Imports of Certain Rubber Chemicals, namely, TDQ & PX-13 from the European

Dated 8th July, 2016 | Copy of | Notification Sl82 |

INITIATION NOTIFICATION

Sunset Review

Initiation of Sunset Review of the anti-dumping duty in force on
imports of Certain Rubber Chemicals, namely, TDQ & PX-13
originating in or exported from the European Union and MOR and
MBTS originating in or exported from the Peoples Republic of China.

Having regard to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 as amended in 1995 (hereafter referred to as the Act) and the Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of Antidumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995) as amended from time to time (hereinafter referred to as the Rules:

2. WHEREAS the Designated Authority, vide notification No.15/14/2009-DGAD dated 11th May, 2011 recommended continued imposition of the antidumping duties on imports of MOR originating in or exported from the Peoples Republic of China (China PR); and PX13 and TDQ originating in or exported from the European Union (EU) and on the basis of these recommendations definitive antidumping duties, on the above goods originating in or exported from China PR and the European Union respectively, was extended by the Department of Revenue, Govt. of India, vide Notification No.67/2011-Customs, dated 28th July, 2011. The duties are valid till 27th July, 2016.

3. Further, continued imposition of antidumping duty on imports of MBTS originating in or exported from China PR was recommended by the Designated Authority, vide notification No.15/9/2010-DGAD dated 25th July, 2011 and on the basis of these recommendations definitive antidumping duties were extended by the Department of Revenue on MBTS originating in or exported from China PR, vide Notification No. 98/2011- Customs, dated 20th October, 2011. The duties are valid till 19th October, 2016.

Request for Review

4. Whereas, in terms of Section 9 A (5) the Customs Tariff Act, 1995, read with Rule 23 of the Rules, the antidumping duty imposed under the said Act shall, unless revoked earlier, cease to have effect on the expiry of five years from the date of such imposition, unless in a review, initiated before the expiry of the duty, the Designated Authority concludes that the cessation of the duties is likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury. In accordance with the above, the Authority is required to review, on the basis of a duly substantial request made by or on behalf of the domestic industry within a reasonable period of time prior to the date of the expiry of the measure, as to whether the expiry of duty is likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury.

5. And Whereas a petition has been filed by the major domestic producer of the above Rubber Chemicals i.e., M/s NOCIL Limited, in accordance with the Act and the Rules, alleging likelihood of continuation or recurrence of dumping of the above goods, originating in or exported from the countries/territories named above and consequent injury to the domestic industry and requesting for initiating a combined sunset review investigation for continuation of anti-dumping duties in force on imports of PX-13 and TDQ originating in or exported from the European Union; and MOR and MBTS originating in or exported from China PR.

Grounds for review

6. The request is for continuation of the antidumping duties in force on the grounds that dumping of PX-13, MOR and MBTS from the subject countries/territories have continued and is likely to continue and dumping of TDQ is likely to recur from the European Union if the duties are revoked because of the excess capacities in the subject countries/territories and other factors; and likelihood of continuation or recurrence of injury on account of such imports of the said goods as evidenced by the volume and price trends of imports in the last 15 months. The Authority finds sufficient prima facie evidence in the petition to initiate an investigation to examine the likelihood of continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury.

Products under Consideration and Like Article

7. The products on which the duties are in force are four specific rubber chemicals used in manufacture of rubber products, viz., PX-13, TDQ, MOR & MBTS. This review covers these four specific rubber chemicals only and hereinafter they have been referred to as subject goods. The products have been described in detail in the petition in terms of their chemical compositions and trade names. There is no known difference between the goods manufactured by the petitioner and the other producers in the countries/territories named.

8. The Authority, in the original investigations, noted that there is no dedicated ITC HS Classification for the subject goods and products under consideration are classified under various subheadings of customs classification heads 38.12.10, 38.12.20 and 38.12.30 as well as under 29.34.20 and 29.25.20 (at six digit levels) of the Customs Tariff Act and ITC HS classification. Therefore, the Customs and ITC HS classifications shown above are indicative only and are in no way binding on the scope of the present investigation.

