THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY

IPART I—SEC. 11

MINISTRY OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY

(Department of Commerce)

NOTIFICATION

New Delhi, the 1st March, 2001.

Subject:—Anti-Dumping investigation concerning imports of Hydroxyl Amine Sulphate (HAS) from

USA, Japan and European Union (EU)—Final Findings.

FINAL FINDINGS

53/1/99-DGAD.—Having regard to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 as amended in 1995 and the Customs

Tariff (Identification, Asscscment and Collection of Ami Dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination

of Injury) Rules, 1995, thereof:—

53/1/99-DGAD - Having regard to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 as amended in

1995 and the Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of Anti

Dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules,

1995, thereof: -

PROCEDURE:

The procedure described below has been followed:

The Designated Authority (hereinafter also referred to as the Authority) notified

preliminary findings vide notification dated the 4^th August, 2000 on anti-

dumping investigation concerning imports of Hydroxyl Amine Sulphate (HAS)

( hereinafter also referred to as subject goods) from USA, Japan and EU

(hereinafter referred to as subject countries / territory ) and requested

interested parties to make their views known in writing within forty days from

the date of its publication;

ii)

The Authority forwarded a copy of the preliminary findings to known interested

parties, who were requested to furnish their views, if any, on the preliminary

findings within forty days of the date of the letter;

in)

The Authority also forwarded a copy of the preliminary findings to the

Embassies of USA, Japan and EU Delegation in India in New Delhi with a

request that the exporters and other interested parties may be advised to

furnish their views on the preliminary findings in the time frame as stipulated in

(i) and (ii) above;

iv)

The Authority provided opportunity to all interested parties to present their

views orally. All parties presenting their views orally were requested to file

written submissions of the views expressed orally The parties were advised

to collect copies of the views expressed by opposing parties and offer

rebuttals, if any. The written submissions thus received from interested parties

have been considered by the Authority in this finding.

(v)

The Authority made available the public file to all interested parties containing

non-confidential version of the submissions, submitted by various interested

parties, for inspection, upon request;

(vi)

Arguments raised by interested parties before announcing of preliminary

findings, which have been brought out in the preliminary findings notified

earlier, have not been repeated herein for sake of brevity.

However,

the

arguments raised by the interested parties after preliminary findings have been

appropriately dealt in this findings;

(vii)

In accordance with Rule 16 of the Rules supra, the essential facts/basis

considered for these findings were disclosed to the known interested parties

on 15.02.2001 and comments received on the same have also been duly

considered in this finding.

(vnj)

***** in the Notification represents information furnished by interested parties

on confidential basis and so considered by Authority under the Rules.

VIEWS OF PETITIONER.

EXPORTERS. IMPORTERS AND OTHER

INTERESTED PARTIES AND EXAMINATION BY AUTHORITY:

The petitioner, exporters and importers have expressed their views, and the

same are briefly mentioned below.

The arguments expressed by the

petitioner, exporters, Importers and other interested parties, which are already

discussed in the preliminary findings have not been repeated for the sake of

brevity.

(a)

PETITIONER¹ VIEWS:

The arguments of the petitioner in this regard are:-

(i)

The cost of production claimed by M/s BASF, Germany, one of the exporters

is prima-facie suspected. The information provided by them in their non-

confidential submission reveals that the company has considered its cost of

production starting from HAS Solution. It appears that the entire process of

manufacturing and cost of production projected by the company considers

HAS manufacturing as crystallization of HAS Solution. It is submitted that

such claim made by the company is grossly unacceptable, deceptive and

misleading.

(ii)

It is understood that M/s BASF is engaged in production of Caprolectum,

which requires production of HAS Solution. M/s BASF is understood to hold

significantly higher capacities for Caprolectum. Prima facie, it appears that

the company has just evaded its cost of raw material for production of HAS

and some incidental cost seems to have been charged under head

"materials" in the statement of cost of production provided by the company

to the Authority.

•

[

—

1 1

(iii)

Attention of the Authority is invited to the oral submissions made by the

representative of M/s BASF at the time of oral hearing, wherein the

company claimed that HAS Solution is a by-product for them. The claim

made by the company reinforces our view that the company has not

apparently allocated its costs appropriately on HAS on account of raw

materials.

(iv)

It is our understanding that M/s BASF sells significant volumes of HAS

Solution. We request the Authority to suitably consider this aspect while

assessing Normal Value of this company.

