PREVIOUS
EXPORT PRICE:43. The export price for M/s. Dalian Chem Import & Export Group Co., PR China, has been established on thebasis of the prices actually paid or payable for the product when sold to India. The Authority notes that ****MTs of the subject goods have been exported to India by the exporter during the POI for US $ ****. The exporter has made adjustments towards discounts, transport, insurance, handling, loading and other expenditures to arrive at ex-factory export price. The Authority has, after verification of the data, accepted various adjustments made by the exporter and the producer of the subject goods to arrive at export price at ex-factory level .The net export price at ex factory level comes to US $****/MT.
44. The Authority notes that the Exporter has exported the subject goods under 95% and 99.9% grade. It is notedthat the active ingredient in the subject goods are contents of B203, which are 36.5% for the subject goods. The Authority has compared the normal value and export price for 99.9% grade taking the active ingredient of 8203 as 36.5%.
DUMPING MARGIN:45. The principles governing the determination of normal value, export price and the dumping margin as laiddown in the Custom Tariff Act and the Anti Dumping Rules are elaborated in Annexure I to the Rules. The dumping'margin has been established on the basis of a comparison of weighted average normal value with weighted averageexport price.. The normal value for China P.R. has been determined on the basis of cost of production of the subject goods of M/s Dashiqiao in China with the profit margin maintained by the exporter. The net ex-factory export price worked out after allowing adjustments works out to US$ '"***/MT. The dumping margin for exports of the subject goods from China PR is assessed by the Authority at US $ ****/MT or % of the export Price.
Other Exporters from China PR46. The Authority provided opportunity to the known exporters from China PR to furnish information relevant tothe investigations and offer comments, if any, in accordance with the Section cited above. The Authority wrote to the Embassy of China in India also. However, no other exporters from China have responded to the Authority's request for information. The claim made by the petitioner with the regard to the determination of normal value has also not been disputed by the other interested party(ies). In view of large non cooperation from the large number of producers and exporters from China PR, and in the absence of other reliable information from the independent sources, and in order to avoid rewarding non cooperation, it was considered appropriate to base the residual dumping margin on the highest margin of dumping alleged in the complaint after suitable normation. Thus, the dumping margin in case of Non-cooperative/ other exporters of Borax Decahydrate from China PR is assessed by Authority at US$ ****/MT or ....of Export price.
TURKEY:
M/s. ETI A.S. Turkey, and M/s. Borochemie International Pte. Limited, Singapore.47. M/s ETI Holdings, A.S. exported borax decahydrate to India during the POI and previous two years throughtheir agent M/s. Borochemie International Pte. Limited, Singapore. M/s. ETI Holdings A.S. has submitted that its 100% subsidiary M/s. ETI Bor A.S. manufactures the subject 'goods and sells in the domestic market thorough its depots throughout the country. However, ETI Bor, A.S. does not export the product directly as its sells the product to its holding company ETI Holdings A.S. who exports to India through M/s. Borochemie International Pte. Limited,Singapore. Both the producers as well as the exporter have submitted response to the exporter's questionnaire. Inorder to establish normal value for only exporter/producer M/s. ETI Bor in Turkey, it was first determined that whether the total domestic sales of the subject goods by the producer M/s. ETI Bor was representative when compared to their total sales of the subject goods concerned sold in the exporting country and whether their sales are under ordinary course of trade in terms of Rule 2 of the annexure 1 to the anti dumping rules. The authority notes that the domestic sales of the M/s. ETI Bor were representative sales and they are also under ordinary course of trade after the Authority examined the transaction wise information of the domestic sales of the exporter during the period of investigation. The domestic industry has represented that their principal raw material "tincal" should be valued at the cost at which it is sold in the domestic market in the country of export as well as to the other countries. They have requested the Authority to take into account a proforma offer of the input tincal where a price of US $****has been quoted for its sale.
48. The exporter has represented that their principal raw material 'tincal' mined by M/s ETI Bor A.S is consumedby the said company itself for the manufacture of product under consideration and cost of mining 'tincal' is part of the cost of production of the subject goods. 'Tincal' is also not procured by ETI Bor A.S. from any other related company. They have clarified that 'tincal' produced and captively consumed in the manufacture of borax decahydrate has been valued at actual cost of production. They have also added that it is only the actual cost of producing that input which has been included in the cost of production of the subject goods.
