Diketopyrrolo Pyrrole Pigment Red 254 (DPP Red 254) from China
Sunset Review Initiated on Complaint of Heubach
Colour
·
Ntfn 41-ADD/2015 Expire on 16 August
2020
[Initiation
Notification (Case
no. SSR 15/2019) dated 18.12.2019]
Subject: Initiation of Sunset Review of Anti-Dumping
investigation concerning imports of Diketopyrrolo Pyrrole Pigment Red 254 (DPP
Red 254) originating in or exported from China PR.
F.
No. 7/27/2019-DGTR: Whereas M/s. Heubach Colour Private
Limited (hereinafter referred to as the “applicant”) has filed an application
before the Designated Authority (hereinafter referred to as the Authority), on
behalf of the domestic industry, in accordance with the Customs Tariff Act,
1975, as amended from time to time (hereinafter 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 referred to as the “Rules”), for Sunset Review
of Anti-Dumping investigation concerning imports of “Diketopyrrolo Pyrrole
Pigment Red 254 (DPP Red 254)” (hereinafter referred to as the “subject
goods” or “product under consideration”), originating in or exported from China
PR and Switzerland (hereinafter referred to as the “subject countries”).
2.
AND WHEREAS, the applicant has alleged likelihood of continuation or recurrence
of dumping of subject goods, originating and exported from China PR and
Switzerland and consequent injury to the domestic industry and has requested
for review and continuation of the anti-dumping duty imposed on the imports of
subject goods, originating in or exported from the subject countries.
Background
3.
And Whereas, the original investigation concerning imports of the subject goods
from China PR and Switzerland was initiated by Authority vide Initiation Notification
No. 14/8/2014-DGAD dated 20th June
2014. The Authority vide its final findings No. 14/8/2014- DGAD dated 19th
June 2015, recommended imposition of
anti-dumping duty against imports of the subject goods from China PR and
Switzerland. Duty was imposed by the Central Government vide Customs
Notification No. 41/2015- Customs (ADD) dated 17th August 2015.
Subject
Country
4.
The countries involved in the original investigation were China PR and
Switzerland. However, for the purpose of this current sunset review
investigation, the Authority is initiating the investigation only against China
PR, since prima facie analysis of information submitted by petitioner does not
show likelihood of dumping from Switzerland. China PR is, therefore, the
subject country for this sunset review.
Product
under consideration
5.
The product under consideration in the present investigation is “Diketopyrrolo
Pyrrole Pigment Red 254’ (herein after referred as “DPP Red 254” or “subject
goods” or “product concerned”). DPP Red 254 is a highly saturated medium shade
red pigment with good hiding power, excellent fastness to organic solvent and
outstanding light and weather fastness. The pigments are synthetic organic
colors which retain their crystalline or particulate form throughout the
application process. DPP Red 254 is having a brilliant shade, high color
strength, opacity and saturation. The chemical name of DPP Red 254 is 3,
6-bis-(4- chlorophenyl)-2, 5-dihydro pyrrolo (3, 4- c) pyrrole ,1,4 dione. The
molecular formula of DPP 254 is C18H10Cl2N2O2. The color index number of DPP
Red 254 is 56110 and chemical abstract number is 84632-65-5.
6.
DPP Red 254 may be manufactured in many different shades or variants. All
variants and shades of DPP Red 254 are covered within the scope of the product
under consideration. It may be sold in crude or finished forms. The product
scope includes crude pigment in any form (e.g. dry powder, paste, wet cake,
etc.) and finished pigment in any form; examples include press cake, dry color,
pigment blends, pigment dispersions.
7.
DPP Red 254 is widely used as a high-performance pigment in waterborne paints,
air drying alkyds, stoving enamels, acid curing systems, amine curing epoxies,
isocyanate cured systems, power coatings, etc. DPP Red 254 is also used in
automotive and industrial paint applications. It is used to obtain metallic
effect finishes and for formulation of new saturated metallic shades. It is
used in plastic applications especially in polyolefin’s, PVC and PS where they
offer excellent all-round properties and outstanding heat resistance. Other
uses include transportation crates, caps, blow molded containers and films. DPP
Red 254 is also used in making warp-free formulations for injection molded
HDPE.
8.
The subject goods are classifiable under Chapter 32 of the Custom Tariff Act,
1975 under tariff item 32041739. DPP Red 254 is also being imported under other
sub-headings such as 32041111, 32041630, 32041711, 32041719, 32041720,
32041790, 32041973, 32041984, 32049000, 32061110, and 32064990. However, the
customs classification is indicative only and in no way binding on the scope of
this investigation.
Like
Article
9.
Rule 2(d) with regard to like article provides as under: -
"like article" means an
article which is identical or alike in all respects to the article under
investigation for being dumped in India or in the absence of such article, another
article which although not alike in all respects, has characteristics closely
resembling those of the articles under investigation;
10.
The Applicant has submitted that the subject goods produced by them and the
subject goods imported from the subject country are like articles. There is no
known difference between the subject goods exported from the subject country
and those produced by the Applicant. DPP Red 254 produced by the Applicant and
imported from the subject country are comparable in terms of technical
characteristics, functions and uses, distribution and marketing, pricing and
tariff classification. Consumers can use and are using the two interchangeably.
11.
The scope of the product under consideration has been kept the same as was
considered by the Designated Authority at the time of previous final findings.
Subject goods produced by the Applicant are being treated as “like article” to
that being imported from the subject country for the purpose of the present
review investigation
Domestic
industry
12.
The application has been filed by M/s. Heubach Colour Private Limited. The
Applicant has neither imported the subject goods from the subject country nor
is related to any exporter or producer of subject goods in the subject country
or any importer of the PUC in India during POI. Further, the Applicant is the
sole producer of subject goods. Therefore, the Authority has considered the
Applicant as Domestic Industry within the meaning of the Rule 2 (b) and the
application satisfies the criteria of standing in terms of Rule 5 (3), of the
Rules.
Initiation
of Sunset Review
13.
And therefore in view of the duly substantiated application filed by the
applicant, and having satisfied itself, on the basis of prima facie evidence
submitted by the domestic industry, substantiating the likelihood of
continuation/ recurrence of dumping and injury and in accordance with Section
9A(5) of the Act, read with Rule 23 of the Rules, the Authority hereby
initiates a Sunset Review investigation to review the need for continued
imposition of the duty in force in respect of the subject goods, originating in
or exported from the subject country and to examine whether the expiry of such
duty is likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury to
the domestic industry.
Period
of Investigation
14.
The period of investigation (hereinafter referred to as “POI”) for the present
investigation will be from 1st April
2018 to 30th June 2019 (15 months). The
injury investigation period will, however, cover the periods April 2015-March
2016, April 2016-March 2017, April 2017-March 2018 and the POI.
Procedure
15.
The present sunset review covers all aspects of the final findings of the
original investigation published vide Notification No. 14/8/2014-DGAD dated 19th
June 2015.
16.
The provisions of Rules 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20 of the Rules
supra shall be mutatis mutandis applicable in this review.
Submission
of information
17.
The known exporters in the subject country and their government through their
embassy in India, importers and users in India known to be concerned with the
subject goods 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 one week from the date on which it was sent by the Designated
Authority or transmitted to the appropriate diplomatic representative of the
exporting Country. 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 summarised 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 summarisation 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 authorise
its disclosure in generalised 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
authorisation of the party providing such information.
Inspection
of Public File
29.
In terms of Rule 6(7) of the 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.