Elastomeric Filament Yarn from China, South Korea, Taiwan and
Vietnam under Anti-dumping Lens on Complaint of Indorama
[Ref: Anti-dumping Initiation Notification No.
14/29/2015-DGAD dated 27 January 2016]
Subject: Initiation of Anti-Dumping Investigation concerning
imports of Elastomeric Filament Yarn from China
PR, South Korea,
Taiwan and Vietnam
F.No.14/29/2015-DGAD: M/s Indorama
Industries Ltd (hereinafter also referred
to as the Petitioner or Applicant) has filed an application 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 also
referred to as the Act) and the 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 imposition of Anti-dumping duty on imports of Bare Elastomeric Filament Yarn of all deniers
up to and including 150 Deniers and all lustres (like
bright, semi dull and dull) but not including coloured yarns” (hereinafter also referred to as the subject goods or PUC) from China PR, South Korea, Taiwan and
Vietnam (hereinafter also referred to as the subject countries).
Product under consideration
2. The product under consideration
in the
present application is “Elastomeric Filament
Yarn of all deniers upto and including 150 Deniers,
excluding coloured yarns”. These
filament yarns are also commonly
referred to as Spandex or Elastane. These yarns are also referred
to as “Lycra” in the market even though it is a specific brand name. These are described
in technical terms as segmented
polyurethane composed of “soft”
or flexible, segments bonded together
with “hard” or rigid segments. This gives the fibre its built-in
lasting elasticity. It is an elastomeric fibre used widely as the minor component
in stretch garments to provide
stretch with recovery.
3. Spandex yarn is mainly used to make such garments that require great comfort and
fit. As such, they find applications in manufacturing of hosiery, swimsuits,
aerobic or exercise wear, ski pants, golf jackets, disposable diaper, waist bands, bra straps, bra side panels,
bra cups etc. Spandex fabrics are also used to make
compression garments, such as surgical
hose, support hose, bicycle pants,
foundation garments etc
4. The subject goods are described
in terms of the deniers and are sold generally
in the range of 10 - 1680 deniers. The subject
goods are classified under
chapter heading 5404 11 00. However, it has been claimed by the petitioner, the subject goods are also being imported under tariff headings 5402 44 00 and
5402 69 90. It is clarified that the HS codes are only indicative and the product description shall prevail in all circumstances.
5. The Product under Consideration is defined as follows:
“Elastomeric Filament Yarn of all deniers
upto and including 150 Deniers, excluding coloured yarns”.
Like Article
6. The petitioner submitted that subject goods produced
by the petitioner companies and the subject goods imported from the subject
countries are like articles. There is no known difference
between the subject goods exported from subject countries and that produced by the petitioner. Elastomeric Filament Yarn produced by the domestic industry
and imported from 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 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 country.
Domestic Industry &
Standing
7. The Application has been filed by M/s Indorama Industries Ltd., as domestic industry of the product
under consideration. According to the Petitioner, they are the sole producers of the subject goods in India. The petitioner has
certified that there are no imports of the product under consideration by the petitioner or any of its related party from the subject countries.
Since the production of the petitioner accounts
for “a major proportion” in the total production of the
product under consideration in India,
the petitioner satisfies
the standing and constitutes Domestic Industry within the meaning of the Rules.
Countries involved
8. The present investigation is in respect
of alleged dumping of the product
under consideration from China PR, South Korea, Taiwan
and Vietnam.
Normal
Value
9. The petitioner has claimed that China PR should be treated as a
non-market economy and has determined normal value in accordance with Para 7 and 8 of
Annexure I of the Rules. In view of the non-market economy presumption and
subject to rebuttal of the same by the responding exporters, normal value of the
subject goods in China PR has been estimated in terms of Para 7 of Annexure I to the Rules.
The applicant has determined the normal value
based on cost of
production in India, duly adjusted
with selling, general and administrative expenses
and reasonable profit.
10. Further, the applicant
has also constructed the normal values in respect of Korea, Taiwan and Vietnam on the grounds that they were neither able to get any
documentary evidence nor reliable
information with regard
to domestic prices of the subject goods
in the said countries. Further, such information is
also not available in public domain. The Authority has prima-facie considered the normal value of
subject goods in subject countries on the basis of
constructed values as made available by the applicants for the purpose
of this initiation.
Export Price
11. The applicant
has determined the export price on the basis of data published
by IBIS. Price adjustments have been claimed on account of commission, ocean freight, port expenses, inland
freight, marine insurance, VAT
adjustment and
bank charges. During the course of investigation, the Authority will also analyse transaction-wise import data from Directorate General
of Commercial Intelligence
& Statistics (DGCI&S)
Dumping Margin
12. The normal value and the export price have been compared at ex-factory level, which
show significant dumping
margin in respect of the subject
country. There is sufficient
prima facie evidence
that the normal value of
the subject goods in the subject country
is significantly higher than the ex-factory export price, indicating, prima facie, that the subject goods are being dumped into the
Indian market by the exporters from the subject country.
Injury and Causal
Link
13. The applicant
has claimed that domestic industry has suffered material
injury from dumped imports.
The demand for the product
under consideration has
increased over the injury period and subject imports have increased in absolute
terms. The imports are undercutting the domestic prices. The imports have suppressed/depressed the domestic prices over the injury period. With regard to
consequent impact of the imports on the domestic industry,
it is noted that
performance of the domestic industry has deteriorated in respect of parameters such as profits; return on capital employed and cash profits.
The domestic industry is suffering
significant financial losses,
cash losses and negative
return on investments. There is sufficient prima
facie evidence of injury to the domestic industry
caused by dumped imports from subject countries to justify
initiation of an anti-dumping investigation.
14. And whereas,
the Authority prima facie finds that sufficient evidence of dumping of the subject
goods, originating in or exported from the
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 Para 5 of the Rules, to determine
the existence, degree and effect of alleged dumping and to recommend
the amount of antidumping duty, which if levied, would be adequate to remove the ‘injury’ to the domestic
industry.
Period of Investigation (POI)
15. The period of investigation for the purpose of present investigation
is from 1st October
2014 to 30th September 2015 (12 months). However,
the injury investigation period will cover the data of previous three years, i.e. April 2012
to March 2013, April 2013 to March 2014, April
2014 to March-2015 and POI.
Submission of Information
16. The exporters
in the subject countries, their government through their Embassy in
India, the importers and users in India known to be concerned
and the domestic industry are being
addressed separately to submit relevant information in the form and manner prescribed and to make their views known
to the Authority at the following address:
The Designated Authority
Directorate General of
Anti-Dumping & Allied
Duties
Department of Commerce, Jeevan Tara Building, 4th Floor
5, Parliament Street
New Delhi -110001
17. 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. 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
18. 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 forty days (40 days) from the date of publication of this Notification. 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.
19. 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 and offer their comments to the domestic industry’s application within forty days (40 days) from the date of publication of this
Notification. The information must be submitted in hard copies as well as soft copies.
Submission of information on confidential basis
20. 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.
21. 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.
22. The confidential version shall contain all information
which are by nature confidential and/or
other information which the supplier of such information claims as confidential. The information which is 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.
23. 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 summary, and a statement
of reasons why summarization is not possible,
must be provided to the satisfaction of the Authority.
24. 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.
25. 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.
26. 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
27. In terms of Rule 6(7) of the AD Rules, any interested
party may inspect the public
file containing non-confidential version
of the evidence submitted
by other interested parties.
Non-cooperation
28. 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.