49. The authority has examined the contention of the domestic industry that the company is the state ownedcompany and such being the case, it is not clear how the petitioner has established - price at which the principal raw material (tincal) had been charged in the cost of production statement and therefore, the prices at which the company is getting tincal is not in ordinary course of trade by reason of affiliation with the supplier of the raw material keeping in view that M/s. ETI Bor is the only entity who has the mining rights in the Turkey and it controls 4 the whole operation from mining to production. The authority has verified the cost of production of the M/s. ETI Bor and after physical onsite verification has determined that raw material tincal is not being supplied by any affiliate but by a the same company who is selling the goods in the domestic market. The Authority has also verified that only a minuscule percentage of the tincal concentrate is sold in the domestic market and that too to customers like universities and for research and development purposes and therefore the sale price of tincal may not be treated as a representative price. The rest of the tincal has been used in their plant for the production of other boron products. The Authority notes that total cost of production of tincal is only **** per tone while the transfer price was **** PMT, the higher cost representing inland freight for transportation frown Chilka to Badirama. The Authority has also examined the inference made by the domestic industry with regards to Annexure II para (v) of the Anti Dumping rules and determines that this paragraph has nothing to do with the determination of the value of raw materials used captively. The Authority has verified the actual cost of the production of the subject goods by taking into account the cost of the tincal, the major raw material and its freight cost to the plant at Bandirama and thus determines that the domestic sales price of the subject goods in Turkey are above the cost of production under sub-rule 2 of the Annexure I of the Anti Dumping rules. and therefore, domestic sales are under ordinary course of trade. It is further noted that M/s. ETI Bor A.S. has sold *** MT of the subject goods for a price of TL **** and the weighted average, normal value during the period of investigation comes to US $ **** per MT. The sales price at the ex factory level for the domestic sales has been established after making adjustments towards the handling charges and inland freight as indicated by M/s. ETI Bor A.S. The weighted average normal value for ETI Bor A.S. at the ex-factory level comes to US **** per MT. The Confidential copy of calculations of normal value and export price is enclosed as Annexure attached.
EXPORT PRICE50. The export price for M/s. ETI Holdings A.S through exporter M/s Borochemie international has beenestablished on the basis of the prices actually paid or payable for the product when sold to India. The Authority notes that **** MTs of the subject goods have been exported to India during the POI for US $ ****. The exporter has made adjustments towards discounts, transport, insurance, handling, loading and other expenditures to arrive at ex-factory export price. The weighted net export price at ex-factory level comes to US $ ****/MT.
DUMPING MARGIN:51. The principles governing the determination of normal value, export price and the dumping margin as laiddown in the Custom Tariff Act and the Anti Dumping Rules are elaborated in Annexure I to the Rules. The dumpingmargin has been established on the basis of a comparison of weighted average normal value with weighted averageexport price. The dumping margin for exports of the subject goods from Turkey is assessed by the Authority for thecooperating exporter at US $ ****/MT of the export Price.
Other Exporters from Turkey52. There are no other producers of the subject goods from Turkey and all the subject goods have been exportedby their exporter M/s Borochemie international. In view of the fact that the Authority has examined 100% of the exports from the subject country and also the fact that there are no other producers from that country and no other exporter has exported the subject goods from Turkey during the POI, it is considered appropriate to base the residual dumping margin on the margin of dumping as calculated for the cooperating exporter. Thus, the dumping margin in case of Non-cooperative/other, exporters of borax Decahydrate from Turkey is assessed by Authority at US$ ****/MT or % of Export price.
| Country/producer/exporter | Normal Value | Export Price | Dumping Margin | Dumping Margin % |
| ETI Holdings, Turkey and M/s Borochemie international | **** | **** | **** | 12.44 |
| Other producers in Turkey | **** | **** | **** | 12.44 |
| Dashiqiao Huaxin Chemi Co , and M/s Dalain chem import aid export group Co Ltd, China PR | **** | **** | **** | 26.58 |
| Other Producers in China PR | **** | **** | **** | 96.5 |
Injury Submissions made by the petitioner
Cumulative Assessment53. The exporters from China and Turkey are dumping borax Decahydrate in the Indian market. Annexure II (iii)to the Anti Dumping Rules requires that in case imports of a product from more than one country are being,simultaneously subjected to anti dumping investigations, the designated authority will cumulatively assess the effect of such imports, in case it determines that: –
(a) The margin of dumping established in relation to the imports from each country is more than two 'Percentexpressed as percentage of export price and, the volume of the imports from each country is three percent ofthe imports of the Pike article of where the export of the individual countries less than three percent, theimports cumulatively accounts., for more than seven, percent of the imports of like article, end;
(b) Cumulative assessment of the effect of imports is appropriate in light of the conditions of competition betweenthe imported article and the like domestic articles.
The margins of dumping from each of the subject country are more than the limits prescribed above, as may be seen from the previous section. Quantum of imports from various countries is contained in the statement of importsenclosed with this petition. Whether the data published by the DGGI&S is considered or data provided by SecondarySources is relied upon, it would be seen that the quantum of imports from each of the subject country is more than the prescribed limit. Cumulative assessment of the effects of imports is thus, appropriate since the exports from thesubject' countries directly compete with the like goods offered by the domestic industry In the Indian market. TheAuthority is, therefore, requested to assess injury to the domestic industry cumulatively from the subject countries.
