon’ble CESTAT has held that mere production of a product is not enough for it to be included in the scope of the PUC; the domestic industry must show that it has catered to a certain amount of demand for that product for it to be included. The article in this regard notes that Appellant’s reliance on the questionnaire response and legal submissions made before the DGTR to stress on the product exclusion played an important role in convincing the CESTAT about the bona fides of its product exclusion claims. The article further notes that the CESTAT has also observed that the production and sale quantities during the period of investigation (POI) are only relevant. According to the author, the jurisprudence developed in this case should guide the DGTR in analysing genuine user / importer interests in future investigations.
The article in this issue of International Trade Amicus briefly discusses the first anti-absorption investigation...
The article in this issue of International Trade Amicus discusses some of the relevant jurisprudence...
The article discusses the legal basis for these agreements and assesses their compatibility with the...
Get access to our latest newsletters, articles and events:
Scan the QR code to get in
touch with us