Initiation of anti-dumping investigation concerning imports of “Dispersion Unshifted Single-mode Optical Fibre” (“SMOF”) originating in or exported from China, Indonesia and South Korea

Initiation of anti-dumping investigation concerning imports of “Dispersion Unshifted Single-mode Optical Fibre” (“SMOF”) originating in or exported from China, Indonesia and South Korea

 MINISTRY OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY

(Department of Commerce)

(DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF TRADE REMEDIES)

INITIATION NOTIFICATION

New Delhi, the 6th May, 2022

Case No. AD (OI) – 01/2022

Subject: Initiation of anti-dumping investigation concerning imports of “Dispersion Unshifted Single-mode Optical Fibre” (“SMOF”) originating in or exported from China, Indonesia and South Korea

F. No. 6/1/2022-DGTR.—M/s Birla Furukawa Fibre Optics Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the ‘applicant’) has filed an application before the Designated Authority (hereinafter referred to as the Authority), on behalf of the domestic industry, in accordance with the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 as amended in 1995 and thereafter (hereinafter referred as the Act) and the Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of Anti-dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995, as amended from time to time (hereinafter referred as the “Rules”), for initiation of anti-dumping investigation concerning imports of ” Dispersion Unshifted Single-mode Optical Fibre” (“SMOF”)” (hereinafter referred to as ‘subject goods’ or ‘product under consideration’) originating in or exported from China, Indonesia and South Korea (hereinafter referred to as ‘subject countries’).

2. The applicant has alleged that material injury is being caused to the domestic industry due to the dumped imports, originating or exported from the subject countries and has requested for the imposition of anti-dumping duties on the imports of subject goods from the subject countries.

Dispersion Unshifted Single-mode Optical Fibre

A. PRODUCT UNDER CONSIDERATION

3. The product under consideration is “Dispersion Unshifted Single-mode Optical Fibre” (“SMOF”) originating in or exported from China, Indonesia and South Korea. SMOF facilitates transmission of a single spatial mode of light as a carrier and is used for signal transmissions within certain bands. The product scope covers Dispersion Unshifted Fibre (G.652) as well as Bend insensitive single mode Fibre (G.657) – as defined by International Telecommunication Union (ITU-T), which is a global standardization body for telecommunication systems and vendors. Dispersion shifted Fibre (G.653), Cut-off shifted single mode optical Fibre (G.654), and Non Zero Dispersion Shifted Fibres (G.655 & G.656) are specifically excluded from the scope of Product.

4. The product under consideration is used for manufacture of Optical Fibre Cables, including Uni-tube and Multi tube stranded cables, tight buffer cables, Armoured and Un-armoured cables, ADSS & Fig-8 cables, Ribbon cables, Wet core and Dry core cables and others. Single-mode Optical Fibre is mainly applied to high-data rate, long distance and access network transportation, therefore, is mainly used in long-haul, metro area network, CATV, optical access network (for example FTTH) and even over short distance networks as applicable. Major consumption is driven by 3G/4G/5G rollout by Telco’s, Connectivity of Gram Panchayat and Defence (NFS Project).

5. The PUC is being imported under Customs Tariff Heading 90011000 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. However, it is possible that the subject goods may also be imported under other headings and therefore, the Customs tariff heading is indicative only and is not binding on scope of the product.

B.   LIKE ARTICLE

6. The Applicant has claimed that the subject goods, which have been alleged to be dumped in India, are identical to the goods produced by the domestic industry. There are no known differences in the technical specifications, quality, functions and end use of the two products. The Authority notes that the two are prima facie technically and commercially substitutable. Hence, for the purposes of the present investigation, the Authority holds that the two should be treated as ‘like article’ under the Rules.

C. SUBJECT COUNTRIES

7.  The subject countries in the present petition are China, Indonesia, and South Korea.

D. PERIOD OF INVESTIGATION

8. The period of investigation (POI) adopted by the Authority for the present investigation is 1st January’ 2021 to 31st December’ 2021. The injury investigation period covers the periods 1st April’ 2018 – 31st March 2019, 1st April’ 2019 – 31st March 2020, 1st April’ 2020 – 31st March 2021 and the POI.

E. DOMESTIC INDUSTRY AND STANDING

9. The application has been filed by M/s Birla Furukawa Fibre Optics Pvt. Ltd. (―BFL‖) In addition to the Applicant, there are other manufacturers of the PUC in India. The Applicant has submitted the production data of other manufacturers from CRU, a data reporting body which specialises in studying and analysing commodity markets, including Optical Fibre market. It has been submitted that out of the other Indian manufacturers, Sterlite Technologies Ltd. and M/s ZTT India Pvt. Ltd., are regular importers of the PUC and have imported significant quantities of PUC during the POI. Considering that the said producers are regular importers of the PUC and have imported significant quantity of PUC during the POI, the Authority holds that they are not eligible domestic producers under Rule 2(b) of the ADD Rules.

10. It is seen that BFL accounts for the major share of the total production of the eligible domestic production (i.e. Indian production after excluding Sterlite Technologies Ltd. and ZTT India Pvt. Ltd.) and therefore, has the requisite standing to file the present application.

11. As per the information submitted by the Applicant, one of its group company has imported the subject goods from China PR and Korea, albeit under duty exemption schemes for the purpose of manufacturing goods for export. Considering that the imports have been made for export purposes and also as the volume of such imports is not significant, the Authority notes, after due examination, that the applicant constitutes eligible domestic industry in terms of the provisions of Rule 2(b) and the application satisfies the criteria in terms of Rule 5(3) of the Rules.

F. BASIS OF ALLEGED DUMPING

12. Normal Value

The Applicant has claimed that in terms of Article 15(a)(i) of China’s Accession Protocol, the normal value for Chinese producers may be determined based on costs or domestic selling prices prevailing in China, only if the responding Chinese producers demonstrate that their cost and price information are based on market driven principles and allow for fair comparison in terms of Para 1 to 6 of Annexure I to ADD Rules, failing which, normal value for Chinese producers must be determined based on para 7 and 8 of Annexure I to the rules.

