Ministry of Finance revises anti-dumping duty rates on PTA imports from Korea RP, Thailand, Indonesia

The Ministry of Finance imposed anti-dumping duty on Pure Terephthalic Acid (PTA) from Korea RP, Thailand, and Indonesia. After a review, the Designated Authority recommended revised duty rates, resulting in a reduction for Korean exports. However, errors in duty computation and calculation of prices were highlighted, leading to a re-computation of Non-Injurious Price and Landed Cost. The Tribunal directed amendments to Notification No. 99/2000, imposing anti-dumping duty on PTA imports from Korea RP at revised rates, thereby allowing the appeal and adjusting the duty rate accordingly.

---

---

Issues:
1. Imposition of anti-dumping duty on Pure Terephthalic Acid (PTA) from Korea RP.
2. Review of anti-dumping duty by the Designated Authority.
3. Dispute regarding the correct computation of the rate of anti-dumping duty.
4. Errors in determining the Landed Value of imported PTA and Non-Injurious Price for domestically manufactured PTA.
5. Justification of different norms for working out the cost of inputs.
6. Recalculation of Non-Injurious Price and Landed Cost.
7. Re-computed injury margins for PTA exports from Korea RP.
8. Amendment of Notification No. 99/2000 to revise anti-dumping duty rates.

1. Imposition of Anti-Dumping Duty:
The Ministry of Finance imposed anti-dumping duty on Pure Terephthalic Acid (PTA) from Korea RP, Thailand, and Indonesia based on investigations showing dumping margins. The duty imposed varied for Korean Supplies, leading to financial losses for the domestic industry.

2. Review of Anti-Dumping Duty:
Reliance Industries Ltd. sought an upward revision of anti-dumping duty due to increased dumping margins from Korea RP. The Designated Authority recommended revised duty rates, resulting in a reduction in duty for Korean exports, causing dissatisfaction for the domestic industry.

3. Dispute over Duty Computation:
The appeal contended that the Designated Authority erred in determining the duty rate, given the increased dumping margins and adverse effects on the domestic industry. The Authority's recommendation for a reduction in duty was deemed inconsistent with the investigation findings.

4. Errors in Computation:
The Designated Authority's errors in calculating Landed Value and Non-Injurious Price were highlighted. The exclusion of Return on Investment in electricity cost determination and inconsistent cost computation practices led to artificially lower duty rates.

5. Justification of Norms:
The Designated Authority's practice of adopting different norms for input costs was questioned. The failure to disclose cost elements affected the accuracy of determining Non-Injurious Price and Landed Cost, impacting the duty rate.

6. Recalculation of Prices:
The Tribunal directed a re-computation of Non-Injurious Price by including capital costs in electricity generation and using the actual cost of production for inputs. Landed Cost was to be re-determined by excluding handling charges, ensuring a fair comparison.

7. Re-computed Injury Margins:
After adjustments, the injury margins for PTA exports from Korea RP were revised. The Designated Authority provided re-calculated margins, indicating the difference between Non-Injurious Price and Landed Value for Korean exports.

8. Amendment of Duty Rates:
Based on the revised injury margins, the Tribunal ordered amendments to Notification No. 99/2000 to impose anti-dumping duty on PTA imports from Korea RP at the recalculated rates, thereby allowing the appeal and revising the duty rate accordingly.

---