DGAD Initiates Dumping Investigation on Pigment
Red (DPP Red 254) from China and Switzerland on Complaint of Heubach Colour Pvt Ltd Mumbai
[DGAD Initiation Notification
No 14/8/2014-DGAD dated 20th June 2014]
Subject: Initiation of Investigation
of Anti-dumping duty imposed on Import of Diketopyrrolo
Pyrrole Pigment Red 254(DPP Red 254) originating in
or exported from China PR and Switzerland.
Whereas M/s Heubach Colour Private limited (herein after referred to as
Applicant) has filed an application before the Designated Authority (herein
after referred to as the Authority) in accordance with the Customs Tariff Act,
1975 as amended in 1995 and the Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and
Collection of Anti-dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of
Injury) Rules, 1995 as amended, alleging dumping of Diketopyrrolo
Pyrrole Pigment Red 254 (DPP Red 254) (herein after
referred to as subject goods) originating in or exported from China PR and
Switzerland (herein after referred to as subject countries) for initiation of
Anti-dumping duty investigation for levy of anti dumping
duties on the subject goods.
2. And whereas, the Authority finds that sufficient evidence of
dumping of the subject goods originating in or exported from subject countries,
‘injury’ to the domestic industry and causal link between the alleged dumping
and ‘injury’ exist to justify initiation of an anti-dumping investigation; the
Authority hereby initiates an investigation into the alleged dumping, and consequent
injury to the domestic industry in terms of the Rules 5 of the Rules, to
determine the existence, degree and effect of any alleged dumping and to
recommend the amount of antidumping duty, which if levied would be adequate to
remove the ‘injury’ to the domestic industry.
Product under Consideration
3. The product under consideration is “Diketopyrrolo
Pyrrole Pigment Red 254(DPP Red 254)”.
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 colours 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-chloropheny1)-2, 5-dihydro pyrrolo (3, 4-c) pyrrole, 1,4 dione. The molecular formula of
DPP 254 is C18H10C12N2O2. The color index number of
DPP Red 254 is 56110 and chemical abstract number is 84632-65-5.
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.
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.
4. The subject goods are classified are classifiable under Chapter
32 of the Custom Tariff Act, 1975 under Tariff item 3204.17.39. DPP Red 254 is
also being imported under other sub-headings such as 32041111, 32041630,
32041711, 32041719, 32041720, 32041760, 32041973, 32041984, 32049000, 32061110,
32064990. However, the customs classification is
indicative only and in no way binding on the scope of this investigation.
Domestic Industry Standing
5. The application has been filed by M/s Heubach
Colour Private Limited. As per the evidence available on record, the applicant
is the sole producer of the subject goods. On the basis of information
available the Authority notes that the applicant company constitutes a major
proportion in Indian production. The Authority, therefore, determines that the
applicant constitutes 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 Rule supra.
Like Article
6. The applicant has claimed that the subject goods, which are being
dumped into India, are identical to the goods produced by the domestic
industry. There is no difference either in the technical, specifications,
quality, functions or end-uses of the dumped imports and the domestically
produced subject goods and the product under consideration manufactured by the
applicant. The two are technically and commercially substitutable and hence
should be treated as ‘like article’ under the AD Rules. Therefore, for the
purpose of the present investigation, the subject goods produced by the
applicant in India are being treated as ‘Like Article’ to the subject goods
being imported from the subject countries.
Countries Involved
7. The countries involved in the present sunset review
investigations are, China PR and Switzerland.
Normal Value
8. The petitioner has claimed that in the absence of any evidence of
price of subject goods in the domestic markets of the subject countries, they
have adopted constructed cost method for calculation of normal value based on
the estimate of cost of production in India, duly adjusted. International price
of raw materials, conversion & other cost of the domestic industry and
reasonable profit margin have been considered to determine normal value. The
Authority has prima-facie considered the normal value of subject goods in
respect of these countries on the basis of best estimates of cost of
production, including selling, general, administrative & finance expenses
and reasonable profit as made available by the applicant for the purpose of
this initiation.