13. The Applicant has also claimed that the data relating to price in other subject countries is not available. The normal value has been thereby constructed based on best estimates of the cost of production of subject goods as per the best available information after duly adjusting selling, general & administrative expense with reasonable profits.

14. Export price

The export price for subject goods for the subject countries have been computed based on the import data. Price adjustments have been made for ocean freight, marine insurance, commission, port expenses, bank charges and inland freight expenses. There is sufficient prima facie evidence with regard to the net export price so computed.

15. Dumping margin

The normal value and the export price have been compared at the ex-factory level, which prima facie shows that the dumping margin is above the de-minims level and is significant in respect of the product under consideration from the subject countries. Thus there is sufficient prima facie evidence that the product under consideration from subject countries is being dumped in Indian market by the exporters from the subject countries.

G. INJURY AND CAUSAL LINK

16. Information furnished by the applicant has been considered for assessment of injury to the domestic industry. The applicant has furnished evidence regarding the injury taken place as a result of the alleged dumping in form of increased volume of dumped imports in absolute terms and in relation to production or consumption in India, price undercutting and price suppressing and depressing effect on the domestic industry. The applicant has claimed that its performance has been adversely impacted in respect of sale, profitability, return on investment, accumulation of inventories and capacity utilization as a result of increase in imports of product under consideration at an injurious price for the domestic industry. There is sufficient prima facie evidence that the injury is being caused to the domestic industry by dumped imports from subject countries.

H. INITIATION OF ANTI-DUMPING INVESTIGATION

17. On the basis of the duly substantiated written application by the domestic industry, and having satisfied itself, on the basis of the prima facie evidence submitted by the domestic industry, about dumping of product under consideration originating in or exported from the subject countries, injury to the domestic industry and causal link between such alleged dumping and injury, and in accordance with Section 9A of the Act read with Rule 5 of the Rules, the Authority, hereby, initiates an investigation to determine the existence, degree and effect of any alleged dumping in respect of the product under consideration originating in or exported from the subject countries and to recommend the amount of anti-dumping duty, which if levied, would be adequate to remove the injury to the domestic industry.

I. PROCEDURE

18. Principles as stated under Rule 6 of the said Rules shall be followed in the present investigation.

J. SUBMISSION OF INFORMATION

19. In view of the special circumstances arising out of COVID-I9 pandemic, all communication should be sent to the Designated Authority via email at email address [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], and [email protected]. It should be ensured that the narrative part of the submission is in searchable PDF/ MS Word format and data files are in MS Excel format.

20. The known producers/exporters in the subject countries, Government of the subject countries through their Embassies in India, the importers and users in India known to be concerned with the subject goods are being informed separately to enable them to file all the relevant information in the form and manner prescribed within the time limit set out below.

21. Any other interested party may also make its submissions relevant to the investigation in the form and manner prescribed within the time-limit set out below. Any party making any confidential submission before the Authority is required to make a non-confidential version of the same available to the other parties.

K. TIME LIMIT

22. Any information relating to the present investigation should be sent to the Designated Authority via email at the following email addresses [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] and [email protected], within 30 days from the date on which it was sent by the Designated Authority or transmitted to the appropriate diplomatic representative of the exporting country as per Rule 6(4) of the Rules. If no information is received within the prescribed time limit or the information received is incomplete, the Authority may record its findings on the basis of the facts available on record in accordance with the Rules.

23. All the interested parties are hereby advised to intimate their interest (including the nature of interest) in the instant matter and file their questionnaire responses within the above time limit.

L. SUBMISSION OF INFORMATION ON CONFIDENTIAL BASIS

24. Any party making any confidential submission or providing information on confidential basis before the Authority, is required to simultaneously submit a non-confidential version of the same in terms of Rule 7(2) of the Rules. Failure to adhere to the above may lead to rejection of the response / submissions.

25. The parties making any submission (including Appendices/Annexures attached thereto), before the Authority including questionnaire response, are required to file Confidential and Non-Confidential versions separately.

26. The “confidential” or “non-confidential” submissions must be clearly marked as “confidential” or “non- confidential” at the top of each page. Any submission made without such marking shall be treated as non-confidential by the Authority, and the Authority shall be at liberty to allow the other interested parties to inspect such submissions.

27. The non-confidential version is required to be a replica of the confidential version with the confidential information preferably indexed or blanked out (in case indexation is not feasible) and summarized depending upon the information on which confidentiality is claimed. The non-confidential summary must be in sufficient detail to permit a reasonable understanding of the substance of the information furnished on confidential basis. However, in exceptional circumstances, the party submitting the confidential information may indicate that such information is not susceptible to summary, and a statement of reasons why summarization is not possible must be provided to the satisfaction of the Authority.

28. The Authority may accept or reject the request for confidentiality on examination of the nature of the information submitted. If the Authority is satisfied that the request for confidentiality is not warranted or if the supplier of the information is either unwilling to make the information public or to authorize its disclosure in generalized or summary form, it may disregard such information.

29. Any submission made without a meaningful non-confidential version thereof or without good cause statement on the confidentiality claim shall not be taken on record by the Authority.

M. INSPECTION OF PUBLIC FILE

30. A list of registered interested parties will be uploaded on DGTR’s website along with the request therein to all of them to email the non-confidential version of their submissions to all other interested parties since the public file will not accessible physically due to ongoing global pandemic.

N. NON-COOPERATION

31. In case any interested party refuses access to and otherwise does not provide necessary information within a reasonable period, or significantly impedes the investigation, the Authority may declare such interested party as non- cooperative and record its findings on the basis of the facts available to it and make such recommendations to the Central Government as deemed fit.

ANANT SWARUP,
Designated Authority

नोट :- हमारे वेबसाइट www.indiangovtscheme.com पर ऐसी जानकारी रोजाना आती रहती है, तो आप ऐसी ही सरकारी योजनाओं की जानकारी पाने के लिए हमारे वेबसाइट www.indiangovtscheme.com से जुड़े रहे।

*****

Initiation of Anti-Dumping Investigation concerning imports of ―SOLAR CELLS WHETHER OR NOT ASSEMBLED INTO MODULES OR PANELS originating in or exported from China PR, Thailand and Vietnam.