In view of the above, we request the Authority to collect detailed information

on cost of production on the lines demanded from Domestic Industry, It is

submitted that the costing information required to be provided by the

Domestic Industry is comprehensive and disclosure of information as per

this format would reveal the correct position with regard to cost of production

and profitability of M/s BASF Further, it is also important to examine that all

sales made by the exporter in its home market were above the full cost of

production including Selling, General and Administrative expenses.

(v)

HAS is consumed for production of Sulphamethaxazole (SMX). SMX per se

and in other forms is being exported from India in substantial volumes,

Since the Government of India has permitted imports of the material

required for production of export of goods from the purview of anti dumping

duties, it is submitted that effectively this demand is not available to the

Domestic Industry unless Government of India withdraws the exemption.

(vi)

The petitioner has submitted that about 2500 MT HAS is imported in India

for production of HAS related export items. Further, 650 Kg HAS is required

for production of 1 ton of SMX. However, Government of India has permitted

imports of 800 Kg of HAS against exports of 1 ton of SMX. Thus, effectively

20% extra imports is being permitted by the Government of India against

every MT of every ton of export of SMX.

In view of the above, petitioner has submitted that though the merchant

demand of the HAS for the Indian domestic consumption is in the region of

2000 MT, effectively another 400 MT imported anti dumping duty free

material would be available to the industry which would be consumed by the

company for production of item destined for domestic market. The effective

demand of HAS for domestic market is thus in the region of 1600 MT, which

is the capacity, created by the company.

(b)

VIEWS OF THE

EXPORTER. IMPORTER AND OTHER INTERESTED

PARTIES.

M/s BASF and Importer have made the following submissions-

(i)

The Period of Investigation in the present case, as determined is from Is July

1999 to 31^st December, 1999

The said Period of Investigation is too small

for any industry, and in particular, chemical industry to depict a clear picture of

the trend in the chemical industry

They have requested that Period of

Investigation may be extended for a full financial year in order to have a clear

picture of the trend in that particular industry.

(li)

The petitioner herein has imported the alleged product under consideration

from USA just before the Period of Investigation.

(lii)

The practice followed by the Authority to take the lower Export Price for non-

cooperative exporter to calculate the Dumping Margin is unprecedented. The

only data available with the Authority is the imports details and to take the

lowest exports (or import) price is patently unfair to the users of HAS.

(iv)

It is submitted that petitioner has suffered no injury. Injury is being claimed and

highlighted on account of a selective analysis of injury, where differing period

are compared - quarter to quarter or annualized just to accentuate the

apparent injury.

(v)

The fact that factors other than dumped imports are affecting the Domestic

Industry is reinforced by the petitioner's admission at the public hearing that

sales are still down. This proves that even after the imposition of duty the

Domestic Industry is not benefiting and that imports are not on account of price,

but rather on account of other factors such as poor quality and inefficient

production methods.

AUTHORITY POSITION:

The submissions made by petitioner, exporters, importers and other

interested parties have been examined and considered only to the extent they

are relevant under the Rules and have a bearing on this case and dealt with

at appropriate places in the notification: -

(i)

With regard to the issues raised by the petitioner, the Authority has conducted

on the spot verification of the exporter M/s BASF. Accordingly, Normal Value,

Export Price and Dumping Margin have been determined.

(ii)

With regard to the issue of quality, the Authority notes that there is no

evidence that there is a difference in quality. Hon'ble CEGAT has already

held that the issue of quality is not relevant to the present purposes. In any

event, the issue of quality requires, at the best, a quantified adjustment, which

has not been demonstrated by an interested party.

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA EXTRAORDINARY

[PART I—SEC 11

(III)

The Domestic Industry has not imported HAS during the period of

investigation

In any event, the Authority has discretion to retain such a

company within the scope of the Domestic Industry The reasons advanced

for exclusion of the company are worthy of rejection

(iv)

The Period of Investigation considered by the Authority is in accordance with

the rules and most appropriate as the petitioner had alleged dumping of

Hydroxyl Amine Sulphate by the exporters from these countries during this

period

The Authority is required to investigate the period for which the

dumping allegation is made by the petitioner

PRODUCT UNDER CONSIDERATION:

