Anti-dumping pricing methodology: actual costs, permissible landed-value components, and revised duty computation shape injury margin analysis.

In anti-dumping matters, non-injurious price may be computed on actual production costs of raw materials and utilities where the domestic industry is established, and sales tax and income tax need not be included. Landed value must be confined to permissible components; SAD and handling charges cannot be added for landing-cost purposes, and any anti-dumping duty must be worked out on the corrected landed value and expressed in US dollar terms where required. Investigation period selection may extend to capture relevant import data, forecast figures cannot override actual imports, and de minimis export and negative injury margin objections fail where the revised computation does not support them.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the Designated Authority correctly computed the non-injurious price by relying on actual costs of raw materials and utilities and by excluding sales tax and income tax. (ii) Whether SAD and handling charges could be included in the landed value and whether anti-dumping duty had to be refixed in US dollar terms. (iii) Whether the investigation against the Spanish exporter was vitiated by the choice of investigation period or by the plea of de minimis exports and negative injury margin.

Issue (i): Whether the Designated Authority correctly computed the non-injurious price by relying on actual costs of raw materials and utilities and by excluding sales tax and income tax.

Analysis: The non-injurious price was held to be a factual determination based on relevant data. Where the domestic industry is already established, actual production costs provide a reliable basis for injury analysis. The authority was justified in taking actual costs of raw materials and utilities instead of market tariff assumptions. Sales tax does not form part of ex-factory price. The provision made for return on capital was treated as adequate to cover capital-related elements, and the exclusion of income tax was not found erroneous.

Conclusion: The computation of non-injurious price was upheld and the challenge on this issue failed.

Issue (ii): Whether SAD and handling charges could be included in the landed value and whether anti-dumping duty had to be refixed in US dollar terms.

Analysis: The landed value was found to have been inflated by inclusion of elements that were not permissible. SAD was not a duty that could be added for landing-cost purposes, and the separate addition of handling charges was also unjustified. Once the landed value was corrected, it had to be compared with the non-injurious price to determine the correct injury margin. Since anti-dumping duty cannot exceed the relevant margin, duty had to be worked out on the revised basis and expressed in US dollar terms.

Conclusion: The landed value was required to be refixed by excluding SAD and handling charges, and the resulting anti-dumping duties were to be imposed in US dollar terms.

Issue (iii): Whether the investigation against the Spanish exporter was vitiated by the choice of investigation period or by the plea of de minimis exports and negative injury margin.

Analysis: The authority was entitled to fix the investigation period so as to capture relevant imports even beyond the date of the application. Forecast figures could not prevail over actual import data. The exports were not de minimis on the material before the authority, and the negative injury margin shown in the disclosure stage did not survive once the landed value was correctly recomputed. The authority was therefore justified in subjecting the Spanish exporter to anti-dumping duty.

Conclusion: The objections of the Spanish exporter were rejected and the duty imposed on its exports was sustained in modified form.

Final Conclusion: The common order upheld the methodology for determining non-injurious price, corrected the landed-value computation, and consequentially modified the anti-dumping duties on the subject exports.

Ratio Decidendi: In anti-dumping matters, actual production costs may be used for non-injurious price where the domestic industry is established, and only permissible components can be included in landed value for determining injury margin and duty.

---