54. Petitioner submits that while DOQI&S data may not be appropriate, as other products have been cleared inthis classification, data compiled by the secondary sources is not exhaustive, a: all the ports are not covered by this source. The imports reported by the Secondary Sources should, therefore, be considered as minimum known imports. With regard to China, since information on exports from China has become available to the petitioner, the same has been relied upon. It is seen that the actual volume of imports from the two countries are in the region of 10,000 MT. Further, it is submitted that the imports are more in volume from China then Turkey. Import statistics show that the quantum of imports from subject countries have increased in a significant way. The petitioner has also submitted that the imports are more involving from China PR and import from Turkey.
M/s ETIA.S. Turkey-Views of Trukish Government55. M/s. ETI Holdings has represented that a number of Injury parameters have recorded positive developmentsand therefore the determination of Injury is wrong and the finding is liable to be reversed. They have further stated that there is no price depression or price suppression for the domestic Industry and they have also disputed the factual data relied upon by the authority in the provisional findings. It has been further added that the authority has compared the figures for the POI with that of the year 1999-2000 as such a comparison is not correct as there was no allegation of dumping during the intervening period. They have also disputed the provisional determination made by the authority with regard to opening stock, production arid closing stock periods. Imports are taking place from United States and are also undercutting the price of the domestic industry. However, there appears to be a deliberate attempt by the domestic Industry to project as if there were no exports from the United Mates. The finding of the Designated Authority, on the basis of DGCIS data, is incorrect as the DGCIS date includes the prices for other products such as Borax Pentahydrate, Turkish Government and the exporters have also expressed concern as regards cumulation of Imports from Turkey with Imports from China PR. they have urged the Authority to consider if competition exists between imports from Turkey and China and volume of imports and price undercutting from two countries individually before deciding to make cumulative assessment. Following the disclosure statement released by the authority, the exporter has further represented that the authority has not evaluated the conditions of competition between the imported products i.e. between imports from Turkey and China PR. They further represent that if the authority evaluates this aspect, it will be clear that the causal link would be absent in so far as imports from Turkey is concerned.
Submissions by Dilian Chem, China56. The exporter from China has represented that the marginal decline in the capacity utilization of the domesticindustry may be temporary and could be as a result of teething problems in the change of technology by the petitioner producing the subject goods. They have requested the authority to analyse the export performance of the domestic industry in the injury analysis. With regard to sales volume, they have represented that there is a very insignificant decline in the domestic industry, average net sales price for the subject goods produced and sold in the domestic market. They have also pointed out the differences in the manufacturing efficiencies between India and China and have drawn the authority towards producers operations and economies of scale, raw materials, process, procurement costs, and logistics and better infrastructure in China PR and economic slow-down in India during the POI. They have further highlighted the cost of capital in India and specially debt services burden of the petitioner.
57. They have drawn the attention of the authority towards the DGCI&S data for the POI and have furtherclaimed that imports of the subject goods from China Pit compared with the exports made by Malaysia and USA also. They have further pointed out that there are substantial goods of subject goods at comparable prices during the POI from USA. They have disputed the authority's findings with regard to price undercutting and price underselling of the domestic industry and have requested the authority to further examine the data of USA imports for better causal link analysis. They have further pointed out that the petitioner's losses are due to change in the raw material used for the production process of the borax decahydrate.
Submissions made by the Domestic Industry58. The subject goods are being dumped in the Country for a long period. As would be seen from the petitionearlier filed by the domestic industry, the imports have gradually shown 'an increase. Such an increase is due toconsistent price undercutting of the domestic prices by the imports from the subject countries. Thus, it can be said that the domestic industry is being injured as a result of dumped imports for past some time. The fact that the Indian industry is being injured for past some time is established by gradual suspension of production by Indian Producers one after another. In fact, a number of producers of the subject goods have rather turned traders and have started importing the material, as these producers could not face the brunt of dumping from the subject countries.
The domestic industry has requested injury to the domestic industry to be assessed cumulatively from China arid Turkey.1. The imports have increased significantly during the Period of Investigation as compared to previous years:The imports have increased (i) in absolute terms; (ii) relative to production; and (iii) relative to consumption inIndia. The Production of the domestic industry over the years has declined. Even though it has increased inthe investigation period as compared to the immediate preceding year, the level of production was far lower,than the production in the past. Decline in production has consequently resulted in decline in capacityutilization and Even though, the sales volumes have increased over the years, the same has declined in theinvestigation period as compared to previous period. Closing stocks with the domestic industry haveincreased: Consequently, average number of days production is in stock has gone up.