Initiation  of  Anti-Dumping  Investigation  concerning  imports  of  ―SOLAR  CELLS WHETHER OR NOT ASSEMBLED INTO MODULES OR PANELS originating in or exported from China PR, Thailand and Vietnam.

 MINISTRY OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY

(Department of Commerce)

(DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF TRADE REMEDIES)

INITIATION NOTIFICATION

New Delhi, the 15th May, 2021

Case No. AD (OI)-48/2020

Subject:  Initiation  of  Anti-Dumping  Investigation  concerning  imports  of  ―SOLAR  CELLS WHETHER OR NOT ASSEMBLED INTO MODULES OR PANELS originating in or exported from China PR, Thailand and Vietnam.

F. No. 6/56/2020-DGTR.—M/s. Indian Solar Manufacturers Association (hereinafter also referred to as „ISMA‟ or the „applicant‟), on behalf of (i) M/s. Mundra Solar PV Limited, a unit in a Special Economic Zone (“SEZ unit”); (ii) M/s. Jupiter Solar Power Limited, a unit in the Domestic Tariff Area (“DTA unit”) and (iii) M/s. Jupiter International Limited (“DTA unit”), has filed an application seeking initiation of an anti-dumping investigation concerning imports of „Solar Cells whether or not assembled into modules or panels‟ (hereinafter referred to as the „subject goods‟ or the „product under consideration‟) originating in or exported from China PR , Thailand and Vietnam (hereinafter referred to as ‘subject  countries‟)  before  the  Designated  Authority  (hereinafter  referred  to  as  the  „Authority‟)  in accordance with the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 as amended from time to time (hereinafter referred to as the Act‟) and the Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of  Anti-dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995 as amended from time to time (hereinafter referred to as the „Rules‟).

SOLAR  CELLS

2. The Applicant has alleged that material injury is being caused to the domestic industry due to dumped imports of solar cells whether or not assembled into modules or panels , originating in or exported from the respective  subject countries and  has  requested for  imposition of  the anti- dumping duty on the import of the subject goods originating in or exported from the subject countries.

A. Product under consideration

3. The product under consideration in the present petition is „Solar Cells whether or not assembled into modules or panels‟ which is defined as follows:

Solar cells are also known as photovoltaic cells. Solar cell is a solid-state electrical device that converts sunlight directly into electricity by the photovoltaic effect. To make practical use of solar cells, they are placed in panels or modules and a solar panel/module is a packaged, connected assembly of solar cells. Electrical connections are made to the solar cells in series to achieve desired output wattage and/or in parallel to provide a desired current capability. Such an assembly of solar cells is called solar panel or solar module.

4. There are two major technologies available for manufacturing the subject goods. They are: (1) Crystalline silicon (c-Si) based solar cell technology which is also known as silicon wafer-based technology  and  (2)  Thin  film  technology  (TFT).  The  thin  film  technology  may  also  use, Amorphous Silicon, Cadmium Tellurium (CdTe) or Copper Indium Gallium Selenium as semiconductor materials. Solar cells of both c-Si technology and Thin Film Technology are covered within the scope of the product under consideration.

5. Solar cells are also known as Photovoltaic Cells in the market parlance. Photovoltaic is the direct conversion of sun light into electricity at the atomic level. Some materials exhibit a property known as the photoelectric effect that causes them to absorb photons of light and release electrons. When these free electrons are captured electric current results, which can be used as electricity. Semiconductor materials such as silicon used in microelectronics industry possess such photoelectric effect. When light energy strikes the semiconductor material, electrons are knocked loose from the atoms in the semiconductor material. If electrical conductors are attached to the positive and negative sides, forming an electrical circuit, the electrons can be captured in the form of an electric current i.e. electricity.

6. The subject goods are classified under Customs Classification chapter heading 8541 40 11. When the subject goods are assembled into modules or panels, they are classified under 8541.10.12. However, the customs classification is indicative only and in no way binding on the scope of this investigation.

B. Like Article

7. The Applicant has claimed that there are no significant differences between the subject goods imported from the subject countries and that produced by the domestic industry. Accordingly, the subject goods produced by the applicant in India are, prima facie, treated as „Like Article‟ to the subject goods being imported from the subject countries under Rule 2(d) of the Rules, for the purposes of this investigation.

C. Domestic industry and Standing

8. The application has been filed by Solar Manufacturer‟s Association on behalf of M/s. Jupiter International Ltd (DTA unit), Jupiter Solar Power Ltd (“DTA Unit”) and Mundra Solar PV Ltd (“SEZ Unit”). The Authority has considered the scope of domestic industry restricted to DTA units i.e., Jupiter International Ltd and Jupiter Solar Power Ltd only in accordance with original/review finding dt 16.07.2018 and 18.07.2020 of the safeguard investigation of the same product. There are other producers of the subject goods in India. However, the Authority notes that the production of the two DTA units accounts for a „major proportion‟ of total domestic production of the like article in India.

9. The Authority, therefore, determines that the two DTA units mentioned above constitute the domestic industry within the meaning of the Rule 2 (b) and the application satisfies the criteria of standing in terms of Rule 5 (3) of the Rules supra.

D. Basis of Alleged Dumping  Normal Value – China PR

10. The Applicant has submitted that the Normal Value for China PR should be determined as per Para 7 of Annexure I of the Anti-Dumping Rules, 1995 on any of the following basis:

  • the price in a market economy third country.
  • constructed value in a market economy third country.
  • the price from such a third country to other countries, including India.
  • Any other reasonable basis including the price actually paid or payable in India, adjusted to include a reasonable profit margin.

11. The Applicant has claimed that pursuant to the same, efforts were made to determine normal value on the basis of price or constructed value in a market economy third country, price from such a third country to other countries, including India. However, there is no verifiable evidence or published evidence regarding the same. Therefore, the applicant has claimed normal value in China PR for each of the subject goods on any other reasonable basis i.e. on the basis of cost of production in India, duly adjusted for selling, general and administrative expenses and reasonable profit margin.