Domestic Industry

9. The Petition has been filed by NOCIL Limited., who is the major producer of the subject goods in India. The other producers of the subject goods in India are (a) Lanxess India Pvt. Ltd (b) Merchem Ltd. and (c) PMC Rubber Chemicals India Pvt. Ltd. However, as per information available with Authority the petitioner Company commands a major proportion of the total production of each of the subject goods in India and therefore, commands the standing to file the application. Accordingly, the petitioner Company constitutes the ‘Domestic Industry’ within the meaning of the Rules for the purpose of injury investigation.

Initiation of Sunset Review

10. Having satisfied itself, on the basis of the positive prima facie evidence submitted by the domestic industry indicating likelihood of continuation or recurrence of dumping and consequent injury, the Authority hereby initiates a Sunset Review investigation in accordance with Section 9 A (5) of the Act, read with Rule 23 of Antidumping Rules, to examine whether the expiry of the duties on the subject goods extended/ imposed, vide customs notification No.67/2011-Customs dated 28th July, 2011 and No.98/2011-Customs dated 20th October, 2011, would likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury to the domestic industry and whether continued imposition of duties is warranted.

Procedure

11. The review will cover all aspects of Notification Nos.15/14/2009-DGAD dated 11th May 2011 and 15/9/2010-DGAD dated 25th July 2011. The period of investigation for the purpose of the present review is from April 2015-Mar 2016 (12 Months). The injury investigation period will however cover the periods 2012- 13, 2013-14, 2014-15 and proposed period of investigation (2015-16). The provisions of Rules 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20 of the Rule supra shall be applicable to this review.

Submission of Information

12. The known exporters in the subject countries/territories, the Government of the subject countries/ territories, through their embassies/representatives in India, and known importers and users of the subject goods in India, are being addressed separately to submit relevant information in the form and manner prescribed and to make their views known to the Authority at the following address:

The Designated Authority
Directorate General of Anti-Dumping & Allied Duties
Department of Commerce,
Jeevan Tara Building, 4th Floor
5, Parliament Street
New Delhi-110001

13. Any other interested party may also make its submissions relevant to the investigation in the prescribed form and manner 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.

Time Limit

14. Any information relating to the present review and any request for hearing should be sent in writing so as to reach the Authority at the address mentioned above not later than forty days (40 Days) from the date of communication of initiation of this Notification. 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 Antidumping Rules.

15. 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 and offer their comments to the domestic industry’s application regarding the need to continue or otherwise the Anti-dumping measures within 40 days from the communication of initiation of this Notification.

Submission of information on confidential basis

16. In case confidentiality is claimed on any part of the questionnaire response/submissions, the same must be submitted in two separate sets (a) marked as Confidential (with title, index, number of pages, etc.) and (b) other set marked as Non Confidential (with title, index, number of pages, etc.). All the information supplied must be clearly marked as either “confidential” or “non-confidential” at the top of each page.

17. Information supplied without any confidential marking shall be treated as non-confidential and the Authority shall be at liberty to allow the other interested parties to inspect any such non-confidential information. Two (2) copies of the confidential version and five (05) copies of the non-confidential version must be submitted by all interested parties.

18. The non-confidential version is required to be a replica of the confidential version with the confidential information preferably indexed or blanked out/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. For information claimed as confidential; 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 and/or why summarization of such information is not possible, to the satisfaction of the Authority.

19. 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 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.

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

21. In terms of Rule 6(7) of the AD Rules, any interested party may inspect the public file containing nonconfidential version of the evidence submitted by other interested parties.

Non-cooperation

22. 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 it may deem fit.

Sd/-
(A.K. Bhalla)
Addl. Secy. & Designated Authority

F.No.15/5/2016-DGAD
Issued by:
Ministry of Commerce and Industry
(Department of Commerce)
(Directorate General of Anti-Dumping and Allied Duties)
New Delhi