2. While the cost of production of the domestic industry has increased, the domestic industry has been forced toreduce the selling price. Landed price of imports from the subject countries was significantly below the sellingprice of the domestic. The landed price of imports, arid selling prices of domestic industry were below the costof production and non-injurious price of the domestic industry. The imports were thus preventing the domesticindustry from effecting legitimate price increases and were suppressing/depressing the prices of the domesticindustry in the market. The domestic industry has further drawn the attention of the authority towards adversecash flow and. continuous losses being suffered by the domestic industry.
Examination by the Authority59. Under Rule 11 supra, Annexure -II, when a finding of injury is arrived at, such finding shall involvedetermination of the injury to the domestic industry, " .... taking into account all relevant facts, including the volume of dumped imports, their effect on prices in the domestic market for like articles and the consequent effect of such imports on- domestic producers of such articles ...." In considering the effect the dues Imports on prices, it considered necessary to examine whether there has been a significant price undercutting by the dumped imports as compared with the pride of the like article in India, or whether the effect of such imports is otherwise to depress prices to a significant degree or prevent price increases, which otherwise would have occurred; to a significant degree.
60. Annexure 11 (iii) under Rule 11 supra further provides that "in case where imports of a product from more,than one country are being simultaneously subjected to Anti Dumping investigation, the Designated, Authority willcumulatively assess the effect of such imports, only when it determines that the margin of dumping established inrelation to the imports from each country is more than two percent expressed as percentage of export price and the volume, of the imports from each country is three percent of the imports of like article or Where the export of the individual country is less than three percent, the imports cumulatively accounts for more than seven percent: of the imports of like article, and cumulative assessment, of the imports is appropriate in light of the conditions of competition between the imported article and the like domestic articles”
61. There are two conditions prescribed for cumulation of injury in the case of imports from more than onecountry i.e. the dumping Margin should be more than de minimus limits prescribed and cumulative assessment of theeffect of imports should be appropriate in the light of conditions of competition between the imported article and the like domestic articles. The authority notes that imports from subject countries are more than de minimus limitsprescribed under the rules. With regard to the second limb of the cumulative assessment condition's, the authoritynotes that it is appropriate to do so in view of the fact that
i. imported products and domestic industry products pare like articles
ii. imports from both the countries are individually under cutting prices in the domestic market.
iii. Imports from both the subject countries and the domestic industry are competing in the same market as thetwo, products acre being used inter-changeably.
62. The authority in this regard referred to(i) Customer wise sales made, by the domestic industry, details of importers Made known by the respondingexporters and names of importers available in the secondary source data
(ii) The degree of fungibility between the imports from the different countries and domestic industry
(iii) Presence of sales in the same-geographical market of imports from different countries and the domestic industry product
(iv) Existence of common or similar channel of distribution for imports from different-countries and-domesticindustry; and
(v) Whether that imports are simultaneously present in the market.
63. The Authority has further examined fine landed price of imparts individually from the two countries with thesailing price, of the domestic industry. It is seen what the landed price of imports is significantly lower than the setting price of the domestic industry even though price under-cutting is higher in the case of China PR. The Authority bras also Compared the landed price of imports with the cast of production and selling: price of the domestic industry: It is seed that the imports from both the countries are individually below the cast of production of the domestic industry and the selling price of the domestic industry are also below the cost of production of the domestic industry. Imports from the subject countries, thus, individually are resulting in, price under-selling in this domestic market. The Authority notes that the margin of dumping and quantum of imports from subject countries are more than the limit prescribed above. Cumulative assessment of the effect of the imports from China PR and Turkey is appropriate since the export prices from these countries were directly competing with the prices offered by the Domestic Industry in the Indian market and displacing domestic producers here.
64. For the examination of the impact on the domestic industry in India, the Authority also considered such furtherindices having a bearing on the state of industry as capacity utilization, production, sales, net sales realization,profitability, etc.
Source of data and the methodology65. For the determination of volume injury from imports from Turkey, the Authority has taken the data submittedby the sole producer and exporter from Turkey for determination of volume of imports from that country for the POI and the previous years. As the exporter has submitted data on calendar year basis, these have been suitably normated for financial year for the period 2000-2001. The data for 1999-2000 has been taken from the transaction wise information from secondary sources as DGCIS data from Turkey comprises of both Borax Decahydrate as well as Borax Pentahydrate. As regards China, the Authority has taken into account transaction wise data made available by DGCI&S for POI as well as previous years as all imports from China PR consist of borax decahydrate only. For other countries import during the POI and previous years, the Authority has taken transaction wise data of the subject goods from secondary sources (IBIS). For the calculation of apparent consumption (demand) of the subject goods in India, the Authority has added the sales volume of the domestic industry and other producers to the total imports made into the country.
