Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2011 (8) TMI 577

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Designated Authority had imposed definitive Anti-dumping duty on NBR originating in or exported out of Germany and Korea RP and in the first sunset review, the Designated Authority recommended for continuation of the definitive Anti-dumping duty on the said NBR originating in or exported from Germany and Korea, which was done by the government vide Notification No. 109/2007-Customs dated 9-10-2007, which was valid up to 8-10-2008. The current proceedings are in the second sunset review which was initiated on a petition filed by the domestic industry. The initiation Notification by the Designated Authority was dated 8-10-2007. Pursuance to said initiation notification dated 8-10-2007, the appellants herein filed the questionnaire response as required under the Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of Anti-dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995 (hereinafter read as AD Rules). The Designated Authority conducted a public hearing on 17-6-2008 which was attended by all the interested parties. Consequent to such public hearing, all the interested parties filed written submissions and rejoinder submissions. The Designated Authorit....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... It is his further submission that the Designated Authority has concluded that the appellant had proposals to create reasonably higher additional capacities in the near future is not based on any substantive evidence but on certain press reports, though the said press reports were never disclosed to the appellants to contradict or to defend the same. It is his submission that on the contrary appellants had stated very categorically that there were no plans for capacity expansion. (iii)   It is his submission that while determining the volume of imports, data given by the exporters have been used for the period of investigation but the Designated Authority continued to use DGCIS data for the previous years, hence, the conclusion that the volume of imports from the subject countries is recorded as a very significant jump in the period of investigation, is erroneous. (iv)   It is his next submission that Designated Authority had recorded import volumes from Korea RP are set to grow while the unit export rates to India have consistently remained lower than the export rate to other countries. It is his submission that the export prices to other countries are hi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....at certain grades of NBR, actual consumption factors reported by the appellants were rejected without assigning any reasons; SGA expenses and financial expenses were not allocated based on turnover following the standard practice and while calculating weighted average normal value, weight given to various grades of product concerned sold in the domestic market and export market was not uniform resulting into a skewed weighed average normal value. It is his submission that the definitive Anti-dumping duty imposed of US $ 38.73 is disproportionate to the dumping margin which is determined as 1.69% for the exports made from Korea RP. Hence, determination of single normal value for Korea as whole is not in accordance with law. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Designated Authority would submit that the dumping and injury analysis was based on hard facts and evidence relied upon by the authority which was conducted during the investigations. It is his submission that the statement of Korean Stock Exchange for LG Chem Ltd. was considered along with various statements of the responsible officers of Kumho Petrochemicals. It is his submission that the Designated Authorit....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d the Anti-dumping which was imposed previously should be continued. 5. We have considered the submissions made at length by both sides and perused the records. At the outset, it is recorded that the appellants herein are challenging the continuance of definitive Anti-dumping duty imposed on goods originating in or from Korea RP. 5.1 The undisputed fact in these cases is that, mid-term review initiated by the Designated Authority vide initiation Notification dated 8-10-2007 was well within the powers of the Designated Authority as per the provisions of Rule 16 of the AD Rules. It is also undisputed that all the interested parties were informed about the initiation of mid-term review by the Designated Authority. It is also undisputed that all the interested parties filed their submissions to the Designated Authority during the investigations conducted. It is also seen from the records that the Designated Authority had given a disclosure statement on 23-9-2008 for which, the current appellants have filed their comments on 25-9-2008/30-9-2008. It is also undisputed that the Designated Authority partly revised disclosure statement on 4-10-2008 only to M/s. Kumho Petroch....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....case of sunset or mid-term review, which is as under : "37. The final findings recorded by the Designated Authority at the time of initial imposition of anti-dumping duty on the existence of injury to the domestic industry must be considered to continue to remain valid, unless it is proved to be otherwise, either by the Designated Authority in suo motto review or by the applicant seeking review. In the present case, the review had been initiated by the Designated Authority. Neither the Designated Authority nor the appellant had placed any material on record which could possibly displace the findings given by the Designated Authority at the stage of initial anti-dumping duty." 5.4 In these cases before us in hand, the Designated Authority has recorded the likelihood of continuance of the dumping and the injury in Paragraph 109, 110, 111 and 112, which is as under : "109. The Authority analyzed the data on likelihood of continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury in the light of the various arguments presented by the interested parties. It was observed that in the current scenario, the volume of the imports from the subject countries recorded a very signi....