Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2012 (10) TMI 918

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Similarly, other domestic units have also been excluded from the consideration thereby restricting the domestic industry to comprise only the petitioners.Held that:- Domestic industry status granted by the D.A to the sole petitioner is justified. Market Economy Status - Appellant contended that one of the grounds taken by the D.A. that they are buying power from state controlled public utility is not a valid ground as the D.A. has taken no such objection in respect of some of the other anti-dumping cases. Market economy assessment is an overall assessment of the entity involved, covering several aspects and not an isolated examination of single parameter, which could give a decisive indication of the status of the entity. Held that:- I .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... l Shri Tarun Gulati confines his arguments to the following three grounds:- (i) The petitioner M/s. Aurobindo Pharma has alone been considered as the domestic industry for the purpose of this investigation excluding other domestic producers and the 100% EOU, and ignoring the fact that the said petitioner himself had been sourcing intermediate products from the subject country and has long term contracts with some of the exporters in that country. (ii) The appellants have been wrongly denied the Market Economy Status. (iii) The D.A. has allowed excessive confidentiality while determining the normal price thereby denying the appellants an effective opportunity to challenge the anti-dumping margin and consequent anti-dumping du .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... M/s. Kopran Ltd. It also took note of the fact that all these four domestic producers had imported the subject goods during the POI and hence they did not qualify to be considered as domestic industry under the Anti-dumping Rules. During the course of hearing, it was submitted before us that the petitioner domestic industry produces as much as 86% of the subject goods. Further, it was ascertained that though they had imported the intermediate products, there was no evidence that they had imported the subject goods. As such, we are of the view that domestic industry status granted by the D.A to the sole petitioner domestic industry requires no interference by us. 5. The learned counsel for the appellants has argued that the appellants have .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... constitutes a very significant proportion of the cost of production of the subject goods and therefore, any distortion in this price affects the cost and price structure of the responding exporter, which does not reflect the true market condition. Since the price of major raw materials which are produced in non-market oriented conditions and sold in the domestic market, the import price into the same market may not reflect the correct price trend. Therefore, the arguments of the exporter that the Authority could have adopted the import price to China as a reliable bench mark do not appear to be tenable. The Authority also notes that utilities are supplied by the State utility providers. As per the accession agreement the utility prices are .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ational import prices prevailing in India as per DGCIS data, which goes to indicate that the appellants are not operating in a Market Economy scenario. 7. The learned counsel for the appellants has argued that the D.A. has granted excessive confidentiality thereby denying an effective opportunity to the appellants to question the normal price which has been determined in respect of the appellants and in turn has been used to determine a higher rate of dumping margin and consequent high rate of anti-dumping duty against the appellants. 8. Taking into account the above submission made by the learned counsel for the appellants, we have called for the confidential versions of the final findings and other submissions. We find that for calcu .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates