Newsprint in Rolls or Sheets, excluding Glazed
Newsprint from Australia, Canada,
European Union, Hong Kong, Russia, Singapore and United Arab Emirates –
DGTR
Initiates Investigation on Complaint of Indian Newsprint Manufacturers Association with support of
17 Domestic Producers
[DGTR Initiation Notification (Case
No.OI-31/2019) dated 20.01.2020]
Subject: Initiation of anti-dumping investigation
concerning imports of “Newsprint in rolls or sheets, excluding glazed
newsprint” originating in or exported from Australia, Canada, European Union,
Hong Kong, Russia, Singapore and United Arab Emirates.
F.No.6/40/2019-DGTR
1. Indian Newsprint Manufacturers Association (hereinafter
referred to as the “Applicant”), has filed an application before the Designated
Authority (hereinafter also referred to as the “Authority”) on behalf of
domestic industry, in accordance with the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 as amended
from time to time (hereinafter also referred to as the “Act”) and Customs
Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of Anti-dumping Duty on
Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995 as amended from
time to time (hereinafter also referred to as the “Rules”) for original anti-dumping
duty investigation on imports of “Newsprint, in rolls or sheets, excluding
glazed newsprint” (hereinafter referred as “product under consideration” or PUC
or “subject goods”) originating in or exported from Australia, Canada, European
Union, Hong Kong, Korea RP, New Zealand, Russia, Singapore and United Arab
Emirates.
Subject Countries
2. The Applicant has claimed dumping and injury from
Australia, Canada, European Union, Hong Kong, Korea RP, Russia, Singapore, New
Zealand and United Arab Emirates. However, landed value of imports from New
Zealand & Korea RP based on DGCI&S import data indicates that injury
margin is negative. Accordingly, the subject countries for the present
investigation are Australia, Canada, European Union, Hong Kong, Russia,
Singapore and United Arab Emirates.
Product under consideration
3. The product under consideration is newsprint in rolls or sheets,
excluding glazed newsprint.
4. Newsprint is an uncoated paper of a kind used for the
printing of newspapers, of which not less than 50% by weight of the total fibre content consists of wood fibres
obtained by a mechanical or chemi-mechanical process,
unsized or very lightly sized, having a surface
roughness Parker Print Surf (1 Mpa) on each side
exceeding 2.5 micrometres (microns), weighing not
less than 40 g/m2 and not more than 65 g/m2 and;
a. in strips or rolls of a width exceeding 28 cm;
or
b. in rectangular (including square) sheets with
one side exceeding 28 cm and the other side exceeding 15 cm in the unfolded
state.
5.
The PUC may be denominated in terms of area expressed as square metre or weight expressed in kgs
or MT. For the purpose of initiation, the data has been considered as
denominated by weight in MT.
6.
The PUC is classified under the tariff custom classification 4801 00 90. The PUC,
however, has been imported under the code 4801 00 10 also. The customs
classification is only indicative and is not binding on the scope of the
product under consideration.
Like article
7. The Applicant has claimed
that the PUC, which are being dumped into India, are identical to the goods
produced by the domestic industry. There are no known differences either in the
technical specifications, quality, functions or end-uses of the dumped imports
and the domestically produced goods manufactured by the Applicant. The two are
technically and commercially substitutable and, hence, should be treated as
‘like article’ under the AD Rules. Therefore, the goods produced by the
Applicant in India are being treated as ‘Like Article’ to the PUC being
imported from the subject countries.
Domestic
industry
8. The application has
been filed by the Indian Newsprint Manufactures Association on behalf of the
domestic producers of the like articles. The application has been supported by
17 other domestic producers of like articles and has not been opposed by any
domestic producer. The Applicant has claimed that neither they have imported
the PUC from the subject countries nor are they related to any exporter or
producer of PUC in the subject countries or any importer of the PUC in India.
On the basis of the information available, the Authority notes that the
application has been made by or on behalf of the domestic industry in terms of
the provisions contained in Rule 2 (b) and Rule 5 (3) of the Rules.
Basis of alleged dumping
Normal
Value
9. The
Applicant has stated that the domestic producers use recycled or waste paper as
the raw material for manufacturing the like article, while most of the foreign
producers use wood pulp as raw material for producing the PUC and the
conversion cost from wood pulp is at least three times the conversion cost from
recycled paper. The Applicant has, therefore, requested that Constructed Normal
Value (CNV) on the basis of cost of production in India should not be considered
for determination of normal value.
10. Section
9A of the Customs Tariff Act states that the normal value in relation to an
article means the comparable price, in the ordinary course of trade, for the
like article when destined for consumption in the exporting country or
territory. In case of European Union, the Applicant has relied on the intra-EU
trade data for determination of domestic selling price. Similarly, in case of
Canada the Applicant has relied upon published reports for determination of domestic
selling price. However, for other countries domestic selling price has been
claimed to be not available and therefore the Applicant has relied on the
import data of the PUC into that country. Accordingly, the Authority for the
purpose of initiation, decided to proceed with the normal value as constructed
by the Applicant.
Export price
11.
The Authority has computed the export price for all the subject countries based
on DGCI&S transaction-wise import data. Adjustments have been made for
ocean freight, marine insurance, port expenses, bank charges, commission and
inland freight.
12.
The normal value and the export price have been compared at ex-factory level,
which prima facie shows significant dumping margin in respect of the PUC from
the subject countries. There is sufficient prima facie evidence that the PUC
are being dumped into the Indian market by the exporters from the subject
countries.