Normal Value – Thailand and Vietnam

12. The Applicant made efforts to obtain evidence regarding actual transaction price of sale in the domestic market of Thailand and Vietnam. However, there is no publicly available information regarding actual transaction price of producers. Further, the published import statistics such as trade map do not give the unit of measurement in terms of kwH, in the absence of which it is not practicable to arrive at the per unit price at which the goods are exported from Thailand or Vietnam to an appropriate third country. Accordingly, normal value cannot be determined based on export price from subject country/ies to an appropriate third country. The Applicant made efforts to obtain actual cost of production of the subject goods in Thailand and Vietnam. However, no verifiable evidence was available. Therefore, the applicant has claimed normal value in Thailand  and Vietnam on the basis of basis of cost of production in India, duly adjusted for selling, general and administrative expenses and reasonable profit margin.

E. Export Price

13. The applicant has determined export price based on the weighted average import price from subject countries based on DGCI&S data. Export price  has been adjusted for ocean freight,  marine insurance, port expenses and handling charges, inland freight, commission, bank charges, credit cost and non-refundable VAT on exports, as applicable, have been made to arrive at the ex-factory export price.

F. Dumping Margin

14. Considering the normal value and export price of the subject goods form the subject countries determined as above, dumping margin has been determined, in accordance with Section 9A(1)(a) of the Act. It is noted that dumping margin for the subject goods from each of the subject countries is not only above de minimis level, but also significant. There is prima facie evidence that normal value of the subject goods in the subject countries are higher than the net export prices, thereby indicating that the subject goods originating in or exported from the subject countries are being exported at dumped prices, so as to justify initiation of investigation.

G. Injury and Causal Link

15. Information furnished by the applicant has been considered for assessment of injury of  the domestic industry. The applicant has furnished evidence regarding material injury to the domestic industry resulting from the alleged dumping of the subject goods from the subject countries during the period of investigation. There is positive evidence of price undercutting and price suppression and price depression effect on the domestic industry. The domestic industry is able to sell under the Central Public Sector Undertaking (hereinafter referred to as „CPSU‟) scheme but not in the open market in India. The volume of sale by the applicant is negligible during POI in the open market in which the imported goods compete with them. Even after making sales under the CPSU Scheme, unutilized capacity exists with the applicants. There is prima facie evidence of injury being caused to the domestic industry by dumped imports of the subject goods from the subject countries.

H. Initiation of Anti-Dumping Investigation

16. On the basis of the duly substantiated written application filed by the Applicant, and prima facie evidence submitted by the domestic industry, substantiating (a) dumping of „Solar Cells  whether or not assembled into modules or panels‟ originating in or exported from China PR, Thailand and Vietnam, (b) injury to the domestic industry, and (c) causal link between such alleged dumping and injury, and in accordance with Section 9A of the Act read with Rule 5 of the Rules, the Authority, hereby, initiates an investigation to determine the existence, degree and effect of any alleged dumping in respect of the products under consideration originating in or exported from the subject countries and to recommend the amount of anti-dumping duty, which if levied, would be adequate to remove the injury to the domestic industry.

 I. Subject Country/ies

17. The subject countries for this investigation are China PR, Thailand and Vietnam.

J. Period of Investigation (POI)

18. Keeping in view the COVID pandemic environment, the period of investigation (POI) for the present investigation is July 2019 to December 2020 (18 months). The injury period under investigation will cover the periods 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 and the period of investigation.

K. Procedure

19. Principles as given in Rule 6 of the Rules will be followed for the present investigation.

L. Submission of Information

20. In view of the special circumstances arising out of COVID-19 pandemic, all communication should be sent to the Designated Authority via email at email addresses [email protected], adv13-  [email protected], [email protected] and [email protected]. It should be ensured that the narrative part of the submission is in searchable PDF/MS Word format and data files are in MS Excel format.

21. The known producers and/or exporters in the subject country, Governments of the subject countries through their Embassies in India, the importers and users in India known to be concerned with the subject goods and the domestic industry are being informed separately to enable them to file all the relevant information in the form and manner prescribed within the time-limit set out below.

22. Any other interested party may also make its submissions relevant to the investigation in the form and manner prescribed within the time-limit set out below.

23. Any party making any confidential submission before the Authority is required to make a non- confidential version of the same available to the other parties.

24. Interested parties are further advised to keep a regular watch on the official website of then Designated Authority https://www.dgtr.gov.in/ for any updated information with respect to this investigation.

M. Time-Limit

25. Any information relating to the present investigation should be sent to the Designated Authority via email at the email addresses [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] and dd17-  [email protected] within thirty days from the date of receipt of the notice as per Rule 6(4) of the Anti- Dumping Rules. If no information is received within the prescribed time-limit or the information received is incomplete, the Authority may record its findings on the basis of the facts available on record in accordance with the Rules.

26. All the interested parties are hereby advised to intimate their interest (including the nature of interest) in the instant matter and file their questionnaire responses within the above time-limit.

N. Submission of information on confidential basis

27. Any party making any confidential submission or providing information on confidential basis before the Authority, is required to simultaneously submit a non-confidential version of the same in terms of Rule 7(2) of the Rules. Failure to adhere to the above may lead to rejection of the response / submissions.

28. The parties making any submission (including  Appendices/Annexes attached  thereto),  before the Authority including questionnaire response, are required to file Confidential and Non-Confidential versions separately.

29. The “confidential” or “non-confidential” submissions must be clearly marked as “confidential” or “non-confidential” at the top of each page. Any submission made without such marking shall be treated as non-confidential by the Authority, and the Authority shall be at liberty to allow the other interested parties to inspect such submissions.

30. The confidential version shall contain all information which is by nature confidential and/or other information which the supplier of such information claims as confidential. For information which are claimed to be confidential by nature or the information on which confidentiality is claimed because of other reasons, the supplier of the information is required to provide a good cause statement along with the supplied information as to why such information cannot be disclosed.

31. The non-confidential version is required to be a replica of the confidential version with the confidential information preferably indexed or blanked out (in case indexation is not feasible) and summarized depending upon the information on which confidentiality is claimed. The non-confidential summary must be in sufficient detail to permit a reasonable understanding of the substance of the information furnished on confidential basis. However,  in exceptional circumstances,  the party submitting the confidential information may indicate that such information is not susceptible to summary, and a statement of reasons why summarization is not possible must be provided to the satisfaction of the Authority.

