2016 (10) TMI 127 - AT - Customs

Imposition of Anti Dumping Duty - aniline - imported from European Union - material injury suffered by domestic industry - Customs Tariff Act, 1975 readwith Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of Anti Dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995 - the performance of HOCL and inclusion of such data in injury analysis - belated submission of information by HOCL - Held that - The requirement in terms of Rule 2 (b) of the AD Rules for domestic industry has been fulfilled. The examination by DA is agreed. Effect on the performance and profitability of HOCL due to various factors - no causal link to the import of subject goods to such adverse situation - Held that - The appellant relied on certain remarks in the annual reports of HOCL to state the general economic slow down and other issues contributed to adverse results for HOCL. It was emphasized that GNVF has been performing with full capacity and the sales of subject goods has increased. HOCL had low capacity utilization, attributable to other factors and hence there is no injury to domestic industry. - contentions of the appellant rejected - The assessment by the DA regarding injury and causal link is agreed with. Anti Dumping duty rightly has been imposed - appeal disposed off - decided against appellant.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge against imposition of anti-dumping duty on 'aniline' from the European Union.

Analysis:
The appeal challenges the imposition of anti-dumping duty on 'aniline' originating from the European Union. The Designated Authority (DA) initiated an investigation based on an application by M/s Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizers Co. Ltd, alleging dumping of 'aniline' and resulting injury to the domestic industry. The DA concluded that the subject goods were exported below normal value, causing material injury to the domestic industry. The Final Findings led to the imposition of anti-dumping duty, which is contested in the appeal.

The appellant raised several objections, including the initiation of investigation without essential pre-examination by the DA, the inclusion of data from Hindustan Organics Chemicals Ltd. (HOCL) in the injury analysis, and the adequacy of data considered for injury determination. The appellant argued that HOCL's performance was impacted by factors unrelated to dumping, thus challenging the causal link between dumped imports and industry injury.

The DA's Final Findings were supported by the domestic industry and the Revenue's authorized representative. They emphasized that all necessary information was disclosed, HOCL's data was considered appropriately, and the anti-dumping duty was imposed following established procedures. The DA's findings were challenged based on the lack of injury to the domestic industry and the alleged adverse impact on HOCL's performance.

Upon examination, the Tribunal found no merit in the appeal. It upheld the DA's findings, stating that the investigation fulfilled the requirements under the Anti-Dumping Rules. The Tribunal agreed with the DA's assessment of injury and causal link, emphasizing the holistic analysis of available data. Various economic factors affecting the domestic industry were considered, including price undercutting, volume effects of imports, and industry performance indicators. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, affirming the imposition of anti-dumping duty on 'aniline' from the European Union.