Volume and Market Share of Imports from subject countries and Domestic Industry66. The volume of imports of the subject goods from subject countries has significantly increased during thePeriod of Investigation as compared to previous years. In fact the imports have consistently increased from 1999-00 to the period of investigation. The volume of imports from other countries has declined significantly during the POI from 1999-00. The Authority notes that imports from the subject countries have increased in absolute terms as well as in relation to the production of the domestic industry and also in relation to the demand of the subject goods in India. The imports from subject countries have increased by 305% over the same period in the preceding year in absolute terms and their share to the total imports has gone up from 57.44% in 99-00 to 98.34% during the POI. The share of subject countries in the total demand has increased from 22.34% to 54.26% while that of the domestic industry has declined from 48.83% in 99-00 to 38.10%. In conclusion, the Authority is satisfied that the domestic industry has suffered loss of market share and imports from subject countries have significantly increased their market share.
Imports from the subject Countries| Country/Territory | 99-00(MT) | 00-01(MT) | Apr-Dec01(MT) | Jan-Sep02(MT) |
| Sub Count | 842 | 2767 | 2517 | 7687.9 |
| Others | 624 | 0 | 20 | 130 |
| Total | 1466 | 2767 | 2537 | 7817.9 |
| Share of Imports (%) |
| Country | 99-00 | 00-01 | Apr-Dec01 | Jan-Sep02 |
| Import from Subject Country | 57.44 | 100.00 | 99.21 | 98.34 |
| Other Countries | 42.56 | 0 | 0.49 | 1.62 |
| Total | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
| Share of Imported subject goods in total demand (%) |
| Country | 99-00 | 00-01 | Apr-Dec01 | Jan-Sep02 |
| Import from Subject Country | 6.04 | 18.85 | 22.34 | 54.26 |
| Other Countries | 4.48 | 0.00 | 0.18 | 0.92 |
| Other producers | 40.66 | 27.05 | 20.57 | 6.72 |
| Total Demand | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
| Imports in relation to the domestic Industry (MT) |
| Country | 99-00 | 00-01 | Apr-Dec01 | Jan-Sep02 |
| Import from Subject Country | 842 | 2767 | 2517 | 7687 |
| Production Domestic Industry | 7414 | 7522 | 6629 | 7112 |
| Dumped Imports in relation to the Domestic Industry | 11.36% | 36.77% | 37.96% | 108.08% |
Production and Capacity Utilisation67. It is noted, that the production of the domestic industry has increased during the POI as compared to previousyears. It is also noted that their capacity utilization has declined only marginally during the period of investigation as compared to the previous nine months. The Authority notes that: Annexure .II to the Rules provides as under with regard to assessment of the effect of the dumped imports. The effect of the dumped imports shall be assessed in relation to the domestic production of the like article when available data permit the separate identification of that production the basis of such criteria as the production process, producers sales and profit of such separate identification of that production is not possible, the effects; of the dumped imports shall be assessed by the examination of the production of the narrowest group or range of products, which includes the like 'product, for which the necessary information can be provided. In the instant case, the domestic industry has combined capacity for borax deca and penta. Such bang the case, it would not be appropriate to assess, injury to the domestic industry in isolation for borax deca. The Authority, has therefore, has taken into account injury to the domestic industry after combining information for penta and deca (in addition to separate information on, decay for the purpose of assessment of dumped imports in terms of production and capacity utilization ( and hence figures in para 66 and 72 may not match). The Authority on the basis of exam; of records is satisfied that the domestic industry has suffered significant under utilization of the capacity.
Sales Volume and Growth68. It is noted, that a says volume of the domestic, industry have declined in the investigation period as comparedto previous years. While the demand of the subject goods hive increased by 25% during the POI against previousyear, the sales volume of domestic Industry have declined by 15.79% during the POI as compared to previous period. The Authority is satisfied that the domestic industry has suffered a decline in the sales volume.
Sales Prices69. The domestic industry average net sales price for the subject goods produced and sold in domestic marketdeclined by 1.82% between 99-00 and POI. The evolution in the prices should be seen in comparison with the unitcost of the production, which increased by 2.95% from 99-00 to the POI.
Stocks and Margin of Dumping70. The closing stocks of the domestic industry have increased significantly during the POI as compared to theprevious years. The Authority is satisfied that the domestic industry has suffered injury because of increase ofinventory of subject goods. Also the margin of dumping from both the countries are very significant.
PROFITABILITY:71. Though the unit cost of production of the domestic industry has increased during the POI since 1999-2000,their unit-selling price has declined during the POI since 1999-2000.