32. The Authority may accept or reject the request for confidentiality on examination of the nature of the information submitted. If the Authority is satisfied that the request for confidentiality is not warranted or if the supplier of the information is either unwilling to make the information public or to authorize its disclosure in generalized or summary form, it may disregard such information.

33. Any submission made without a meaningful non-confidential version thereof or without good cause statement on the confidentiality claim shall not be taken on record by the Authority.

34. The Authority on being satisfied and accepting the need for confidentiality of the information provided, shall not disclose it to any party without specific authorization of the party providing such information.

O. Inspection of Public File

35. In terms of Rule 6(7) of the Rules, any interested party may inspect the public file containing non- confidential version of the evidence submitted by other interested parties. The modality of maintaining public file in electronic mode is being worked out.

P. Non-cooperation

36. In case where an interested party refuses access to, or otherwise does not provide necessary information within a reasonable period, or significantly impedes the investigation, the Authority may record its findings on the basis of the facts available to it and make such recommendations to the Central Government as deemed fit.

ANANT SWARUP, Jt.
Secy. & Designated Authority

नोट :- हमारे वेबसाइट www.indiangovtscheme.com पर ऐसी जानकारी रोजाना आती रहती है, तो आप ऐसी ही सरकारी योजनाओं की जानकारी पाने के लिए हमारे वेबसाइट www.indiangovtscheme.com से जुड़े रहे। 
*****

Initiation of anti-dumping investigation concerning imports of Elastomeric Filament Yarn originating in or exported from Singapore

Initiation of anti-dumping investigation concerning imports of Elastomeric Filament Yarn originating in or exported from Singapore
MINISTRY OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY

(Department of Commerce)
(DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF TRADE REMEDIES)

INITIATION NOTIFICATION

New Delhi, the 30th September, 2020

Initiation of anti-dumping investigation concerning imports

OI Case No. 37/2020

Subject : Initiation of anti-dumping investigation concerning imports of Elastomeric Filament Yarn originating in or exported from Singapore.

F. No. 6/44/2020-DGTR.—1. M/s. Indorama Industries Limited (hereinafter also referred to as the „Petitioner‟ or „Applicant‟) has filed an application before the Designated Authority (hereinafter referred to as the „Authority‟) in accordance with the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 as amended from time to time (hereinafter referred to as the „Act‟) and the Customs Tariff(Identification, Assessment and Collection of Anti-dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995 as amended from time to time (hereinafter referred to as the „Rules‟) for imposition of Anti-Dumping Duty on imports of Elastomeric Filament Yarn (hereinafter referred to as the „subject goods‟ or „PUC‟) from Singapore.

A. Product under consideration

2. The product under consideration in the present application is “Elastomeric Filament Yarn of all deniers”. The subject goods are described in terms of the deniers and are sold generally in the range of 10 to 1680 deniers.

[post_ads]

3. Following products are excluded from the scope of the product under consideration:

  • a. Coloured Elastomeric Yarns;
  • b. Elastomeric yarns on Beam;
  • c. Subject goods having brand name as “Lycra®” as the same is a specialized and fine quality product manufactured under process control conditions, which are patent protected.
  • d. Elastomeric Filament Yarn meant for hygiene requirements such as diapers are also excluded from the product under consideration.

4. The subject products are classified under Chapter Heading 54 of the Customs Tariff Act. The classification at the 8-digit level is 54024400 and 54041100 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The custom classification is indicative only and not binding upon the product scope.

B. Like Article

5. The applicant has claimed that the subject goods, which are being dumped into India, are identical to the goods produced by the domestic industry. There are no differences either in the technical specifications, quality, functions or end-uses of the dumped imports and the domestically produced subject goods and the product under consideration manufactured by the applicant. The two are technically and commercially substitutable and hence should be treated as „like article‟ under the Rules. Therefore, for the purpose of the present investigation, the subject goods produced by the applicant in India are being treated as „Like Article‟ to the subject goods being imported from the subject country.

C. Domestic Industry & Standing

6. The application has been filed by M/s Indorama Industries Limited. As per the  information available there is only one other producer of the subject goods namely Hyosung India Private Limited. The applicant has claimed that they have neither imported the subject goods from Singapore nor are they related to any other producer/exporter of subject goods in Singapore or any importer in India. Further, the petitioners account for a major proportion in Indian production of the subject goods. Therefore, the Authority has considered the petitioners as the Domestic Industry within the meaning of the Rule 2(b) of the Rules and the application satisfies the criteria of standing in terms of Rule 5 of the Rules.

D. Basis of alleged dumping

a. Normal value

7. The normal value for the subject country has been considered based on estimates of cost of production in the subject country on the basis of cost of production, duly adjusting selling, general & administrative expenses with reasonable profit.

b. Export Price

8. The Authority has computed the export prices from Singapore based on Directorate General of Commercial Intelligence and Statistics (DGCI&S) transaction-wise import data. Adjustments have been made for ocean freight, marine insurance, port expenses, bank charges, commission, credit cost and handling charges.

c. Dumping Margin

9. The normal value and the export price have been compared at ex-factory level, which prima facie shows dumping margin above the de-minimis level in respect of the PUC from Singapore. There is sufficient prima facie evidence that the PUC from Singapore is being dumped into the Indian market by the exporters from the Singapore.

E. Injury & Causal Link

10. Information furnished by the Applicant has been considered for assessment of injury to  the domestic industry. The Applicant has furnished prima facie evidence regarding the injury having taken place as a result of the alleged dumping, resulting in increased volume of dumped imports in absolute terms and in relation to production and consumption in India. The Applicant has claimed that their performance has been adversely impacted in terms of financial losses and negative return on capital employed, as a result of increase in imports of product under consideration at a price below selling price and non-injurious price for the domestic industry. There is prima facie evidence of material injury being caused to the domestic industry by dumped imports from subject country to justify initiation of anti-dumping investigation.

