9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 752X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i Sharad Bhansali and Jitendra Singh, Advocates - M/s Saint Gobain, Gold Plus and HNG Float Glass, for the appellants. S/Shri Amit Singh, Advocate for DA and Govind Dixit, Authorized Representative (DR) - for the Respondent. For I.P. S/Shri Sharad Bhansali and Jitendra Singh, Advocates Respondent Domestic Industries for 1 - 3. ORDER Per: B. Ravichandran : These six appeals are directed against final findings dated 10/10/2014 of the Designated Authority (the DA), Directorate General of Anti-Dumping and Allied Duties, Ministry of Commerce and Customs Notification No. 48/2014 - CUS (ADD) dated 11/12/2014 imposing anti-dumping duty (AD duty) on "clear float glass" (subject goods) imported from Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and UAE. 2. The Indi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which costs during the period of investigation are affected by start-up operation. The POI in the present case is 01/10/2011 to 31/12/2012. Appellant started commercial production in July 2011 which is just 3 months prior to POI. As such the cost structure was high on account of huge start-up costs and low capacity utilization. This aspect was not properly taken into account by the DA for arriving at the 'normal value' of local sales. 4. The learned Counsel for M/s Tariq Glass Industries Ltd., producer/exporter of subject goods from Pakistan contested the imposition of AD duty on subject goods from Pakistan. Apart from contesting the finding due to non-disclosure of data during investigation, the learned Counsel stated that the vol ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... producer/exporters of foreign country are against imposition whereas the DI is against improper quantification of injury and AD duty. We take up, issue wise, the arguments raised by the appellants. Non-disclosure of relied up on data, especially sourced from DGCI&S is one of the grounds. The reliability of the said data was also questioned. We find that the DA had sent questionnaire to elicit relevant information to various known exporters in subject countries and known importers/users in India. Request was made to DGCI&S to obtain details of imports for POI and proceeding three years. The same was obtained and relied upon. Spot verifications of information provided by DI and producers/exporters were also conducted. We note that the produce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e note that while disclosing the details of import, the particulars of importers are kept confidential. Here the DA considered the data for subject goods (irrespective of their varying customs classifications at 8 digit level) for analysis. Summary of such data has been made available to the interested parties. 9. The second issue raised by the appellant (Obeikan) is non-consideration of adjustment for start up cost. The DA's observation is as below. "100 (xi) As regards the request of Obeikan for considering adjustment for start up expenses while determining cost of production/sales during POI, the Authority has examined the issue and found no merit due to the following . (a) The Authority notes that Obeikan had set up a new float ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct and, therefore, in the initial period of operation, it is one of the constraints for achieving optimum capacity utilization. In this connection, the Authority notes that Obeikan started its operations in April, 2011 and the inventories at the end of POI were high as compared to the Inventories at the end of 2013 when Obeikan claims that it had achieved optimum level of capacity utilization. This shows that Obeikan could have increased its production during 2013 when the market had picked up. The Authority, therefore, holds that the contention of Obeikan that its production in POI was affected due to start up operations and it got stabilized only during 2013 is not correct. (e) The Authority further holds that the reasons for production ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ne of the subject countries for injury analysis we find that para (iii) of Annexure II provides for cumulative investigation in case of imports being from more than the country. We also note that one of the co-operating, other exporter (Ghani Glass) from Pakistan had not raised this issue in their appeal. Regarding material injury the DA noted that in spite of increased production and sales during POI, as compared to the base year, the DI's performance has declined in the POI. None of the other opposing interested parties brought out any reason with evidence for the injury suffered by DI due to "other factors". After analyzing all known factors the DA concluded that the injury suffered by the DI is due to dumped imports. 12. We have al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