RETURN ON CAPITAL & CASH PROFIT72. The return on the capital of the domestic industry as well as the cash profit has deteriorated during the POI ascompared to 1999-2000 though it has improved from 2000-2001.
| Injury parameters |
| | | 99-00 | 00-01 | Ap-Dec01 | Jan-Sep02 |
| Parameters | Units | | | | |
| Capacity | MT | 17000 | 17000 | 12750 | 12750 |
| Combined Production | MT | 9614 | 10541 | 7572 | 7553 |
| Capacity Utilisation | % | 56.55 | 62.01 | 59.39 | 59.24 |
| Domestic sales (Act) | MT | 6806 | 7940 | 6412 | 5399 |
| Domestic sales (Ann) | Index | 100 | 116.66 | 125.61 | 105.77 |
| Opening stock | MT | 866 | 1259 | 481 | 342 |
| Closing stock | MT | 1259 | 481 | 342 | 1523 |
| Unit Cost of production | Index | 100 | 100.77 | 102.63 | 102.95 |
| Selling rice | Index | 100 | 91.35 | 95.03 | 98.18 |
| Unit profit/loss | Index | -100 | -320.16 | -279.84 | -214.11 |
| Total profit | Index | (-100) | -373.51 | -351.51 | -226.47 |
| ROC | Index | -100 | -260.57 | -149.06 | -68.571 |
| Employment | Index | 100 | 94.12 | 96.08 | 90.2 |
| salary Wages | Index | 100 | 83.33 | 114 | 109.88 |
| Productivity | Index | 100 | 107.8 | 93.06 | 106.35 |
| Cash Profit | Index | -100 | -418.41 | -378.22 | -212.49 |
| Growth | % | | 16.66 | 7.67 | -19.98 |
PRODUCTIVITY & EMPLOYMENT:73. The productivity of the domestic industry has increased during the POI form 1999-2000. However, theAuthority also notes that the same could be on account of the decline in the level of employment.
74. Price Undercutting, Price Underselling and Price Depression| Price Under Cutting from M/s ETI A.S/Borochmie |
| | Ap-Dec 01 | Jan-Sep02 |
| Net Selling price | **** | **** |
| Landed Value | **** | **** |
| Price Undercutting % | **** | **** |
| Price Under Cutting from M/s Dalian/Dashiquiao |
| | Ap-Dec 01 | Jan-Sep02 |
| Net Selling price | **** | **** |
| Landed Value | **** | **** |
| Price Undercutting % | **** | **** |
| Price Underselling during POI |
| Country | Non Injurious Price of petitione | Landed Price from Subject country | Price Underselling | Pr Underselling % |
| ETI Holdings | **** | **** | **** | **** |
| Dalian | **** | **** | **** | **** |
AP-Dec 01 Jan-Sep 02Price Undercutting from Dalian/DasiquaoNet Selling price Landed ValueAP-Dec 01 Jan-Sep 02Price Undercutting from ETI A.S./BorochemieNet Selling price Landed Value
In considering the effect of the dumped imports on prices, it is considered necessary to examine whether therehas been a significant price undercutting by the dumped imports as compared with the price of the like product inIndia, or whether the effect of such imports is otherwise to depress prices to a significant degree. The Authority has compared the landed value of imports of subject goods from subject countries during the POI with the net salesrealization and has found that there has been a significant price under-cutting by the dumped imports from subjectcountry/territory.
75. The Authority has also examined the claim of the petitioner that the domestic industry is suffering on accountof the losses. The Authority notes that price underselling is an important indicator to make an assessment of the injury. The Authority has worked out the Non-injurious price for the product under consideration and compared the same with the landed value to arrive at the extent of price underselling. The analysis shows a significant incidence of price underselling. The Authority notes that price depression occurs when domestic industry, for some reason, reduces its prices of the subject goods. The Authority has verified the records of the domestic industry with regards to average selling prices to support its claim of the price depression. However, the Authority could not find any significant price depression during the POI.
Selling Price / Profitability76. The authority notes that selling prices of the domestic industry is significantly below the price, which wouldhave permitted the domestic industry, a fair recovery of its cost of production and earn a reasonable return. Though the losses from this product have come down during the POI as compared to previous years, these could be seen in the backdrop of other producers of the subject goods closing down and increase in the productivity of the domestic industry:
CAUSAL LINK:77.a. Introduction
In order to reach its conclusions on the cause of the injury suffered by the domestic industry and in accordancewith rule V of the Annexure II of the Anti Dumping Rules, the Authority examined the impact of all known factors and their consequences on situation in, that industry. Known factors others than the dumped imports, which could, at the same time, have injured the domestic industry, were also examined to ensure that the possible injury caused by these other factors was not attributive to the dumped imports.
b. Effect of the dumped imports.