F. Initiation of Anti-Dumping Investigation

11. On the basis of the duly substantiated written application by or on behalf of the Domestic Industry, and having satisfied itself, on the basis of the prima facie evidence submitted by the Domestic Industry, substantiating dumping of the product under consideration originating in or exported from the subject country, injury to the Domestic Industry and causal link between such alleged dumping and injury, and in accordance with Section 9A of the Act read with Rule 5 of the Rules, the Authority, hereby, initiates an investigation to determine the existence, degree and effect of any alleged dumping in respect of the product under consideration originating in or exported from the subject country and to recommend the amount of anti-dumping duty, which if levied, would be adequate to remove the injury to the domestic industry.

G. Subject country

12. The subject country for the present investigation is Singapore.

H. Period of Investigation

13. The period of investigation (POI) for the present investigation is 1st April 2019 to 31st March 2020 (12 months). The injury period under investigation will, however, cover the periods April 2016 to March 2017, April 2017 to March-2018, April 2018 to March2019, and the period of investigation (POI).

I. Procedure

14. Principles as given in Rule 6 of the Rules will be followed for the present investigation.

J. Submission of information

15. In view of the special circumstances arising out of COVID-19 pandemic, all communication should be sent to the Designated Authority via email at email address [email protected], adv12- [email protected], [email protected] and [email protected]. It should be ensured that the narrative part of the submission is in searchable PDF/ MS Word format and data files are in MS Excel format. The known producers/exporters in the subject country, Government of the subject country through their Embassy in India, the importers and users in India known to be concerned with the subject goods and the domestic industry are being informed separately to enable them to file all the relevant information in the form and manner prescribed within the time-limit set out below.

[post_ads_2]

16. Any other interested party may also make its submissions relevant to the investigation in the form and manner prescribed within the time-limit set out below.

17. Any party making any confidential submission before the Authority is required to make a non- confidential version of the same available to the other parties.

K. Time Limit

18. Any information relating to the present investigation should be sent to the Designated Authority via email at the email addresses [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] and dd15- [email protected] within thirty days from the date of receipt of the notice as per Rule 6(4) of the Rules. It may, however, be noted that in terms of explanation of the said Rule, the notice calling for information and other documents shall be deemed to have been received within one week from the date on which it was sent by the Designated Authority or transmitted to the appropriate diplomatic representative of the exporting country. If no information is received within the prescribed time limit or the information received is incomplete, the Authority may record its findings on the basis of the facts available on record in accordance with the Rules.

19. All the interested parties are hereby advised to intimate their interest (including the nature of interest) in the instant matter and file their questionnaire responses within the above time limit.

20. The interested parties are further advised to keep a regular watch on the official website of DGTR

i.e. www.dgtr.gov.in for any updated information with respect to this investigation.

L. Submission of Information on Confidential basis

21. Any party making any confidential submission or providing information on confidential basis before the Authority, is required to simultaneously submit a non-confidential version of the same in terms of Rule 7(2) of the Rules. Failure to adhere to the above may lead to rejection of the response / submissions.

22. The parties making any submission (including Appendices/Annexures attached thereto), before the Authority including questionnaire response, are required to file Confidential and Non-Confidential versions separately.

23. The “confidential” or “non-confidential” submissions must be clearly marked as “confidential” or “non-confidential” at the top of each page. Any submission made without such marking shall be treated as non-confidential by the Authority, and the Authority shall be at liberty to allow the other interested parties to inspect such submissions.

24. The confidential version shall contain all information which is by nature confidential and/or other information which the supplier of such information claims as confidential. For information which is claimed to be confidential by nature or the information on which confidentiality is claimed because of other reasons, the supplier of the information is required to provide a good cause statement along with the supplied information as to why such information cannot be disclosed.

25. The non-confidential version is required to be a replica of the confidential version with the confidential information preferably indexed or blanked out (in case indexation is not feasible) and summarized depending upon the information on which confidentiality is claimed. The non- confidential summary must be in sufficient detail to permit a reasonable understanding of the substance of the information furnished on confidential basis. However, in exceptional circumstances, the party submitting the confidential information may indicate that such information is not susceptible to summary, and a statement of reasons why summarization is not possible must be provided to the satisfaction of the Authority.

26. The Authority may accept or reject the request for confidentiality on examination of the nature of the information submitted. If the Authority is satisfied that the request for confidentiality is not warranted or if the supplier of the information is either unwilling to make the information public or to authorize its disclosure in generalized or summary form, it may disregard such information.

27. Any submission made without a meaningful non-confidential version thereof or without good cause statement on the confidentiality claim shall not be taken on record by the Authority.

28. The Authority on being satisfied and accepting the need for confidentiality of the information provided, shall not disclose it to any party without specific authorization of the party providing such information.

M. Inspection of Public File

29. In terms of Rule 6(7) of the Rules, any interested party may inspect the public file containing non- confidential version of the evidence submitted by other interested parties. The modality of maintaining public file in electronic mode is being worked out.

N. Non-cooperation

30. In case any interested party refuses access to and otherwise does not provide necessary information within a reasonable period, or significantly impedes the investigation, the Authority may declare such interested party as non-cooperative and record its findings on the basis of the facts available to it and make such recommendations to the Central Government as deemed fit.

B. B. SWAIN, 
Spl. Secy. & Designated Authority

नोट :- हमारे वेबसाइट www.indiangovtscheme.com पर ऐसी जानकारी रोजाना आती रहती है, तो आप ऐसी ही सरकारी योजनाओं की जानकारी पाने के लिए हमारे वेबसाइट www.indiangovtscheme.com से जुड़े रहे। 
*****

Initiation of Anti-Dumping Investigation concerning imports of ―Silicone Sealants ‖ originating in or exported China PR

Initiation of Anti-Dumping Investigation concerning imports of ―Silicone Sealants ‖ originating in or exported China PR
MINISTRY OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY
(Department of Commerce)

(DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF TRADE REMEDIES)
INITIATION NOTIFICATION
New Delhi, the 28th September, 2020

Case No. AD-OI–26/2020

Initiation of Anti-Dumping Investigation

Subject : Initiation of Anti-Dumping Investigation concerning imports of ―Silicone Sealants ‖ originating in or exported China PR.

