Acetone Antidumping Sunset
Review Initiated
·
Import
from EU, Singapore, South Africa and USA
·
On Complaint of SI Group India and Deepak Phenolics
Ltd along with HOCL
·
2014 Notification to Expire on 10 March 2019 - Acetone from EU
($277.85/MT), USA ($213.76/MT), Singapore ($240.06/MT) and South Africa
($179.65/MT)
·
Korea ($79.75/MT), Chinese Taipei ($271.37/MT) and Saudi Arabia ($203.85/MT) Already in Duty Net
[Initiation Notification - Case No. SSR
14/2018 (Sunset Review) dated 6 July 2018]
Subject: Initiation of 2nd Sunset Review
petition for extension of Anti-dumping duty against imports of Acetone
originating in or exported from European Union, Singapore, South Africa and
United States of America.
File No. 7/26/2018-DGAD: Having
regard to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 as amended in 1995 and thereafter
(hereinafter also referred 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 as the Rules), the Designated Authority (hereinafter also
referred to as the Authority) recommended imposition of anti-dumping duty on
imports of “Acetone” (hereinafter also referred to as the subject goods),
originating in or exported from European Union, Singapore, South Africa and
United States of America.
2. Whereas, the original investigation was initiated on
7.9.2006 to investigate into alleged dumping of Acetone originating in or
exported from Chinese Taipei, European Union, Singapore, South Africa and USA
and provisional antidumping duty was imposed vide customs notification no.
77/2007-Customs dated 19.6.2007 on the basis of the preliminary findings of the
Authority dated 25.4.2007. The final findings were notified vide notification
dated 4.1.2008 and the Department of Revenue imposed definitive anti dumping duties on the subject goods from the subject
countries vide Notification No. 33/2008-Customs dated 11.3.2008.
3. Thereafter, M/s Hindustan Organic Chemicals Limited (HOCL)
filed a review application in accordance with the Act and the AD Rules before
the Authority alleging continued dumping of the subject goods originating in or
exported from European Union, Singapore, South Africa and USA and requested for
review and continuation of the antidumping duties. Having satisfied that the
petitioners have substantiated the need for vide notification no. 15/1/2012
-DGAD dated 15.6.2012.
4. After conducting detailed sunset review investigation,
the final findings were notified vide notification dated 13.12.2013 and the
Department of Revenue imposed definitive anti-dumping duties on the subject
goods from European Union, Singapore, South Africa and United States of America
vide Notification No. 10/2014 Customs (ADD) dated 11.3.2014.
5. Whereas, present petition has been filed by M/s SI Group
India Pvt Ltd and M/s Deepak Phenolics
Ltd along with a support from M/s HOCL for initiation of Sunset Review
investigation in terms of Rule 23(1B) for extension of anti-dumping duty on
imports of Acetone from European Union, Singapore, South Africa and United
States of America.
6. Whereas, based on the facts and data the Authority is of
the opinion that there is a need to review for continued imposition of the
duties in force in respect of the subject goods, originating in or exported
from the European Union, Singapore, South Africa and United States of America.
A. Subject
Countries
7. The countries involved in the present investigation are
European Union, Singapore, South Africa and United States of America. .
B. Product under
Consideration
8. The product under consideration in the petition is the
same as the original investigations, which was defined as follows in the final
findings
“6.
The product under consideration is ‘Acetone’. Acetone is organic chemical also
known as Dimethyl Ketone and used in the manufacture of bulk pharmaceuticals,
agro chemicals, dye stuffs, certain explosives and downstream chemicals.
Acetone is classified under Chapter 29 of Custom Tariff Act under the
sub-heading 29141100. Product under Consideration
7.
It is a basic organic chemical produced in single grade. It is a colourless liquid with an agreeable ether-like odour. It is used in numerous organic synthesis either as
solvent or as an intermediate. It is used in manufacture of bulk
pharmaceuticals, agrochemicals, dyestuffs, certain explosives and downstream
chemicals. Acetone is specifically used in manufacture of Isophorone,
Diacetone, Alcohol, Methyl Methacrylate and Bishphenol A. Besides this, it is used in manufacture of
certain rubber chemicals or Oxy Acethylene Cellulose
Acetate.”