The product considered in the present investigation is Hydroxyl Amine

Sulphate (HAS) originating in or exported from USA, Japan and the

European Union (EU) Hydroxyl Amine Sulphate is classified, under the

Custom-sub heading 2825 1003 of the Custom Tariff Act, 1975 The

classification is, however, indicative only and in no way binding on the scope

of the present investigation

DOMESTIC INDUSTRY STANDING OF THE PETITIONER:

The petition has been filed by M/s Deepak Nitrite Limited having its

Registered Office at Alkapun, Baroda-390007

The petitioner is the sole

producer of the subject goods in India Therefore, the petitioner fulfils the

criteria to represent the Domestic Industry, as required under the Rules

LIKE ARTICLE:

5 (a) Rule 2(d) of the Anti-Dumping Rules specifies that "Like Article" means an

article which is identical or alike in all respects to the product under

investigation or in the absence of such an article, another article, having

characteristics closely resembling those of the articles under examination

(b) The petitioner has claimed that there is no significant difference in Hydroxyl

Amine Sulphate produced in India and Hydroxyl Amine Sulphate exported

from subject countries/territory

Hydroxyl Amine Sulphate produced by

Domestic Industry and imported from these countries/ territory are

comparable in terms of characteristics such as physical and chemical

characteristics, manufacturing process and technology, functions and uses,

product

specification,

pricing,

distribution and marketing and tariff

classification of the goods

The two are technically and commercially

substitutable

The consumers have used the two interchangeably

Therefore, Hydroxyl Amine Sulphate produced by the petitioner and imported

from subject countries/ territory should be treated as Like Article in

accordance with the anti dumping rules

The petitioner has also claimed that there are two methods available for

production of Hydroxyl Amine Sulphate.

Domestic industry is producing

Hydroxyl Amine Sulphate with Raschig's process and other method of

production for Hydroxyl Amine Sulphate is by hydrogenation of Nitric Oxide

over platinum catalyst in presence of dilute sulphuric acid. The HAS solution

is then separated out by crystallizing and centrifuging Domestic industry has

further stated that they are not aware about the method adopted by the

producers in the subject countries/ territory However, it is submitted that the

difference in method adopted has no significant impact on marketing, pricing,

specification etc..

(c)

In view of the same, the Authority holds that Hydroxyl Amine Sulphate being

produced by the Domestic Industry and those being imported from the subject

countries/ territory can be used interchangeably and thus are commercially

and technically substitutable and therefore, are Like Article within the

meaning of the Rules.

NORMAL VALUE. EXPORT PRICE & DUMPING MARGIN USA. JAPAN

AND EU:

The Authority provided opportunity to the exporters from USA, Japan and EU

to furnish information relevant to the investigations and offer comments, if

any, in accordance with the Rules. The Authority also wrote to the Embassy

of USA, Japan and EU Delegation in India.

DUMPING MARGIN

NORMAL VALUE:

The Authority has examined Normal Value in relation to Section 9A(1 )(c) of

the Customs Tariff (Amendment) Act, 1995.

The Authority sent the questionnaire to the exporters from the subject

countries/ territory in terms of the Section cited above, The claims made by

the exporters with regards to the Normal Value and the Export Price are as

under: -

EXPORTERS FROM USA, JAPAN AND EU:

The response was received from M/s BASF Aktiengesellschaft, Germany and

M/s UBE Industries Limited, Japan.

They had furnished the details of

domestic sales and the exports made to India during the Period of

Investigation. M/s Toagosei Company Ltd., Japan and M/s DSM, Netherlands

have submitted that they have not exported the subject goods during period

of investigation. M/s DSM has further stated that since January, 1998 they are

not producing or exporting Hydroxyl Amine Sulphate any more, hence there is

no necessity to participate in the investigation,

The claims made by the

exporters with regard to the Normal Value and the Export Price are discussed

herein under: -

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA EXTRAORDINARY

[PAR 11—SEC 11

M/S BASF, GERMANY:

(a)

NORMAL VALUE:

The exporter furnished the month wise details of the sales of Hydroxyl Amine

Sulphate in the domestic market M/s BASF sold *****Kg of Hydroxyl Amine

Sulphate in the domestic market at a sales value of US$*****

Thus, the

average sales realisation in the domestic market was US$***** per kg

M/s

BASF has also submitted its cost of production of Hydroxyl Amine Sulphate

They have claimed adjustments in respect of Commission, Packing, and

Inland Freight to arrive at the Ex-factory price of domestic sales Accordingly,

an Ex-factory domestic price of US$***** per Kg of HAS was claimed

(n)

