Russia also under Dumping Net on Sodium Nitrite on Complaint of
Deepak Nitrite
· China, EU, Korea and Ukraine
Already in the Net
[Ref: Initiation Notification Case
No. (O.I.) 32/2017 dated 19 December 2017]
Subject: Initiation of
anti-dumping investigation concerning imports of “Sodium Nitrite" originating
in or exported from Russia.
F. No. 6/29/2017-DGAD – M/s Deepak Nitrite Ltd
(hereinafter referred to as the applicant/domestic industry/petitioner) have
filed an application/petition 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 Sodium Nitrite (hereinafter also referred to as the subject goods),
originating in or exported from Russia (hereinafter also referred to as the
subject country).
2. And whereas, the Authority prima facie finds
that sufficient 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” 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 Rule 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.
Domestic Industry & Standing
3. The application has been filed by M/s Deepak Nitrite
Ltd. There are three other producers of Sodium Nitrite in the Country i.e
Punjab Chemical and Pharmaceuticals Ltd., National Fertilizers Ltd and
Rashtriya Chemicals and Fertilizers Ltd.
4. As per the evidence available on record, the
production of the applicant company constitutes “a major proportion” of the
domestic production. The Authority, therefore, determines that the applicant
company constitutes eligible domestic industry within the meaning of Rule 2 (b)
of the Anti Dumping Rules and the application satisfies the criteria of
standing in terms of Rule 5 (3) of the Rules supra.
Product under Consideration and Like Article
5. The product under consideration in the present
investigation is “Sodium Nitrite” in all its forms. It is an inorganic chemical
and is oxidizing and reducing agent. It is a white crystalline powder mostly
used in pharmaceuticals industries, dye industries, lubricants, construction
chemicals, rubber blowing agent, heat transfer salts, meat processing, textiles
etc.
6. The product is classified under Customs Tariff
heading 28.34.10 of the Customs Tariff Act. This classification is, however,
indicative only and in no way binding on the scope of the proposed present
investigation.
Like Article
7. The applicant has claimed that there is no known
difference between the subject goods exported from subject country and that
produced by the domestic industry. As submitted by the applicant, the product
under consideration produced by the domestic industry and imported from 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 can use and
are using the two interchangeably. The applicant has further claimed that 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
applicants in India as “Like Article” to the subject goods being imported from
the subject country/territory.
Countries Involved
8. The present investigation is in respect of alleged
dumping of the product under consideration from Russia.
Normal Value
9. The applicant has submitted that efforts were
made to get information/evidence about cost and prices of subject goods in the
domestic market of the subject country. In the absence of availability of
reliable information in the public domain on domestic prices of the subject
goods in the subject country, the Normal value in the subject country has been
estimated on the basis of cost of production of the domestic industry for POI
period. The estimation has been duly adjusted including selling, general and
administrative expenses and profit.
Export Price
10. The
applicant has claimed determination of export price as the average import price
from subject country on the basis of data procured from DGCI&S. For fair
comparison between the normal value and export price, it is necessary to
compare the two at the same level of trade. The export prices being calculated
at the CIF level, have been adjusted for ocean freight, marine insurance,
commission, port expenses, inland freight and bank charges.
Dumping Margin
11. The normal
value has been compared with the export price at ex-factory level. There is
sufficient prima facie evidence that the normal value of the subject goods in
the subject country is higher than the ex-factory export price, indicating that
the subject goods are being dumped into the Indian market by the exporters from
the subject country. The dumping margin is estimated to be above de-Minimis.
Injury and Causal Link
12. Information furnished by the applicant has been
considered for assessment of injury to the domestic industry. The applicant has
furnished evidence regarding the injury having taken place as a result of the
alleged dumping in the form of increased volume of dumped imports in absolute
terms and in relation to production and consumption, price undercutting, price
underselling and consequent adverse impact in terms of decline in production,
sales, market share, inventories. There is sufficient prima facie evidence of
the “material injury” being suffered by the domestic industry caused by dumped
imports from subject country to justify initiation of an antidumping
investigation.
Period of Investigation
13. The period of investigation for the purpose of
the investigation is Oct., 2016 to Sep., 2017 (12 months). The injury investigation
period will however cover the periods 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 and the POI.
Submission of Information
14. The known
producers and exporters in the subject country, the Government of the subject
country 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:
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.
15. Any other interested party may also make its submissions relevant to
the investigation in the prescribed form (downloadable
from the website of the Authority at (www.dgtr.gov.in) and manner prescribed
within the time limit set out below.
Time Limit
16. 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. 17. 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 impose the
Antidumping measures within
40 days from the date of initiation of this
investigation
17. 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.
Submission of information on confidential/
Non-confidential basis
18. 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.
19. 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 five (05) copies of the non-confidential version must be submitted
by all the interested parties.
20. 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.
21. 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.
22. 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.
23. 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
24. 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
25. 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.