Export Price
9. Export price of the subject goods from the subject countries has
been estimated by considering transaction-wise import data as provided by the
applicant from Directorate General of Commercial Intelligence & Statistics
(DGCI&S). Price adjustments have been allowed on account of Ocean freight,
marine insurance, inland transportation, port handling and port charges etc. to
arrive at the net export price. There is sufficient evidence of the export
prices of the subject goods from the subject countries to justify initiation of
an antidumping investigation.
Dumping Margin
10. The normal value and export price have been compared at ex-factory
level, which shows significant dumping margin in respect of the subject
countries. There is sufficient prima facie evidence that the normal value of
the subject goods in the subject countries is significantly higher than the
ex-factory export price, indicating, prima-facie, that the subject goods are
being dumped into the Indian market by exporters from the subject countries.
The dumping margins are estimated to be above de minimis.
Injury and Causal Link
11. 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, price undercutting, price underselling, price suppression
and decline in profitability return on capital employed, cash profit, market
share, capacity utilization etc. of the domestic industry. There is sufficient
evidence of ‘injury’ being suffered by the domestic industry caused by dumped
imports from subject countries to justify initiation of an antidumping
investigation.
Period of Investigation
12. The period of investigation (POI) for the purpose of present
investigation is 1st January 2013 to 31st December 2013. The injury
investigation period will however cover the periods 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13
and the POI.
Submission of Information on
Non-Confidential Basis
13. The known exporters in subject countries, their Government through
their Embassy/Economic and Cultural Centre in India, importers and users in India
known to be concerned and the domestic industry are being informed separately
to anable them to file all information relevant in
the form and manner prescribed. Any other interested party may also make its
submissions relevant to the investigation within the time-limit set out below
and write to:
The Designated Authority
Directorate General of Anti-Dumping & Allied
Duties
Department of Commerce,
Jeevan Tara Building, 4th Floor
5, Parliament Street
New Delhi -110001
Time Limit
14. Any information relating to the present investigation should be
sent in writing so as to reach the Authority at the address mentioned above not
later than 40 (forty) days From the date of publication of this notification.
The known exporters and importers, who are being addressed separately, are
however required to submit the information within forty days from the date of
the letter addressed to them separately. If no information is received within
the prescribed time limit or the submitted information is incomplete, the Designated
Authority may record its findings on the basis of the facts available on record
in accordance with the Rules. It may be noted that no request, whatsoever,
shall be entertained for extension in the prescribed time limit.
Submission of Information on
Non-Confidential Basis
15. In case confidentiality is claimed on any part of the
questionnaire’s response/submissions, the same must be submitted in two
separate sets (a) marked as Confidential (with title, index, number of pages,
etc.) and (b) other set marked as Non-Confidential (with title, number of
pages, index, etc.). All the information supplied must be clearly marked as
either “Confidential” or “non-confidential” at eh top of each page.
16. Information supplied without any mark shall be treated as non-confidential
and the Authority shall be at liberty to allow the other interested parties to
inspect any such non-confidential information. Two (2) copies of each of the
confidential version and the non-confidential version must be submitted.
17. For information claimed as confidential; 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 and/or why
summarization of such information is not possible.
18. The non-confidential version is required to be a replica of the
confidential version with the confidential information preferably indexed or
blanked/ summarized depending upon the information on which confidentiality is
claimed. The nonconfidential 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, party submitting the confidential information may indicate that
such information is not susceptible to summary, a statement of reasons why
summarization is not possible, must be provided to the satisfaction of the
Authority.
19. 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.
20. Any submission made without a meaningful non-confidential version
thereof or without a good cause statement on the confidentiality claim shall
not be taken on record by the Authority. 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 confidential information. Parties, may that such
information will be subject to acceptance in terms of Anti-Dumping Rule 7(1)
and 7(2).
Inspection of Public File:
21. In terms of Rule 6(7), the Designated Authority maintains a public
file. Any interested party may inspect the public file containing
non-confidential version of the evidence submitted by the interested parties.
Non-Cooperation
22. In case any 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.