Sunset review can reassess exporters with prior nil duty rates where dumping and injury may continue or recur.

A sunset review may reassess an exporter even where the original investigation assigned a de minimis or nil dumping margin. The review is treated as a fresh examination of dumping margin, injury margin, and the likelihood of continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury on expiry of the existing measure. The earlier zero-duty finding does not bar consideration of the exporter, and injury may be assessed on a country-wise cumulative basis where the anti-dumping framework permits it. On that reasoning, the imposition of anti-dumping duty in the sunset review was found lawful and the challenge failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether anti-dumping duty could validly be imposed in a sunset review on an exporter that had been assigned a de minimis or nil rate in the original investigation, and whether such review had to result in termination of proceedings against that exporter.

Analysis: The original zero-duty finding did not preclude reconsideration in the sunset review. The review was treated as a fresh examination of the exporter's dumping margin, injury margin, and the likelihood of continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury on expiry of the existing notification. The anti-dumping framework permits assessment of injury on a country-wise cumulative basis, and the designated authority could lawfully consider the exporter despite the earlier nil rate. The authority's approach was found consistent with the relevant anti-dumping rules and the anti-dumping agreement provisions relied upon in the decision.

Conclusion: The imposition of anti-dumping duty on the exporter in the sunset review was held to be lawful, and the challenge was rejected.

---