F. No. 06/31/2020-DGTR.—1. M/s Alstone Industries Pvt. Ltd (hereinafter also referred to as “Applicant”) has filed an application seeking initiation of anti-dumping investigation concerning imports of “Silicone Sealants excluding silicon sealants used in manufacturing of solar photovoltaic modules, and thermal power applications” (hereinafter also referred to as “Subject goods” or “Product Under Consideration” or “PUC”) from China PR (also referred to as “Subject country”) before the Designated Authority (hereinafter also referred to as the “Authority”) in accordance with Customs Tariff Act, 1975 as amended from time to time (herein also referred to as the “Act”) and Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of Antidumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995 (hereinafter also referred to as the “Rules”).

2. The Applicant has alleged that material injury to the Domestic Industry is being caused due to dumped imports of subject goods from China PR and has requested for imposition of anti- dumping duty on such the imports of the subject goods from the subject country.

Product under Consideration (PUC)

3. The product under consideration is “Silicone Sealants excluding silicon sealants used in manufacturing of solar photovoltaic modules, and thermal power applications” originating in or exported China PR.

4. Silicone sealant is a liquid form of adhesive. Typically, it looks, feels, and acts like a gel. It has a different chemical make-up from other organic polymer-based adhesives. Unlike other adhesives, silicone keeps its elasticity and stability in both high and low temperatures. Furthermore, silicone sealant is resistant to other chemicals, moisture, and weathering. This makes it less likely to fail when used in construction of buildings and repairing objects. Unlike some adhesives, silicone sealants must cure. Curing silicone basically means letting it dry. Silicone Sealants are commonly used to seal windows to frames, as they provide a water-resistant seal that maintains a strong hold against harsh weather conditions. Silicone sealants can be used for caulking cracks. Sometimes individuals may use it to try and level surfaces in their home etc. Water-resistant silicone sealants are ideal for repairing areas around sinks and other areas where water is frequently found. Even though silicone isn‟t a good substance to use for weight-bearing seals, there is still a need for its powerful adhesive properties in many construction jobs. Silicone sealants are commonly used to bind surfaces such as plastic, metal, and glass together. For example, aquariums are often sealed with silicone. Windows are often sealed to frames with silicone sealants since it is weather resistant. Apart from construction/building and glass related applications, Silicone Sealants are used in automobiles, appliances, sealing cables and sensors in electronic devices, basic repairs around the house/tiles/floorings etc.

[post_ads]

5. Though Silicone Sealants are used in multiple segments and applications, Silicone Sealants used in the manufacturing of Solar Photovoltaic Modules and Thermal Power applications are not covered in the scope of PUC as the said types were not produced and supplied by the petitioner so far. Such types are claimed to be not identical to the subject goods produced by the applicant and are hence excluded from the scope of PUC.

6. The PUC does not have any dedicated classification under Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (51 of 1975). The imports of PUC have been taking place under respective subheadings of Chapter 32 and 35 and the import of PUC under some other chapters as well is not ruled out.

 Like Article

7. The Applicant has claimed that there is no known difference between the subject goods exported from the subject country and that produced by the domestic industry. Subject goods produced by the domestic industry and imported from the subject country is comparable in terms of essential product characteristics such as physical & chemical characteristics, manufacturing process & technology, functions & uses, product specifications, pricing, distribution & marketing and tariff classification of the goods. Consumers use the two interchangeably. The Applicant has further claimed that the two are technically and commercially substitutable and, hence, should be treated as like article under the Rules. Therefore, for the purpose of the present investigation, the subject goods produced by the Applicant in India are being treated as „Like Article‟ to the subject goods being imported from the subject country.

Domestic Industry & Standing

8. The Application has been filed by M/s Alstone Industries Pvt. Ltd and is supported by another producer of the subject goods in India namely M/s HP Adhesives Pvt. Ltd. The Applicant has claimed that they have neither imported the subject goods from the subject country nor are related to any exporter or producer of subject goods in the subject country or any importer of the PUC in India. Considering the information on record, the Applicant accounts for a major proportion of the Indian production. In view of the above and after examination, the Authority notes that the Applicant constitutes eligible domestic industry in terms of Rule 2 (b), and the application satisfies the criteria of standing in terms of Rule 5(3) of the Rules supra.

Basis of Alleged Dumping

a) Normal Value for China PR

9. The Applicant has claimed that China PR should be treated as a non-market economy and the normal value should be determined in terms of paragraph-7 of Annexure I of the Rules. The Applicant has cited Para 8(2) of Annexure I of the Rules and has stated that the Chinese producers should be directed to demonstrate that market economy conditions prevail in the industry producing the subject goods in terms Para 8(3) of Annexure I of the Rules. The Applicant has claimed that for China, normal value should be determined in accordance with para 7 and 8 of Annexure I of the Rules. The prices or constructed value of the product under consideration in the appropriate market economy third country or the prices from such third country to other countries, including India, has neither been made available by the Applicant nor is this information available with the Authority from any public source. Thus, normal value has been determined on the basis of price paid or payable in India, duly adjusted to include profit, which has been determined considering cost of production in India, after addition for selling, general & administrative expenses and reasonable profits.

b) Export price

10. The Authority has computed the export price for subject goods for the subject country based on transaction-wise import data from Directorate General of Commercial Intelligence and Statistics (DGCI&S). Adjustments have been made for ocean freight, marine insurance, port expenses, bank charges, commission, inland freight expenses and VAT.

c) Dumping margin

11. The normal value and the export price have been compared at ex-factory level, which prima facie shows dumping margin is above the de-minimis level and is significant in respect of the import of PUC from the subject country. There is sufficient prima facie evidence that the PUC from subject country is being dumped into the Indian market by the exporters from the subject country.

