High Speed
Steel of Non Cobalt Grade from Brazil, China and Germany under Anti-dumping
· Investigation
Initiated on Complaint of Graphite India
[Initiation
Notification (F. No. 6/23/2018-DGTR) dated 14 August 2018]
Subject: Initiation of Anti-Dumping
Investigation concerning imports of High Speed Steel of Non Cobalt Grade from
Brazil, China and Germany
F. No. 6/23/2018-DGTR: M/s
Graphite India Limited (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 " High Speed Steel of
Non Cobalt Grade having three elements i.e., Molybdenum, Tungsten and Vanadium,
out of which combination of Tungsten and Molybdenum should be between 4% -
11.5% and Vanadium 3.5% maximum. Carbon should be between 0.7 % - 1.3% and
Chromium between 3.5% - 4.6%" (hereinafter also referred to as the subject
goods or PUC) from Brazil, China and Germany (hereinafter also referred to as
the subject countries).
Product
under consideration
1. The product under consideration for the
purpose of present investigation is "High Speed Steel of Non-Cobalt Grade
having three elements i.e., Molybdenum, Tungsten and Vanadium, out of which
combination of Tungsten and Molybdenum should be between 4% - 11.5% and
Vanadium 3.5% maximum. Carbon should be between 0.7 % - 1.3% and Chromium
between 3.5% - 4.6%”.
2. The subject good is used for making
High Speed Steel Cutting Tools. The subject products are classified under
Chapter Heading 72 “Iron and Steel” of the Customs Tariff Act. The classification
at the 8-digit level is under 72281010 and 72281090. However, goods are coming
under other heads of 7228 also. It is clarified that the HS codes are only
indicative, and the product description shall prevail in all circumstances.
3. The Product under Consideration is
defined as follows:
“High Speed Steel of Non-Cobalt Grade having three elements
i.e., Molybdenum, Tungsten and Vanadium, out of which combination of Tungsten
and Molybdenum should be between 4% - 11.5% and Vanadium 3.5% maximum. Carbon
should be between 0.7 % - 1.3% and Chromium between 3.5% - 4.6%”.
Like Article
4. The petitioner has submitted that subject
goods produced by the petitioner company 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. Subject goods 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 countries.
Domestic
Industry & Standing
5. The Application has been filed by M/s
Graphite India Limited., as domestic industry of the product under
consideration. According to the Petitioner, they are the major producers of the
subject goods in India accounting for 83% of the total production 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 petitioner account for entire the major proportion of 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.
Country
involved
6. The present investigation is in
respect of alleged dumping of the product under consideration from Brazil,
China and Germany.
Normal Value
7. The applicant has claimed the normal
value based on price prevailing in the subject countries. However, the
Authority has not considered the supporting evidences as representative and
therefore, constructed the same as per its consistent norms / methodology of
cost of production in India, duly adjusted with selling, general and
administrative expenses and reasonable profit.
Export Price
8. The applicant has determined the
export price on the basis of data published by DGCI&S, Kolkata. Price adjustments
have been claimed on account of commission, ocean freight, port expenses,
inland freight, marine insurance, credit cost and bank charges and VAT in case
of China.
Dumping
Margin
9. The normal value and the export
price have been compared at ex-factory level, which show significant dumping
margin in respect of the subject goods from the subject countries. There is
sufficient prima facie evidence that the normal value of the subject goods in
the subject countries are 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 countries.
Injury and
Causal Link
10. 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. 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 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.
11. 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)
12. The period of investigation for the purpose of present
investigation is from 1st April 2017 to 31st March 2018 (12 months).
However, the injury investigation period will cover the data of previous three
years, i.e. April 2014 to March-2015, April 2015 to March 2016, April 2016 to
March-2017 and POI.
Submission
of Information
13. 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 Trade Remedies Department of
Commerce,
Jeevan Tara Building, 4th Floor
5, Parliament
Street
New Delhi
-110001
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. 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
15. 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.
16. 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
17. 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.
18. 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.
19. 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. 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.
20. 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.
21. 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.
22. 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.
23. 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
24. In terms of Rule 6(7) of the AD Rules, any interested
party may inspect the public file containing non-confidential version of the
information or evidence submitted by other interested parties.
Non-cooperation
25. 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.