At the time of verification, based on the issues raised by the petitioner and

information submitted by M/s BASF, certain clarifications were sought from

the company The company was requested to reproduce the oral clarifications

at the time of verification in writing which they have failed to do

(in)

Since the company has failed to reproduce their oral clarifications in writing,

the clarifications provided by the company orally at the time of verification has

not been taken on record, particularly in view of the counter-claims lodged by

the petitioner This was clarified to M/s BASF at the time of visit and informed

in writing also

However, M/s

BASF has failed to provide the

clarifications/information solicited by the Authority in writing and hence M/s

BASF has been treated as non-cooperative to such an extent The Authority

has, therefore, proceeded on the basis of Rule 6(8), i e best information

available

(b)

EXPORT PRICE:

M/s BASF has exported ***** Kg of Hydroxyl Amine Sulphate to India for a

total value of US$*****

Accordingly, the average Export Price of Hydroxyl

Amine Sulphate during the Period of Investigation works out to US$***** per

kg The exporter has claimed adjustments on account of Commission *****,

Inland Freight *****, Overseas Freight ***** and Packing ***** The Ex-factory

Export Price to India is claimed at *****/Kg For Export Price the Authority has

relied on the data submitted by the exporter

Thus, the Dumping Margin in case of M/s BASF,

Germany from EL) is

assessed by the Authority at US$***** per Kg or 98 74%

OTHER EXPORTERS FROM KU:

(a)

The Authority provided opportunity to the exporters from EU to furnish

information relevant to the investigations and offer comments, if any in

accordance with the Section cited above

The Authority wrote to the

Delegation of EU in India also

However, no other exporters from EU have

responded to the Authority's request for information The claim made by the

petitioner with regard to the determination of Normal Value has also not been

disputed by the other interested party(ies).

The Authority has, therefore,

proceeded on the basis of Rule 6(8), i.e. best information available.

(b)

Thus, the Dumping Margin in case of Non-co-operative/other exporters of

Hydroxyl Amine Sulphate from EU assessed by Authority is same as of M/s

BASF i.e. at US$***** per Kg. or 98.74%.

M/S UBE INDUSTRIES LTD. JAPAN:

(a)

NORMAL VALUE:

(i)

M/s UBE has stated that subject goods produced by them are sold in the

Japanese market through distributors,

(ii)

M/s UBE has stated that they are not the distributor of subject goods in

Japanese market, data regarding such as "Margin (balance of purchase price

and resale price of distributors which is normally 3-5% of purchase price)' is

not provided.

(in)

The exporters furnished the month wise details of the sales of Hydroxyl

Amine Sulphate in the domestic market on same level of trade as exported in

India. M/s UBE sold *****Kg of Hydroxyl Amine Sulphate in the domestic

market at a sales value of US$***** Thus, the average sales realisation in

the domestic market was US$***** per kg. M/s UBE has also submitted its

cost of production of Hydroxyl Amine Sulphate. The adjustments have been

claimed in respect of Packing, Inland Freight, insurance and handling to arrive

at the Ex-factory price of domestic sales. Accordingly, an Ex-factory domestic

price of US$***** per Kg. was claimed.

The Authority has allowed above adjustments. The Normal Value comes to

US$***** per Kg.

(b)

EXPORT PRICE:

(i)

The exporter has mentioned that subject goods produced by them is sold to

distributors/trading houses and they exported it to India.

The subject goods

produced by M/s UBE is exported to India through M/s Nissho Iwai Co , M/s

Mitui &Co Ltd. and M/s Mitsuya Boeki Ltd., Japan.

(ii)

M/s UBE has stated, that they have not directly exported the subject goods to

India. However, they have provided exports data such as Exports Selling

Price (CIF basis) and charges after FOB, of their distributors/trading houses.

(ui)

M/s. UBE Industries Ltd. has exported ***** Kg. of Hydroxyl Amine Sulphate

to India for a total value of US$***** Accordingly, the average Export Price of

Hydroxyl Amine Sulphate during the period of investigation works out to

US$***** per kg (through its distributors/trading houses) . The exporter has

claimed adjustments on account of commission *****, inland freight *****,

overseas freight *****, insurance *****, overseas insurance *****, packing *****,

handling *****, forwarding ***** and interest ***** Thus the ex-factory price for

export sales to India is claimed at *****/Kg. The Authority has allowed above

adjustments.