Evidence of injury and causal link

12. Information furnished by the Applicant has been considered for assessment of injury to the domestic industry. The Applicant has furnished evidence regarding the injury having been caused from the alleged dumped imports during the Period of Investigation in the form of increase volume of dumped imports in absolute terms and in relation to production and consumption, price undercutting and price suppression effect on the domestic industry. The Applicant has claimed that their performance has been adversely impacted resulting in stagnancy in production, capacity utilization and domestic sales volumes and declines in market share. The profitability, cash profits and return on capital employed has decreased as a result of increase in imports of product under consideration from subject country at a price below the selling price, cost of sales and non- injurious price of the domestic industry. The Applicant has also claimed that there is a further threat of injury to the domestic industry in view of such significant increase in imports in the recent time and suppressing effect of import prices on domestic selling prices. There is sufficient prima facie evidence of injury being caused to the domestic industry by dumped imports of subject goods from the subject country. It has been stated that the imports from other countries have been at a much higher price than subject country and cannot be treated as cause of alleged injury.

Initiation of Anti-Dumping Investigation

13. On the basis of the duly substantiated written application by or on behalf of the domestic industry, and having satisfied itself, on the basis of the prima facie evidence submitted by the domestic industry, about dumping of the subject goods originating in or exported from the subject country, injury to the domestic industry and causal link between such alleged dumping and injury, and in accordance with Section 9A of the Act read with Rule 5 of the Rules, the Authority, hereby, initiates an investigation to determine the existence, degree and effect of any alleged dumping in respect of the subject goods originating in or exported from the subject country and to recommend the amount of anti-dumping duty, which if levied, would be adequate to remove the injury to the domestic industry.

Subject Country

14. The subject country for this investigation is China PR.

Period of Investigation (POI)

15. The period of investigation (POI) for the present investigation is 1st April 2019 to 31st March 2020 (12 Months). The injury investigation period will cover the periods April 2016- March 2017, April 2017-March 2018, April 2018- March 2019 and the POI.

Procedure

16. Principles as given in Rule 6 of the Rules will be followed for the present investigation.

Submission of Information

17. In view of the special circumstances arising out of COVID-19 pandemic, all communication should be sent to the Designated Authority via email at email address [email protected], adv13- [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] . It should be ensured that the narrative part of the submission is in searchable PDF/ MS Word format and data files are in MS Excel format.

[post_ads_2]

18. The known exporters, their Government through their Embassy in India, the importers and users in India known to be concerned with the subject goods and the domestic industry are being informed separately to enable them to file all the relevant information in the form and manner prescribed within the time-limit set out below.

19. Any other interested party may also make its submissions relevant to the investigation in the form and manner prescribed within the time-limit set out below on the email address mentioned in Para 17 above.

20. Any party making any confidential submission before the Authority is required to make a non- confidential version of the same available to the other parties.

Time Limit

21. Any information relating to the present investigation should be sent to the Designated Authority via email at the email addresses [email protected] , [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], within thirty days from the date of receipt of the notice as per Rule 6(4) of the Anti- dumping Rules. It may, however, be noted that in terms of explanation of the said Rule, the notice calling for information and other documents shall be deemed to have been received within one week from the date on which it was sent by the Designated Authority or transmitted to the appropriate diplomatic representative of the exporting country. If no information is received within the prescribed time limit or the information received is incomplete, the Authority may record its findings on the basis of the facts available on record in accordance with the Rules.

22. All the interested parties are hereby advised to intimate their interest (including the nature of interest) in the instant matter and file their questionnaire responses within the above time limit. Submission of information on confidential basis

23. Any party making any confidential submission or providing information on confidential basis before the Authority is required to simultaneously submit a non-confidential version of the same in terms of Rule 7(2) of the Rules and the Trade Notices issued in this regard. Failure to adhere to the above may lead to rejection of the response / submissions.

24. The parties making any submission (including Appendices/Annexures attached thereto), before the Authority including questionnaire response, are required to file Confidential and Non- Confidential versions separately.

25. The “confidential” or “non-confidential” submissions must be clearly marked as “confidential” or “non-confidential” at the top of each page. Any submission made without such marking shall be treated as non-confidential by the Authority, and the Authority shall be at liberty to allow the other interested parties to inspect such submissions.

26. The confidential version shall contain all information which is by nature confidential and/or other information which the supplier of such information claims as confidential. For information which are claimed to be confidential by nature or the information on which confidentiality is claimed because of other reasons, the supplier of the information is required to provide a good cause statement along with the supplied information as to why such information cannot be disclosed.

27. The non-confidential version is required to be a replica of the confidential version with the confidential information preferably indexed or blanked out (in case indexation is not feasible) and summarized depending upon the information on which confidentiality is claimed. The non- confidential summary must be in sufficient detail to permit a reasonable understanding of the substance of the information furnished on confidential basis. However, in exceptional circumstances, the party submitting the confidential information may indicate that such information is not susceptible to summary, and a statement of reasons why summarization is not possible must be provided to the satisfaction of the Authority.

28. The Authority may accept or reject the request for confidentiality on examination of the nature of the information submitted. If the Authority is satisfied the request for confidentiality is not warranted or if the supplier of the information is either unwilling to make the information public or to authorize its disclosure in generalized or summary form, it may disregard such information.

29. Any submission made without a meaningful non-confidential version thereof or without good cause statement on the confidentiality claim shall not be taken on record by the Authority.

30. The Authority on being satisfied and accepting the need for confidentiality of the information provided, shall not disclose it to any party without specific authorization of the party providing such information.

Inspection of Public File

31. In terms of Rule 6(7) of the Rules, any interested party may inspect the public file containing non- confidential version of the evidence submitted by other interested parties. The modality of maintaining public file in electronic mode is being worked out.

Non-cooperation

32. In case where an interested party refuses access to, or otherwise does not provide In case where an interested party refuses access to, or otherwise does not provide necessary information within a reasonable period, or significantly impedes the investigation, the Authority may record its findings on the basis of the facts available to it and make such recommendations to the Central Government as deemed fit.

B. B. SWAIN,
Spl. Secy. & Designated Authority

नोट :- हमारे वेबसाइट www.indiangovtscheme.com पर ऐसी जानकारी रोजाना आती रहती है, तो आप ऐसी ही सरकारी योजनाओं की जानकारी पाने के लिए हमारे वेबसाइट www.indiangovtscheme.com से जुड़े रहे। 
*****
Share via
Copy link