Dumping Investigation Initiated on
Seamless Steel Tubes from China
[F.No. 14 /55/2009-DGAD dated 12th January 2010]
Subject: Initiation
of anti-dumping investigation concerning imports of seamlesstubes,
pipes & hollow profiles of iron, alloy or non-alloy steel (other than cast
iron), whether hot finished or cold drawn or cold rolled, of an external
diameter not exceeding 273 mm or 10”, originating in or exported from China PR.
Whereas M/s ISMT Ltd., Pune.
(hereinafter referred to as the applicant) has filed an application before the
Designated Authority (hereinafter referred to as the Authority), in accordance
with the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 as amended in 1995 and thereafter
(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 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules), alleging dumping of
seamless tubes, pipes & hollow profiles of iron, alloy or non-alloy steel
(other than cast iron), whether hot finished or cold drawn or cold rolled, of
an external diameter not exceeding 273 mm or 10”, (hereinafter referred to as
subject goods), originating in or exported from China PR, (hereinafter referred
to as subject country) and requested for initiation of Anti-Dumping
investigation for levy of anti dumping duty on import of the subject goods. The
application is supported by M/s Maharastra Seamless
Ltd. and Jindal Saw Ltd.
2. AND
WHEREAS, the Authority finds sufficient prima facie evidence of dumping of the
subject goods from the subject country and injury to the domestic industry and
causal link between the dumping and injury exists, the Authority hereby
initiates an investigation into the alleged dumping, and consequent injury to
the domestic industry in terms of Rule 5 of the said Rules, to determine the
existence, degree and effect of any alleged dumping and to recommend the amount
of anti-dumping duty which, if levied, would be adequate to remove the injury
to the domestic industry.
Product under Consideration
3. The
product under consideration in the present investigation is seamless tubes,
pipes & hollow profiles of iron, alloy or non-alloy steel (other than cast
iron), whether hot finished or cold drawn or cold rolled, of an external
diameter not exceeding 273 mm or 10”, The product under consideration
includes boiler & line pipes used in hydrocarbon industry and casing &
tubing of a kind used in drilling for oil and gas exploration.
4. Seamless
tubes are used where strength, resistance to corrosion, microstructure and
product life is very crucial. Casing/tubing are used in extraction of Crude Oil
and Gas from sea as well as from earth. Line pipes are used in hydrocarbon and
processing industry. Boiler pipes are used in Boilers, Heat Exchangers, Super
Heaters and Condensers, and in mechanical, structural and general engineering
industry, Railways etc.
5. Seamless
Pipes and Tubes are classified under Customs sub-heading No. 73.04 of Chapter
73 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975. The classification is however, indicative
only and in no way binding on the scope of the present investigations.
Domestic Industry and Standing
6. The
application has been filed by M/s. ISMT Limited, Pune
and supported by M/s. Maharastra Seamless Limited and
M/s. Jindal Saw Limited. M/s Bharat Heavy Electrical
Limited (BHEL) and M/s Remi Metals Ltd. are the other
known producers of the product under consideration in India It is noted that
M/s Bharat Heavy Electrical Limited (BHEL) and M/s Jindal
Saw Limited have imported the product under consideration from the subject
country in the period of investigation. BHEL has substantially consumed the
product captively and has even purchased the same
from other Indian Producers. The Authority has considered BHEL as ineligible
domestic industry. However, the volume of imports made byM/s
Jindal Saw Limited are however quite low and in view
of that the Authority has considered M/s Jindal Saw
as eligible domestic industry. It is noted that (a) production of the applicant
constitutes a major proportion in Indian production; (b) domestic producers
expressly supporting the application account for more than 50 percent of
production of the like product produced by the domestic industry; and (c) the
application has been made by or on behalf of the domestic industry. The
Authority after examining the information on record determines that the
applicant (with or without exclusion of M/s Jindal
Saw Limited constitutes domestic Industry within the meaning of the Rule 2 and
the application satisfies the criteria of standing in terms of Rule 5 of the
Rules supra.
Country Involved
7. The
country involved in the present investigation is China PR.
Like Article
8. The
applicant has claimed that there are no known significant differences in subject
goods produced by the domestic industry and exported from China PR. Both
products have comparable characteristics in terms of parameters such as
physical & chemical characteristics, manufacturing process &
technology, functions & uses, product specifications, pricing, distribution
& marketing and tariff classification, etc. The goods produced by the
domestic industry are comparable to the goods imported from China PR in terms
of essential product properties. The domestic product is technically and commercially
substitutable to the imported product. Therefore, for the purpose of present
investigation, subject goods produced by the applicant are being treated as
“Like Article” to the subject goods imported from China PR within the meaning
of the Rules.