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA EXTRAORDINARY

[PART I—SEC 1]

Thus, the Dumping Margin in case of exports of subject goods produced by

M/s UBE, Japan is assessed by the Authority at US$***** per Kg or 40 03%.

(iv)

The Authority sought a clarification from M/s UBE regarding their statement

that they have exported the subject goods in India through three

distributors/trading houses named above, whether these distributors/trading

houses have exported the subject goods produced by M/s UBE only, in India

during Period of Investigation M/s UBE has clarified that during the Period of

Investigation all three distributors/trading houses did not export Hydroxyl

Amine Sulphate to India produced by any other company

Accordingly, the Dumping Margin is 40 03% for M/s Nissho Iwai Co, M/s

Mitui &Co Ltd and M/s Mitsuya Boeki Ltd , Japan as assessed for M/s UBE

Industries Ltd

OTHER EXPORTERS FROM JAPAN:

(i)

The Authority provided opportunity to the exporters from Japan to furnish

information relevant to the investigations and offer comments, if any, in

accordance with the Section cited above

The Authority wrote to the

Embassy of Japan in India also

However, no other exporters from Japan

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)

The Authority has,

therefore, proceeded on the basis of Rule 6(8), i e best information available

(MI)

The Dumping Margin in case of Non-co-operative exporters of Hydroxyl

Amine Sulphate from Japan is assessed by Authority at US$**** per Kg or

105 78%

EXPORTERS FROM USA

(I)

The Authority provided opportunity to the exporters from USA to furnish

information relevant to the investigations and offer comments, if any, in

accordance with the Section cited above The Authority also wrote to the

Embassy of USA in India

However, none of the exporters from USA has

responded to the Authority's request for information

(II)

The claim made by the petitioner with regard to the determination of Normal

Value has also not been disputed by any interested party (les) The Authority

has, therefore, proceeded on the basis of Rule 6(8), i e , best information

available

(MI)

The Export Price has been determined on the basis of the information

compiled by the DGCI&S The average Export Price has been adjusted for

commission insurance, inland freight, overseas freight, port expenses as

claimed by Domestic Industry The Dumping Margin has been assessed by

the Authority at US$***** per kg or 67 47% for all exports of HAS from USA

14.

The Rules relating to comparison provides as follows:

"While arriving at margin of clumping, the Designated Authority shall

make a fair comparison between the Export Price and the Normal Value,

The comparison shall be made at the same level of trade, normally at ex-

works level, and in respect of sales made at as nearly possible the same

time,

Due allowance shall be made in each case, on its merits, for

differences which affect price comparability, including differences in

conditions and terms of sale, taxation, levels of trade, quantities, physical

characteristics, and any other differences which are demonstrated to

affect price comparability,"

15.

Based on the Normal Value and the Export Price, as discussed above, the

Dumping Margin in respect of individual exporters and the specific countries/

territory, is as under: -

No.

Country/Exporter

All Exporters

JAPAN

1)M/sUBE Industries Ltd.

2) M/s Nissho Iwai Co.

3) M/s Mitui & Co. Ltd.

4) M/s Mitsuya Boeki Ltd.

5) Others Exporters

USA

All Exporters

Dumping Margin

98.74

40.03

105.78

67.47

INJURY & CAUSAL LINK:

16. (a) In considering the effect of the dumped imports on prices, it is considered

necessary to examine whether there has been a significant price undercutting

by the dumped imports as compared with the price 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.

(b) For the examination of the impact of the imports on the Domestic Industry in

India, the Authority considered such indices having a bearing on the state of

the industry as production, capacity utilisation, sales quantum, stock,

profitability, net sales realisation, the magnitude and margin of dumping, etc.

in accordance with Annexure II (iv) of the rules supra,

uneconomical plant size, inefficiencies, mismanagement, quality or any other

factors etc. as cited which might be injuring the Domestic Industry at the

same time.

IHE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY

[PART I—SEC. 11

m/kinn ^nn

! ^

for

t h e D °

m 6 S t i c l n d u s t ry h a s b e e n determined by

uTaae n f ^ T

a?alyS1S

Of ?' r e l e v a n t f a c t o r s '*ke usage of raw material

usage of utilities, etc. and the actual expenses during the Period of

nvest.gat.on including the investments and capacity utilization

The Non-

Injurious Pnce of Domestic Industry has been determined by considering the

optimum cost of production and considering the reasonable return on he

capital employed by the Domestic Industry

J-

CONCLUSION ON INJURY

17.

