2016 (10) TMI 662 - AT - Customs

Imposition of ADD - cold rolled flat products of stainless steel - import from China PR, Korea, EU, South Africa, Taiwan, Thailand and USA - sunset review - N/N.61/2015-Customs (ADD) dated 1 1.12.2015 of Ministry of Finance - Held that - the subject goods continued to enter in the Indian market from the subject countries at substantially dumped price. Examination of the injury indicates that domestic industry continues to suffer injury on account of import at very low price from subject countries against which anti-dumping duties are in force. In terms of AD Rules, the DA is required to determine whether revocation of the AD duty would lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury. One relevant factor noticed is that the subject goods of higher width above 1250 mm. has increased during the injury investigation period. The claim of the DI that higher width products are imported and are easily converted into lesser width product by simply slitting, has also been considered by the DI before the final finding. He concluded that the dumping and injury are continuing and are likely to continue or recur, if the duties are revoked. Accordingly, he recommended for continuation of AD duties on subject goods imported form sub-countries. The capacity of DI has increased by about 137% and the production increased by 84% in the POI compared to the base year. It was recorded that the capacity addition of the DI appears to be in consonance with the increase in demand of the subject goods. The DA noted that the cost of production has been duly normated to account for additional cost, if any, due to ramp up operation and under utilization of capacity while fixing NIP. It was concluded by the DA that the non-attribution analysis does not show any other factor that could have significantly contributed to the injury suffered by the DI - no interference required with the duty imposed. Improper fixation of export price in respect of the POSCO, Korea/Thailand, we find that the DA has taken into account the relationship between the group companies of POSCO before arriving at the decision - neither the determination nor the interests of the domestic industry have been affected due to non-participation of the so called related parties of the cooperating exporters in other countries. the objections of the domestic industry in this regard have not been accepted. ADD rightly imposed - appeal rejected - decided against appellant.

Summary

Issues:
Appeals against Final Findings and Customs Notification regarding anti-dumping duty on cold rolled flat products of stainless steel imported from subject countries.

Analysis:
1. The appeals challenged the continuation of anti-dumping duty (AD duty) on subject goods due to alleged lack of justification and faulty injury conclusions. The Designated Authority (DA) initiated a sunset review following an application from the domestic industry (DI) and recommended extending AD duty on subject goods. The DA's findings were based on the rules for the assessment of AD duty and the need to prevent dumping causing material injury to the DI.

2. The appellants contested the findings on various grounds, including the decline in import volume and the alleged lack of thorough examination by the DA regarding the cause of injury to the DI. The DI, while supporting the imposition of AD duty, raised concerns about the low duty on certain exporters. The DA defended its findings, emphasizing the difference in scope between sunset reviews and other investigations, such as safeguard inquiries.

3. Specific concerns were raised by one appellant regarding the alleged improper construction of export prices for certain exporters. The DA defended its methodology, stating that related parties' non-participation did not impact the determination. The DA considered the relationship between group companies before making its decision, ultimately rejecting the appellant's plea.

4. The appellate tribunal carefully analyzed the arguments presented by all parties. It upheld the DA's findings, noting the continued entry of subject goods at dumped prices and the impact on the DI. The tribunal found no merit in the appeals challenging the imposition of AD duty, as the DA's analysis considered various factors, including the increase in product width and the DI's capacity expansion.

5. Regarding the plea related to the fixation of export prices for specific exporters, the tribunal found that the DA had appropriately considered the relationships between group companies and rejected the appellant's contentions. After thorough consideration of all arguments and evidence, the tribunal concluded that the appeals lacked merit and rejected them.

In conclusion, the appellate tribunal upheld the DA's decision to continue the AD duty on cold rolled flat products of stainless steel imported from subject countries, dismissing the appeals challenging the imposition of duty and the methodology used in determining export prices for certain exporters. The tribunal's detailed analysis considered the various grounds raised by the appellants and affirmed the DA's findings based on the rules governing anti-dumping investigations.