Normal Value
9. The
applicant has claimed that China PR should be treated as non-market economy and
therefore the normal value should be determined in accordance with the
provisions of Para 7 and 8 of Annexure-I of the Rules. The applicant has
submitted that normal value could not be determined on the basis of price or
constructed value in a market economy third country for the reason that the
relevant information is not available to them. Further, they claimed that price
from market economy third country to other countries, including India, cannot
be relied upon for the reasons (a) the relevant information is not publicly
available, (b) summary customs information cannot be relied upon for the reason
that the product under consideration does not have dedicated customs
classification, (c) the investigations being conducted by other investigating
authorities (Europe, USA and Canada) clearly establishes that the Chinese
producers are resorting to dumping in major global markets and thus export
price from other countries would also be suppressed. The applicant has
therefore, claimed normal value based on cost of production in India, including
selling, general & administration expenses and reasonable profit. The applicant has further provided address of a few
producers of the subject goods in USA and submitted that the Designated
Authority may seek cooperation from the producers in USA during the course of
the proposed investigation. Authority hereby invites comments from all
interested parties in accordance with Para 7 and 8 of Annexure I to the Rules.
Export Price
10. Export
price of the subject goods from the subject country has been determined by
considering transaction wise import data collected from the DGCI&S. Price
adjustments have been made on account of ocean freight, inland freight, marine
insurance, commission, and port expenses in the exporting country to arrive at
ex-factory export price.
Dumping Margin
11. Normal
value and export price have been compared at ex-factory level in respect of the
subject country. There is sufficient evidence that the normal value of the
subject goods in China PR, so arrived is significantly higher than the
ex-factory export price indicating, prima facie, that the subject goods are
being dumped by exporters from subject country into the Indian market and the
dumping margin is estimated to be above de minimis.
Injury and Causal Link
12. The
applicant has furnished information on various parameters relating to material
injury. Analysis of the information shows that imports have increased in
absolute terms as also in relation to production & consumption in India.
Imports of the product under consideration are significantly undercutting the
domestic prices and the effect of such imports was to prevent price increases
which otherwise would have occurred to a significant degree. On the basis of
the information provided with regard to various economic parameters relating to
the domestic industry, it is seen that the performance of the domestic industry
materially deteriorated, inter-alia, and collectively & cumulatively in
terms of production, capacity utilization, domestic sales values & volume,
profits, return on investments, cash flow, inventories and market share. In
addition to material injury, the applicant has claimed threat of material
injury on the grounds of significant difference in the domestic and imported
product price, ability of the subject exporters to ship significantly higher
volumes, current investigations being conducted by other countries. There is
sufficient evidence that the injury to the domestic industry has been caused by
dumped imports from China PR to justify initiation of an anti-dumping
investigation in terms of the Rules.
Initiation of Antidumping Investigation
13. The
Designated Authority, in view of the foregoing paragraphs, initiates
anti-dumping investigations into the existence, degree and effect of alleged
dumping of the subject goods originating in or exported from the subject
Country.
Period of Investigation
14. The
Period of Investigation for the purpose of the present investigation is 1st
April 2008 – 30th June 2009 (15 months). The injury investigation period will,
however, cover the period 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08 and the POI.
Submission of Information
15. The known
exporters in the subject Country, their Government through the Embassy in
India, the importers in India known to be concerned with this investigation 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 Designated Authority at the following address:
The Designated Authority
Directorate General of Anti Dumping & Allied
Duties,
Ministry of Commerce & Industry,
Department of Commerce,
Government of India,
Room No. 240, Udyog Bhavan,
New Delhi – 110107.
16. As per
Rule 6(5) of Rule supra, the Designated Authority is also providing opportunity
to the industrial users of the article under investigation and to
representative consumer organizations, who can furnish information relevant to
the investigation regarding dumping, injury and causality. Any other interested
party may also make its submissions relevant to the investigation within the
time limit set out below.
Time Limit
17. 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 Days (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 40 Days( 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 it’s 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
18. In terms
of Rule 6(7) of the Rules, the interested parties are required to submit
non-confidential summary of any confidential information provided to the
Authority and if in the opinion of the party providing such information, such
information is not susceptible to summarization, a statement of reason thereof,
is required to be provided. 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 Designated Authority
may record findings on the basis of facts available and make such
recommendations to the Central Government as deemed fit.
Inspection of Public File
19. 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 interested parties.