Anti-dumping duty requires objective proof of injury and causal link; surplus foreign capacity alone is insufficient.

Anti-dumping duty was held unsustainable because material injury, threat of injury, and causal link were not established on objective and reliable data. The record showed high capacity utilisation, stable or improved selling prices, no significant price suppression or undercutting, and returns that did not support a finding that the domestic industry could not recover costs or earn a reasonable return. The claimed injury was based on assumptions about fixed capital return and annualised figures from a short period, which the material did not support. Surplus capacity in exporting countries, without a clearly foreseen and imminent threat, was insufficient. The anti-dumping notification was set aside for the importers.

---

---

Issues: Whether the finding of material injury and threat of injury to the domestic industry was sustainable for imposition of anti-dumping duty.

Analysis: Anti-dumping duty can be sustained only where dumping, material injury, and causal link are established on an objective appraisal of the record. The evidence on record, including the data produced during the appeal, showed that the domestic industry had high capacity utilisation, improved or stable selling prices, no significant price suppression or undercutting, and returns that did not justify the conclusion that it was unable to recover its costs or earn a reasonable return. The claimed injury also rested on an asserted fixed return on capital and on annualised figures from an abbreviated period, but the actual material did not support those assumptions. On threat of injury, surplus capacity in exporting countries by itself was insufficient absent a clearly foreseen and imminent threat.

Conclusion: The finding of material injury and threat of injury was unsustainable, and anti-dumping duty could not be imposed on that basis.

Final Conclusion: The anti-dumping notification was set aside as far as the importers were concerned, while the challenge by the domestic manufacturers failed.

Ratio Decidendi: Anti-dumping duty cannot be imposed unless material injury or threat of injury, together with causal link, is established on objective and reliable data, and a mere assertion of dumping or surplus foreign capacity is insufficient.

---