The Authority concludes that:

(a)

MARKET SHARE:

Year

1995-96

1996-97

1997-98

1998-99

POI

(Annalised)

Market share -

domestic

industry (%)

12.71

13.80

13.56

15.30

10.72

Market share - Imports

(%)

87.29

86.20

86.44

84.70

89.28

It may be seen from the above table that market shares of imports in demand

of HAS in India has increased. The increase in the market share of imports in

demand was directly at the cost of decline in the market share of the Indian

industry. Further, the entire imports are from the subject countries/territory,

(b)

INCREASE IN IMPORT FROM THE SUBJECT COUNTRIES/TERRITORY IN

ABSOLUTE TERM:

The Authority finds that the imports of HAS from the subject countries/territory

have increased significantly in absolute terms as may be seen from the table

below:-

YEAR

1995-96

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1

1996-97

~ ~ ~ ~ — — ^

1997-98

1998-99

P O I - Annualised

IMPORTS IN MT

2826.25

3268.84

3684.58

4055.77

4117.87

(c)

PRODUCTION & CAPACITY UTILISATION:

Production and Capacity Utilisation of the petitioner has been as under:-

Year

1995-96

1996-97

1997-98

1998-99

POI

(six months)

Capacity in MT

600

750

975

780

Production in MT

379

515

643

750.775

375.33

Capacity

utilization %

63.17

85.83

85.73

48.12

It is evident from the above that the capacity utilisation of the Domestic

Industry has declined even though production of the Domestic Industry has

increased. The increase in the production has been because of increased

capacity of the Domestic Industry.

(d)

SALES REALISATION

The sales realisation of the Domestic Industry for Period of Investigation and

for previous three years is as under (indexed information considering 1995-96

as 100):-

Period

1995-96

1996-97

1997-98

1998-99

July, 1999

August, 1999

September, 1999

October 1999

November, 1999

December, 1999

Sales realisation Rs. per MT

100.00

99.73

89.34

89.98

83.56

74.95

69.88

64.69

71.98

60.29

It is evident that the sales realisation of the Domestic Industry has declined

very steeply particularly during the Period of Investigation.

(e)

PRICE UNDERCUTTING:

Period

1995-96

1996-97

1997-98

1998-99

July, 1999

August, 1999

September, 1999

October, 1999

November, 1999

December

Sales

Realisation

(Domestic Industry )

Base year = 100

100.00

99.73

89.34

89 97

83.56

74.95

69.88

64.69

71.98

60.29

Landed

Value

(Imports)

Base year = 100

100.00

102.62

97.73

81.69

60.47

60.99

58.11

60.00

61.67

59.26

It may be seen from the above table that the Landed Value of the imported

material from subject countries/territory was higher than the selling price of

Domestic Industry till 1998-99. However, during Period of Investigation the

exporters from the subject countries/territory reduced their prices significantly,

which resulted in very significant price undercutting in the Indian market.

&"/6Z/jco/—£?

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA EXTRAORDINARY

[PART I—SM 11

(f)

SALES QUANTITY:

PERIOD

1995-96

1996-97

1997-98

1998-99

POI

P Ol Apnualized

SALES IN MT

422

525

616

765 90

264 53

529 06

The Authority finds that sales of the Domestic Industry have declined Though

Domestic Industry has decreased its selling price because of dumping of HAS

in the Indian market from the subject countries/territory, the Domestic Industry

was not able to increase its sales proportionate to the increase in the

production and capacity

(g)

PROFITABILITY:

The increase in the cost of production and reduction in the selling price on the

other hand has resulted in decline in profitability of the Domestic Industry

(h)

DECLINE

IN CONTRIBUTION

PER MT OF HYDROXYL

AMINE

SULPHATE:

As it is evident from the above para that sales realisation of the Domestic

Industry has declined very significantly, the decline in the sales realisation of

the Domestic Industry resulted in declined in contribution per MT of HAS The

Authority has analysed the same in the confidential information submitted by

the Domestic Industry and found that the Domestic Industry was faced with

the situation of negative contribution

(i)

CLOSING STOCK:

The closing stock of the petitioner was 16 625 MT during 1997-98 and 1 5

MT during 1998-99 has gone up to 117 800 MT during the Period of

Investigation

The Authority, therefore, notes from the above that during the Period of

Investigation the imports from the subject countries/territory have been at a

price below the selling prices of the Domestic Industry Further, the imports

into India have been at a price lower than the Non-Injurious Price for the

Domestic Industry As a consequence thereof the petitioner was forced to sell

its product at a price significantly below its Non-Injurious Price resulting in

financial losses to the petitioner The petitioner was also prevented from

increasing the level of capacity utilisation as compared to the total apparent

market

These parameters collectively and cumulatively indicate that the petitioner

has suffered material injury due to the dumped imports.