Injury and Causal link
13. Information
furnished by the Applicant has been considered for assessment of injury to the
domestic industry. The Applicant has furnished evidence regarding the injury
having taken place as a result of the alleged dumping in the form of increased
volume of dumped imports in absolute terms and in relation to production and
consumption in India, price undercutting, and price suppressing effect on the
domestic industry. The Applicant has claimed that its performance has been
adversely impacted in respect of production, sales and consequent decline in
profits, return on capital employed, and cash flow, as a result of increase in
imports of PUC at a price below selling price and non-injurious price for the
domestic industry. There is sufficient prima facie evidence that the injury
exists and is being caused to the domestic industry by dumped imports from
subject countries.
Initiation of Anti-Dumping
Investigation
14. On
the basis of the duly substantiated written application by or on behalf of the
domestic industry, and having satisfied itself, on the basis of the prima facie
evidence submitted by the domestic industry, about dumping of the product under
consideration originating in or exported from the subject countries, injury to
the domestic industry and causal link between such alleged dumping and injury,
and in accordance with Section 9A of the Act read with Rule 5 of the Rules, the
Authority, hereby, initiates an investigation to determine the existence,
degree and effect of any alleged dumping in respect of the product under
consideration originating in or exported from the subject countries and to
recommend the amount of anti-dumping duty, which if levied, would be adequate
to remove the injury to the domestic industry.
Period of Investigation (POI)
15. The Applicant proposed the Period of Investigation (hereinafter
also referred to as “POI”) 01st April, 2019 – 31st September, 2019 (6 months). However,
the Authority has proposed the POI in the present investigation as 01st April
2019 – 31st December 2019 (9 months).
The injury investigation period will cover the periods 2016-17, 2017-18,
2018-19 and POI.
Procedure
16. Principles
as given in Rule 6 of the Rules will be followed for the present investigation.
Submission of Information
17.
The known exporters in the subject countries, their government through their
Embassy in India, the importers and users in India known to be concerned with
the PUC and the domestic industry are being informed separately to enable them
to file all the relevant information in the form and manner prescribed within
the time-limit set out below.
18.
Any other interested party may also make its submissions relevant to the
investigation in the form and manner prescribed within the time-limit set out
below. The information/ submission may be submitted to:
The
Designated Authority
Directorate General of Trade Remedies Ministry of Commerce & Industry
Department of Commerce
Government of
India
4th Floor, Jeevan Tara Building, 5, Parliament Street
New
Delhi-110001
19. Any
party making any confidential submission before the Authority is required to
make a non-confidential version of the same available to the other parties.
Time Limit
20. Any
information relating to the present investigation should be sent in writing so
as to reach the Authority at the address mentioned above within thirty days
from the date of receipt of the notice as per Rule 6(4) of the Anti-Dumping
Rules. It may, however, be noted that in terms of explanation of the said Rule,
the notice calling for information and other documents shall be deemed to have
been received within one week from the date on which it was sent by the
Designated Authority or transmitted to the appropriate diplomatic
representative of the exporting Countries. If no information is received within
the prescribed time-limit or the information received is incomplete, the
Authority may record its findings on the basis of the facts available on record
in accordance with the Anti-Dumping Rules.
21. All
the interested parties are hereby advised to intimate their interest (including
the nature of interest) in the instant matter and file their questionnaire
responses within the above time limit.
Submission of information on
confidential basis
22. The parties making any submission (including
Appendices/Annexures attached thereto), before the Authority including
questionnaire response, are required to file the same in two separate sets, in
case "confidentiality" is claimed on any part thereof:
i. one set marked as
Confidential (with title, number of pages, index, etc.), and
ii. the other set marked as Non-Confidential (with title, number
of pages, index, etc.).
23.
The “confidential” or “non-confidential” submissions must be clearly marked as
“confidential” or “non-confidential” at the top of each page. Any submission
made without such marking shall be treated as non-confidential by the Authority,
and the Authority shall be at liberty to allow the other interested parties to
inspect such submissions. Soft copies of both the versions will also be
required to be submitted, along with the hard copies in four (4) sets of each.
24.
The confidential version shall contain all information which is by nature
confidential and/or other information which the supplier of such information
claims as confidential. For information which are claimed to be confidential by
nature or the information on which confidentiality is claimed because of other
reasons, the supplier of the information is required to provide a good cause
statement along with the supplied information as to why such information cannot
be disclosed.
25.
The non-confidential version is required to be a replica of the confidential
version with the confidential information preferably indexed or blanked out (in
case indexation is not feasible) and summarized depending upon the information
on which confidentiality is claimed. The non-confidential summary must be in
sufficient detail to permit a reasonable understanding of the substance of the information
furnished on confidential basis. However, in exceptional circumstances, the
party submitting the confidential information may indicate that such information
is not susceptible to summary, and a statement of reasons why summarization is
not possible must be provided to the satisfaction of the Authority.
26.
The Authority may accept or reject the request for confidentiality on
examination of the nature of the information submitted. If the Authority is
satisfied that the request for confidentiality is not warranted or if the
supplier of the information is either unwilling to make the information public
or to authorize its disclosure in generalized or summary form, it may disregard
such information.
27.
Any submission made without a meaningful non-confidential version thereof or
without good cause statement on the confidentiality claim shall not be taken on
record by the Authority.
28.
The Authority on being satisfied and accepting the need for confidentiality of
the information provided, shall not disclose it to any party without specific
authorization of the party providing such information.
Inspection of Public File
29. In
terms of Rule 6(7) of the Anti-Dumping Rules, any interested party may inspect
the public file containing non-confidential version of the evidence submitted
by other interested parties.
Non-cooperation
30. In
case where an interested party refuses access to, or otherwise does not provide
necessary information within a reasonable period, or significantly impedes the
investigation, the Authority may record its findings on the basis of the facts
available to it and make such recommendations to the Central Government as
deemed fit.