DGAD Initiates Investigation on 2-EH (2-Ethyl Hexanol) from EU, USA and Five others on Andhra Petrochem Complaint
[Anti-dumping Initiation Notification F.No.14/24/2014-DGAD dated 20th November 2014]
Subject: Initiation of Anti-Dumping Duty investigation concerning imports of “2-Ethyl Hexanol” originating in or exported from EU, Indonesia, Korea RP, Malaysia, Saudi Arabia, Chinese Taipei and USA.
Whereas, M/s Andhra Petrochemicals Limited, (hereinafter referred to as ‘petitioner’ or “the applicant”) has filed an application (also referred to as petition) before the Designated Authority (hereinafter also referred to as the Authority) in accordance with the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 as amended from time to time (hereinafter referred to as the Act) read with 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 AD Rules) alleging dumping of 2-Ethyl Hexanol (hereinafter also referred to as the subject goods or “2-EH”) originating in or exported from the European Union, Indonesia, Korea RP, Malaysia, Saudi Arabia, Chinese Taipei and USA (hereinafter also referred to as the subject countries/territories) and requested for initiation of an Anti Dumping investigations for determination of degree and extent of dumping and injury to the domestic industry and levy of anti dumping duties on the subject goods imported from the subject countries/territories.
A. Product under consideration
2. The product under consideration in this investigation is “2-Ethyl Hexanol”. 2-Ethyl Hexanol (abbreviated as 2-EH) is a basic organic chemical. It is a fatty alcohol, clear, mobile, neutral liquid with a characteristic odor. 2-EH is produced on a massive scale for use in numerous applications such as solvents, flavors, and fragrances and especially as a precursor for production of other chemicals such as emollients and plasticizers. Main application of 2-Ethyl Hexanol is as a feed stock in the manufacture of low volatility esters; the most important of it is Di-(2Ethyl hexyl) Phthalate (DOP or DEHP). This product is classified under Customs Tariff heading no. 29051620.
However, the said Customs classification is indicative only and in no way binding on the scope of the present investigation.
B. Like Articles
3. The applicant has claimed that the product under consideration, which is exported from subject countries/territories into India, is identical to the goods produced by the domestic industry. 2-Ethyl Hexanol produced by the domestic industry and imported from the subject countries are comparable in terms of essential product characteristics such as physical & chemical characteristics, manufacturing process & technology, functions & uses, product specifications, pricing, distribution & marketing and tariff classification of the goods. Consumers can use, and are using the two interchangeably. 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 good produced by the applicant in India is treated as ‘Like Article’ to the subject goods being imported from the subject countries.
C. Domestic Industry & Standing
4. The application has been filed by M/s Andhra Petrochemicals Limited. The petitioner is the sole producer of the product under consideration in the country. It is also noted that petitioner has not imported the product under consideration, nor are they related to an importer or exporter of the product under consideration. Therefore, applicant satisfies the requirements of ‘standing’ under Rule 5 of the AD Rules and constitutes ‘Domestic Industry’ in terms of Rule 2(b) of the AD Rules.
D. Subject Countries/Territories
5. The countries/territories involved in the present investigation are European Union, Indonesia, Korea RP, Malaysia, Saudi Arabia, Chinese Taipei and USA.
E. Volume of Imports and De minimus imports
6. The volume of imports from the subject countries/territories have been examined on the basis of published data of Directorate General Commercial Intelligence and Statistics (DGCI&S), Govt. of India and the share of imports of each of the subject countries/territories in total imports have been found to be above de minimus level.
F. Normal Value
7. The Petitioner has submitted that efforts were made to get information/evidence of price of subject goods in the domestic markets of subject countries/territories. However, petitioner was not able to get such information. The petitioner has therefore, constructed the normal values for all the subject countries/territories taking into account international raw materials prices, best consumption norms and conversion costs of domestic industry and a reasonable margin of profit.
