Cumulative anti-dumping assessment and injury analysis may sustain duty, with dollar denomination preserving protection.

Cumulative assessment of dumped imports is permitted where the conditions in Annexure-II are satisfied, and the absence of additional foreign-regulation language requiring separate competition analysis between imported products does not defeat cumulation. In anti-dumping analysis, dumping margin, material injury and causal link are assessed on evidence such as production, capacity utilisation, sales, market share and financial losses, and injury need not be attributed by comparing degrees of harm among exporting countries. The document also notes that anti-dumping duty may be expressed in dollar terms to preserve its protective effect against exchange-rate fluctuations.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the Designated Authority was justified in cumulatively assessing imports from Germany and Korea for injury analysis under the anti-dumping rules; (ii) whether dumping, material injury to the domestic industry, and causal link were established so as to sustain imposition of anti-dumping duty; (iii) whether the duty should be sustained in rupee terms or modified to dollar terms.

Issue (i): Whether the Designated Authority was justified in cumulatively assessing imports from Germany and Korea for injury analysis under the anti-dumping rules.

Analysis: The governing rule permits cumulative assessment where the conditions specified in clause (iii) of Annexure-II are satisfied. The Tribunal held that the domestic rule does not contain the additional language found in the foreign regulation relied upon by the appellant, namely the requirement of examining competition between the imported products inter se. Since the statutory conditions for cumulation were met, the challenge to the combined assessment of imports from Germany and Korea was not sustainable.

Conclusion: The cumulation of imports from Germany and Korea was upheld.

Issue (ii): Whether dumping, material injury to the domestic industry, and causal link were established so as to sustain imposition of anti-dumping duty.

Analysis: The dumping margin was not questioned, and the Tribunal accepted the Designated Authority's findings on injury and causal link on the basis of production, capacity utilisation, sales, market share, financial losses, and other relevant indicators. The plea that injury was attributable only to imports from other countries was rejected because the law concerns injury caused by dumped imports under consideration, not comparative degrees of injury by different exporting countries. The selection of the six-month period of investigation and the method of determining fair selling price were also upheld.

Conclusion: Dumping, material injury, and causal link were held to be established.

Issue (iii): Whether the anti-dumping duty should be sustained in rupee terms or modified to dollar terms.

Analysis: The Tribunal accepted the contention that anti-dumping duty should be fixed in dollar terms so that the protective effect is not eroded by exchange-rate fluctuations. Accordingly, the impugned findings were sustained with modification only on the currency in which the duty was to be expressed.

Conclusion: The duty was directed to be imposed in dollar terms instead of rupee terms.

Final Conclusion: The substantive findings on cumulation, dumping, injury, and causal link were maintained, but the duty format was modified to dollar denomination, leaving the appellant with only limited relief.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the statutory anti-dumping rules prescribe cumulative assessment on specified conditions, the absence of foreign-regulation language requiring separate analysis of competition between imported products does not defeat cumulation; once dumping, injury, and causal link are established on the evidence, the finding is sustainable, subject to appropriate modification in the form of duty where required to preserve the intended protection.

---