9. Since the investigation being a sunset review
investigation, product under consideration remains the same as defined in the
previously conducted investigation. Further, no significant developments have
taken place over the period.
C. Like
Article
10. Rule 2(d) with regard to like article provides as under:
-
"like
article" means an article which is identical or alike in all respects to
the article under investigation for being dumped in India or in the absence of
such article, another article which although not alike in all respects, has
characteristics closely resembling those of the articles under investigation;
11. Petitioners have claimed that there is no known
difference in the subject goods produced by the Indian industry and exported
from subject countries. Subject goods produced by the Petitioners and imported
from the subject countries are comparable in terms of physical & technical
characteristics, manufacturing process & technology, functions & uses,
product specifications, pricing, distribution & marketing and tariff
classification of the goods. The two are technically and commercially
substitutable. The consumers are using the two interchangeably.
12. The scope of the product under consideration has been
kept the same as was considered by the Designated Authority at the time of
previous final findings. Subject goods produced by the petitioner companies are
being treated as ‘like article’ to that being imported from the subject
countries for the purpose of the present review investigation.
D. Domestic
Industry & Standing
13. The petition for initiation of sunset review is being
jointly filed by SI Group India Pvt. Ltd. and Deepak Phenolics
Ltd. M/s Hindustan Organic Chemicals Limited has given a support letter,
however, the Authority is of the view that M/s HOCL be invited to give detailed
data during the course of investigation, which will be duly considered for
detailed analysis.
14. It has been found that the production of petitioner
companies is 72% of Indian production of the subject goods in the Country. On
the basis of information furnished, the Authority notes that the petitioner
companies have made imports of the subject goods from the subject countries
during the POI, however, the same are under duty free scheme and are not
significant in quantity to affect the domestic market situation. Therefore, the
Authority has considered the petitioner companies as Domestic Industry within the
meaning of the Rule 2(b) of the Rules and the application satisfies the
criteria of standing in terms of Rule 5 of the Rules supra.
E. Initiation
of Sunset Review
15. Whereas, in view of the duly substantiated application
filed and in accordance with Section 9 A (5) of the Act, read with Rule 23 of
the Anti-dumping Rules, the Authority hereby initiates a Sunset review
investigation to review the need for continued imposition of the duties in
force in respect of the subject goods, originating in or exported from the
subject countries and to examine whether the expiry of existing duty is likely
to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury to the Domestic
Industry.
F. Period of Investigation
16. The period of investigation (POI) for the present investigation
is 1st April 2017 to 31st March 2018 (12 Months) and the injury
investigation period is from April 2014 to March 2015, April 2015 to March 2016
and April 2016 to March 2017 and POI. Further, the data beyond POI will also be
examined to determine the likelihood of dumping and injury.
G. Procedure
17. The review will cover all aspects as notified under
Notification No. 15/1/2012-DGAD dated 13.12.2013.
18. The provisions of Rules 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 16, 17, 18,
19 and 20 of the Rules supra shall be mutatis mutandis applicable in this
review.
H. Submission
of Information
19. The known exporters in the subject countries, the
Government of the subject countries through its embassy 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:
Government of India Ministry of
Commerce and Industry Department of Commerce
Directorate General of
Anti-Dumping and Allied Duties
4th Floor, Jeevan
Tara Building
5, Parliament Street, New Delhi –
110001
20. 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 submit a non-confidential version of the same to be
made available to the other parties.
I. Time Limit
21. Any information relating to the present review 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.
22. 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
Anti-dumping measures within 40 days from the date of initiation of this
investigation.
J. Submission
of Information on Confidential Basis
23. In case confidentiality is claimed on any part of the
questionnaire 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 and accompanied
with soft copies.
24. Information supplied without any confidential marking shall
be treated as non- confidential 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 two (02) copies of the
non-confidential version must be submitted by all the interested parties.
25. 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.
26. 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.
27. 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.
28. 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.
K. Inspection
of Public File
29. In terms of rule 6(7) of the Rules, any interested party
may inspect the public file containing non-confidential version of the
evidences submitted by other interested parties.
L. Non-Cooperation
30. 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.