K

INDIAN INDUSTRTS INTEREST & OTHER ISSUES

19. (a) The purpose of anti dumping duties, in general, is to eliminate dumping which

is causing injury to the petitioner companies and to re-establish a situation of

open and fair competition in the Indian market, which is in the general interest

of the countries.

(b) It is recognised that the imposition of anti dumping duties might affect the

price levels of the products manufactured using the subject goods and

consequently might have some influence on relative competitiveness of these

products. However, fair competition on the Indian market will not be reduced

by the anti dumping measures, particularly if the levy of the anti dumping duty

is restricted to an amount necessary to redress the injury to the petitioner's

company. On the contrary, imposition of anti dumping measures would

remove the unfair advantages gained by dumping practices, would prevent

the decline of the petitioner¹ company and help maintain availability of wider

choice to the consumers of Hydroxyl Amine Sulphate. Imposition of anti

dumping

measures

would

not

restrict

imports

from

the

subject

countries/territory in any way, and, therefore, would not affect the availability

of the product to the consumers.

(c)

To ascertain the extent of anti-dumping duty necessary to remove the injury

to the petitioner's company, the Authority has relied upon Non - Injurious

Price of Hydroxyl Amine Sulphate in India for the petitioner's company, by

considering the optimum cost of production at optimum level of capacity

utilisation for the petitioner's company.

FINAL FINDINGS

20.

The Authority, after considering the foregoing, concludes that:

(a)

Hydroxyl Amine Sulphate originating in or exported from the subject countries/

territory has been exported to India below its normal value, thereby resulting in

dumping;

(b)

The Domestic Industry has suffered material injury;

(c)

The injury has been caused to the Domestic Industry by dumping of the

subject goods originating in or exported from USA, Japan and EU.

(d)

In view of the above, the Authority recommends imposition of definite anti-

dumping duty on all imports of Hydroxyl Amine Sulphate falling under chapter

28 (Custom Sub-heading 2825.1003 ) originating in or exported from USA,

Japan and EU.

THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY

[PART I—SEC. 11

(e)

The landed value of imports for the purpose shall be assessable value as

determined by the customs under the Customs Act, 1962 and all duties of

Customs except duties levied under Section 3, 3A, 8B , 9 and 9A of the

Customs Tariff Act, 1975.

(f)

It was considered to recommend the amount of Anti-Dumping Duty equal to

the Dumping Margin or less which, if levied, would remove the injury to the

Domestic Industry. Landed value of the imports for individual exporters, for

the purposes, were compared with the non-injurious selling price of the

Domestic Industry, determined for the period of investigation. Wherever the

difference was less than the Dumping Margin, a duty lower than the Dumping

Margin is recommended.

(g)

Accordingly, anti-dumping duties may be imposed, on all imports of Hydroxyl

Amine Sulphate originating in or exported from the subject countries/ territory.

The anti-dumping duty shall be the difference between the amounts mentioned

in column 3 below and the landed value of imports in US $ / MT.

S.No.

Country/Exporter

All Exporters

JAPAN

1) M/s UBE Industries Ltd.

2) M/s Nissho Iwai Co.

3) M/s Mitui'& Co. Ltd.

4) M/s Mitsuya Boeki Ltd

5) Others Exporters

USA

All Exporters

Amount USS/MT

1794.13

1733.56

1794.13

(h)

Subject to the above, the Authority confirms the Preliminary Findings dated 4^th

August, 2000.

(i)

An appeal against this order shall lie to the Customs, Excise and Gold

(Control) Appellate Tribunal in accordance with the Act supra.

L. V SAPTHARISHI, Designated Authority

Printed by the Manager, OovL of India Press, Ring Road, Mayapuri, New Delhi-110064

and Publiihod by the Controller of Publications, Delhi-110054.