in Morocco. (i) with respect to taxes withheld at source, on amounts paid or credited, on or after the first day of January of the calendar year next following that in which the Convention enters into force; and
in Morocco. (i) the income tax; and
in Morocco. (i) the taxes referred to in subparagraph (b) of paragraph 3 of Article 2;
in Morocco. (i) in respect of taxes withheld at source, to income derived on or after the first day of January in the calendar year following the year in which the notice is given;
in Morocco. Definitive AD Measures on Exercise Books (Tunisia), the Panel set out the legal requirements of Article 5.2 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement concerning the evidence and information that must be included in a complaint as follows:
in Morocco. Definitive AD Measures on Exercise Books (Tunisia), the Panel explained the legal requirements and standard of review which apply to the investigating authority's examination of a complaint, as follows: "The text of Article 5.3 is composed of just one sentence, which requires the investigating authority to examine 'the accuracy and adequacy of the evidence provided in the application to determine whether there is sufficient evidence to justify the initiation of an investigation'. This provision covers explicitly the investigating authority and requires it to examine the complaint filed by the domestic industry, with a view to determining whether there is 'sufficient' evidence to initiate an investigation. The authority's examination must focus on the 'accuracy' and 'adequacy' of the evidence provided in the complaint. The word 'exactitude' ('accuracy') means something '[q]ui est rigoureusement conforme à la réalité' ('which is strictly in line with reality') and 'adéquation' (adequacy) refers to the '[c]onformité à l'objet, au but qu'on se propose' ('conformity with the purpose, with the objective that one has in mind'). Thus, the authority must examine whether the evidence provided in the complaint is (a) in line with reality, and (b) in line with the objective of the complaint, which, in this case, is to 'prove' the existence of dumping, injury and a causal link. As other panels before us, we note however that 'Article 5.3 says nothing regarding the nature of the examination to be carried out. Nor does it say anything requiring an explanation of how that examination was carried out'. To know what evidence an authority must examine for accuracy and adequacy, reference must be made to the context of this provision and, in particular, to paragraph 2 of Article 5, which determines what the material content of a complaint must be. At the end of its examination, the authority must 'determine' whether the evidence before it is sufficient to initiate an inquiry. The Larousse dictionary defines the word 'suffisant' ('sufficient') as '[q]ui correspond juste à ce qui est nécessaire' ('corresponding exactly to what is necessary'). The investigating authority must therefore determine whether it has before it the evidence necessary to initiate an investigation, i.e. whether an investigation appears to be justified, but also whether it has the information it needs to initiate its investigation. In that regard, the standard dispute not properly before the Panel, and ado...