Between 1999-2000 and POI, dumped imports from the subject countries as a proportion to total importsincreased significantly in volume (57.44% to 98.34%) and in market share 6.04% in 1999-00 to 54.26% in the POI. As regards the export prices, they decreased during the whole period and undercut the domestic industry prices during POI on average by ****°% and ****% (from ETI Holdings A.S and M/s Dalian Chem Import and Export Co respectively.
Effect of other factors(i) Performance of other producers
One domestic producer Ws. Northern Borates Private Limited, Kanpur who had supported the petition closed itsproduction facility before the POI. The petitioner has claimed that there were mare than a dozen manufacturers of the subject goods in India. However, these small producers have now stopped their production and few of them areworking as traders.
(ii) Self inflected injury due to change in processor technology
It has been submitted by the exporter that injury to the domestic industry has been caused by its ganging the rawmaterial to Ulexite. The exporter has further represented that manufacturer of the subject goods from this raw material is a lengthy and costly process since other materials are also consumed which further raise its manufacturing costs. The domestic industry has represented that Ulexite route is cheaper in the sense that raw material costs are less and the overall cost of manufacturer from this route is less despite the fact that other raw materials are also used in the process. The Authority notes from submissions made before it (various literature and journals) that manufacture of subject goods from Ulexite may be a viable route.
(iii) Imports from USA
Non-Inclusion of USA
Submissions by ETI & Turkish Governmenta. The exporter from Turkey has represented that data in the aggregate form in the preliminary findings shouldnot have been used as it includes information relating to products other than the product under considerationalso. It has been submitted by them that the petitioners have imported BPH from USA at a price of US$ 345PMT. Another producer M/s. Raj Industries has imported BPH from USA at a price of US$290 - US$ 365PMT. M/s. Rishi Enterprises a related company of Raj Industries has imported BPH from USA at US$ 290PMT and BDH from USA at US$245 PMT. They aver that the finding by the DA that BDH prices from USA arehigher is incorrect as it includes prices of BPH also. The FOB price of US $ 245 from USA is comparable tothe FOB price from Turkey. It has been submitted that the information relating to imports from USA isauthentic and they have submitted some bills of entries also in support of their claim.
b. Even while justifying his action for not including USA in the investigation, the authority has only examined theimport prices on an aggregate basis. He should have examined the export prices in the disaggregate form,i.e., the prices of Borax Decahydrate alone should have been examined by the authority instead ofconsidering all goods falling within the concerned customs classification head. In the absence of any focusedexamination, the determination by the authority that the import prices of BDH from USA were higher than thatfrom China and Turkey is factually incorrect and without any basis. The authority shall properly evaluate thisaspect while determining causal link.
Submissions made by the Domestic Industryc. Petitioner had, in tact, requested extension of investigation to cover USA also. The Designated Authoritydecided not to initiate investigations against USA in view of insufficient evidence with regard to importsbeyond de minimus limits. USA had been exporting their subject product to India in the past. Import statisticssince 1999 for this product are enclosed. Evidently, exports from USA declined over the years, which could bea result of aggressive selling by Chinese producers. In fact, this further substantiates the dumping practices ofTurkish producers also, when Turkish producer maintains its exports to India, while USA exports declined.Imports of BPH by petitioner is irrelevant to the issue as BPH is not the product under consideration. WhileETI has reported imports of BDH by Raj Industries, the volumes have not been reported. It is thus not knownwhether these imports are beyond de-minimus limits. As stated earlier, while petitioner has also been able toshow imports of BDH, the real issue is such imports are below deminimus limits.
Examination by the Authorityd. Some interested parties have argued that the petitioner has not included the investigation from USAdeliberately and imports from USA are above deminimus. The Authority notes that the petition was filed forimports coming from Turkey, China PR and USA. After careful examination of the import data from IBIS,Mumbai, the Authority noted that there are no imports from that country and hence the investigation wasinitiated against Turkey and China PR. After the initiation of the investigation, the Authority has examined thedata from DGCIS for imports from USA (in the aggregate form) and found that these imports are priced muchhigher than imports from the subject countries. After the preliminary findings, the Authority wrote to theCommissioner of Customs, Mumbai (with a remainder later) requesting data for imports from USA. TheAuthority has now received a letter from the Commissioner of Customs (letter placed in the public file), NhavaShiva stating that almost all of the imports from Nhava Shiva belonged to Borax Pentahydrate and imports ofsubject goods comprised minuscule amounts which are de minimus in the volume terms.
In the case of imports from USA, the authority further notes that
1) imports from USA are within de minimus limits
ii) there is no evidence that dumping margin is more than de minimus
iii) there is no evidence that imports from USA are competing with the supplies from the domestic industry orimports from other countries.
e) Contraction of demand and other factors
The Authority could not find any evidence of contraction of demand, change in pattern of consumption, trade restrictive practices of and competition between the foreign and domestic producers. It id noted that developments in technology has not been a cause for injury to the domestic industry. These parameters collectively and cumulatively indicate that the petitioner has suffered material injury due to the dumped imports from subject countries.