G. Export Price
8. The petitioner has estimated the export prices of the product under consideration from the subject countries/territories based on DGCI&S published data on volume and value of imports into India. Price adjustments have been made on account of ocean freight, marine insurance, commission, port expenses, inland freight expenses and bank charges on facts available basis to arrive at net ex-works export prices for comparison with the constructed normal values at the same level.
H. Dumping Margin
9. The Authority has examined the claims of the petitioner with respect to the Normal Values and Export Prices of the subject goods being exported from or originating in the subject counties/territories and on the basis of prima facie evidence placed before it Authority notes that the applicant has provided sufficient prima facie evidence that the subject goods originating in or exported from the subject countries/territories are entering the Indian market at significantly lower than its Normal Values, indicating that the subject goods originating in or exported from the subject countries/territories are being dumped in India, to justify initiation of an antidumping investigation. The dumping margins so estimated are above de minimus and substantial.
I. Injury and Causal Link
10. The petitioner has claimed that they have suffered material injury and have furnished evidence regarding injury having taken place as a result of the alleged dumping of subject goods from subject countries/territories in terms of increase in imports of subject goods in absolute terms, decline in production, sales, capacity utilization, deterioration in profits, return on capital employed and cash profit etc. The petitioner has also claimed adverse price effects as evidenced by price suppression. The Authority considers that there is sufficient prima facie evidence of ‘injury’ being suffered by the applicant, caused by dumped imports of subject goods from subject countries/territories, to justify initiation of an antidumping investigation.
J. Initiation of Investigations
11. Since the Authority finds that the applicant has produced sufficient prima facie evidence of dumping of the subject goods from the subject countries/territories; injury to the domestic industry; and causal link between the dumping and injury, the Authority hereby initiates an investigation in terms of the Rule 5 of the said Rules, to determine the existence, degree and effect of alleged “dumping”, if any, and to recommend the amount of antidumping duties, which if levied would be adequate to remove “injury” to the domestic industry.
i. Period of Investigation
12. The period of investigation for the present investigation is from 1st April 2013 to 30th June 2014(15 months). However, the injury investigation period will cover the periods April 2010-March 2011, April 2011 to March 2012, April 2012 to March 2013 and the Period of Investigation (POI).
ii. Submission of information
13. The exporters in subject countries/territories, their governments through their Embassies in India, and the importers and users in India known to be concerned with the subject goods, would be addressed separately to submit relevant information in the form and manner prescribed and to make their views known to the Authority in the following address:
The Designated Authority,
Ministry of Commerce & Industry
Department of Commerce
Directorate General of Anti Dumping & Allied Duties
4th Floor, Jeevan Tara Building, Parliament Street
14. Any other interested party may also make its submissions relevant to the investigation in the prescribed form and manner within the time limit set out below.
iii. Time limit
15. All known interested parties, whose addresses are available, would be advised through a letter to file questionnaire responses in the form and manner prescribed and to offer their comments in writing so as to reach the Authority at the address mentioned above not later than forty days (40 Days) from the date of issuance of such letter. Any other interested party, whose address is not available, may also submit comments/ information within 40 days from date of publication of this notification. The information must be submitted in hard copies as well as soft copies. 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 AD Rules.
iv. Submission of information on confidential basis
16. The parties making any submission (including Appendices/Annexure 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:-
(a) One set marked as Confidential (with title, number of pages, index, etc.), and
(b) The other set marked as Non-Confidential (with title, number of pages, index, etc.).
17. 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 two (2) sets of each.
18. 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 can not be disclosed.
19. 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, party submitting the confidential information may indicate that such information is not susceptible to summarization, and a statement of reasons why summarization is not possible, must be provided to the satisfaction of the Authority.
20. 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 summarized form, it may disregard such information.
21. 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.
22. The Authority, on being satisfied and after accepting the need for confidentiality of the information provided by one party, shall not disclose it to any other party without specific authorization of the party providing such information.
v. Inspection of Public File:
23. All non-confidential submissions made by the interested parties shall be placed in a public folder for inspection by other interested parties. In terms of Rule 6(7), any interested party may inspect the public file containing non- confidential version of the evidence submitted by other interested parties.
24. 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 it may deem fit.