Sulphonated
Naphthalene Formaldehyde (SNF) from China in Dumping Investigation Net on
Complaint of Himadri Plus Five
[Ref: Anti-dumping Initiation Notification No.
14/15/2016-DGAD dated 13th October 2016]
Subject: Anti-Dumping investigation concerning
imports of “Sulphonated Naphthalene Formaldehyde” (SNF) originating in or
exported from China PR.
M/s Himadri Speciality Chemical Ltd. (hereinafter
referred to as the 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 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 initiation of anti-dumping investigation and imposition of
anti-dumping duty concerning imports of Sulphonated Naphthalene Formaldehyde (SNF)
(also referred to as Subject goods). The Country concern is China PR. The above
mentioned country also referred to as the Subject Country.
2. And
whereas, the Authority notes that sufficient prima facie evidence of dumping of
the subject goods, originating in or exported from the subject country,
‘injury’ to the domestic industry and causal link between the alleged dumping
and ‘injury’ exists justifying 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 Rule 5 of the Rules, to
determine the existence, degree and effect of alleged dumping and to consider
recommending an amount of antidumping duty, which if levied, would be adequate
to remove the ‘injury’ to the domestic industry.
Domestic Industry & Standing
3. The
petition has been filed by M/s Himadri Specilaty Chemical Limited. There are other
producers of the subject goods in India namely Mangalore Chemicals and
Fertilisers Ltd (MCF)., LRC Specialty Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., Gujarat Polybands
Pvt. Ltd., Gujarat Polysol Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., HR Johnson (India) produce SNF.
The petition has been supported by Mangalore Chemicals and Fertilisers Ltd
(MCF). The petitioner is not related to the exporters or importers of the
alleged dumped article and the petitioner has not imported the product under
consideration from subject countries. The facts of the case, clearly establish
that petitioner should be considered eligible domestic industry within the meaning
of Rule 2(b).
4. The
Authority holds that the petitioner along with supporting domestic producer constitutes
an eligible domestic industry in terms of Rule 2 (b) and satisfies the criteria
of standing also in terms of Rule 5 (3) of the Rules supra.
Product under consideration
5. The
product under consideration is "Sulphonated Naphthalene Formaldehyde
(SNF)”.
6. Sulphonated
Naphthalene Formaldehyde is a derivative of Naphthalene. Sulphonated
Naphthalene Formaldehyde (SNF) Condensate is used as a water reducing admixture
in construction industries for concrete. It is also used as dispersant for
rubber chemicals, gypsum industries and specialty agro-chemicals industries.
SNF is made from sulphonation of naphthalene and neutralization of the process
by caustic soda. It is produced in 100% powder form and in liquid form in the
range of solid content from 40% - 45%.
7. Sulphonated
Naphthalene Formaldehyde is used for the production of concrete admixtures,
application in tanning industry, leather auxiliaries, textile auxiliaries, vat
dyes, superior quality disperse dyes, agro dispersant formulations, rubber and
latex emulsion.
8. Sulphonated
Naphthalene Formaldehyde is classified under Chapter 38 of the Customs Tariff
Act under customs subheading 3824 40 90. The Customs classification is, however,
indicative only and in no way binding on the scope of the proposed
investigation and proposed measures.
Like Article
9. The
applicant has claimed that there is no known difference between the subject
goods exported from the subject country and that produced by the domestic industry.
Subject goods produced by the domestic industry and imported from the subject
country 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 use the two
interchangeably. The applicant has further claimed that 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
Authority treats the subject goods produced by the domestic industry in India
as ‘Like Article’ to the subject goods being imported from the subject country.
Countries involved
10. The
present investigation is in respect of alleged dumping of Sulphonated Naphthalene
Formaldehyde (SNF) from China PR. (referred to as the “subject country”).
Normal Value
China
11. Applicant
has claimed that China should be treated as a non-market economy and normal
value in case of China should be determined in accordance with para-7 and 8 of
Annexure I of the Rules. The applicant has claimed normal value for China PR on
the basis of cost of production in India, duly adjusted. In terms of Para 8 in
Annexure 1 to the Rules it is presumed that the producers of the subject goods
in China PR are operating under non market economy conditions. In view of the
above non-market economy presumption and subject to rebuttal of the same by the
responding exporters from China PR, normal value of the subject goods in China
PR has been estimated in terms of Para 7 of Annexure 1 to the Rules.
Export Price
12. The
applicant has determined ex-factory export price on the basis of transaction wise
import data procured from IBIS a secondary source and providing evidence and basis
of adjustments on account of ocean freight, marine insurance, port expenses, inland
freight, bank charges, commission and VAT adjustment.
Dumping Margin
13. The
comparison of normal values with the ex-factory export price has been carried
out, which shows a significant dumping margin in respect of the subject goods exported
by the subject country.
Injury and Causal Link
14. The
petitioner has furnished evidence regarding injury due to alleged dumping due
to increased imports in absolute terms and relative to production and
consumption in India, price depression, price underselling and adverse impact
on profitability, return on capital employed, and cash flow of the domestic
industry. There is sufficient prima facie evidence of the ‘injury’ being
suffered by the domestic industry caused by alleged dumped imports from the
subject countries to justify initiation of an antidumping Investigation.
Period of Investigation (POI)
15. The
period of investigation for the present investigation is from April 2015 – March
2016 (12 Months). The injury investigation period has been considered and proposed
to cover the periods Apr’12-Mar’13, Apr’13-Mar’14, Apr’14-Mar’15 and the period
of investigation.
Submission of information
16. The known
exporters in the subject countries, the Government of the subject countries
through their embassies in India, the importers and users in India known to be concerned
with the product 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,
Ministry of Commerce & Industry, Department of
Commerce
4th Floor, Jeevan Tara Building, 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.
Time limit
18. Any
information relating to the present investigation and any request for hearing
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
Anti-dumping 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 regarding the need
to continue or otherwise the Antidumping measures within 40 days from the date
of initiation of this investigation.
Submission of Information on Non-Confidential basis
20. 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, index, number of pages, etc.). All the information supplied
must be clearly marked as either “confidential” or “non-confidential” at the top
of each page.
21. Information
supplied without any confidential marking shall be treated as nonconfidential and
the Authority shall be at liberty to allow the other interested parties to inspect
any such non-confidential information. Two (2) copies of the confidential
version and five (05) copies of the non-confidential version must be submitted
by all the Interested parties.
22. 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.
23. The
non-confidential version is required to be a replica of the confidential
version with the confidential information preferably indexed or blanked out / 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, parties submitting the
confidential information may indicate that such information is not susceptible
to summarization; 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 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 may 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 information.
Inspection of Public File
26. In terms
of rule 6(7) any interested party may inspect the public file containing non-confidential
versions of the evidence submitted by other interested parties.
Non-cooperation
27. In case
any interested party refuses access to and otherwise does not provide necessary
information within a reasonable period, or significantly impedes the investigation,
the Authority may declare such interested party as non-cooperative and record
its findings on the basis of the facts available to it and make such recommendations
to the Central Government as deemed fit.