78. For the purpose of determining injury, the landed value of imports is compared with the non-injurious price ofthe petitioner company determined for the period of investigation.
INDIAN INDUSTRY'S INTEREST:79. The purpose of anti dumping duties in general is to eliminate dumping which is causing injury to the domesticindustry and to re-establish a situation of open and fair competition in the Indian market, which is in the generalinterest of the country. The Authority recognizes that the imposition of anti dumping duties might affect the price levels of the products manufactured using subject goods and consequently might have some influence on relativecompetitiveness of these products. However, fair competition on the Indian market will not be reduced by the antidumping measures. On the contrary, imposition of anti dumping measures would remove the unfair advantages gained by dumping practices, would prevent the decline of the domestic industry and help maintain availability of wider choice to the consumers of subject goods. The Authority notes that the imposition of anti dumping measures would not restrict imports from China PR in any way, and therefore, would not affect the availability of the product to the consumers.
80 ConclusionsThe Authority has, after considering the foregoing, comes to the conclusion that:
(a) The subject goods have been exported to India from subject countries below its normal value;
(b) The Domestic industry has suffered material injury;
(c) the material injury to the domestic industry has been caused cumulatively by the dumped imports of subjectgoods from subject countries.
81. The Authority considers it necessary to impose a definitive anti dumping duty on all imports of BoraxDecahydrate in order to remove the injury to the domestic industry. The margin of dumping determined by theAuthority is indicated in the paragraphs above. The Authority proposes to recommend the amount of anti dumping duty equal to the margin of dumping or less, which if levied, would remove the injury to the domestic industry. For the purpose of determining injury, the landed value of imports is compared with the non-injurious price of the petitioner company determined for the period of investigation. The Authority, therefore, recommends imposition of definitive anti dumping duty on the goods, the description of which is specified in column (3) of the Table below, falling under heading of the First Schedule to the said Customs Tariff Act as specified in the corresponding entry in column (2), the specification of which is specified in column (4) of the said Table, originating in the country as specified in the corresponding entry in column (5), and produced by the producer as specified in the corresponding entry in column (7), when exported from the country as specified in the corresponding entry in column (6), by the exporter as specified in the corresponding entry in column (8), and imported into India, an anti-dumping duty at a rate which US equivalent to the difference between, the amount as specified in the corresponding entry in column (9), in the currency as specified in the corresponding entry in column (11) and per unit of measurement as specified in the corresponding entry in column (10), of the said Table, and the landed value of such imported goods in like currency per like unit of measurement.
Table| SI. No | Hea- ding | Des- crip- tion of goods | Spe- cifi- cat- ion | Country of origin | Country of Export | Producer | Exporter | Amo- unt | Unit of Mea- sure- ment | Curr- ency |
|---|
| (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | (6) | (7) | (8) | (9) | (10) | (11) |
|---|
| 1 | 2840 | Borax decahydrate | Any speci- fica- tion | Turkey | Any | Any Producer | Any exporter | 423.1 | Metric Tonne | US$ US$ |
| 2 | 2840 | Borax decahydrate | Any spe- cifi- cat- ion | Any Country other than People’s Republic of China | Turkey | Any Producer | Any exporter | 423.1 | Metric Tonne | US$ US$ |
| 3 | 2840 | Borax decahydrate | Any spe- cifi- cat- ion | China PR | Any | Dashiqiao Huaxin Chem. Ltd. | Dalian Chem import and Export Group Co Ltd.. | 410.86 | Metric Tonne | US$ |
| 4 | 2840 | Borax decahydrate | Any spe- cifi- cat- ion | China PR | Any Country | Any Producer except Dashiqiao Huaxin Chem. Ltd. | Any | 484.1 | Metric Tonne | US$ |
| 5 | 2840 | Borax decahydrate | Any spe- cifi- cat- ion | Any Country except Turkey | China PR | Any | Any | 484.1 | Metric Tonne | US$ |
In case the concentration of the imported product is reported 95%, the quantum of anti-dumping duty shall be95% of the amount mentioned in Column No.9 of the table above.
82. Landed Value of imports for the purpose shall be the assessable value as determined by the Customs underthe Customs Act, 1962 and all duties of customs except duties under sections 3, 3A, 813, 9 and 9A of the CustomsTariff Act, 1975.
83. Subject to the above, the Authority confirms the preliminary findings dated 26th March 2003.84. An appeal against this order shall lie before the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal inaccordance with the Act, supra.
Sd/-
(Abhijit Sengupta)
Designated Authority
Presented by eximkey.com