Dumping Investigation Initiated on Melamine from EU, Japan, Iran and
Indonesia
[Ref: F.No.
14/35/2010-DGAD dated 7th December 2010]
Subject: Initiation of
anti-dumping investigation concerning imports of Melamine in India from
European Union, Iran, Indonesia and Japan.
Whereas M/s. Gujarat State Fertilizers
and Chemicals Ltd., Vadodra (herein after also
referred to as applicant or petitioner) has filed an application before the
Designated Authority (hereinafter referred to as the Authority), in accordance
with the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 as amended in 1995 (herein after referred to
as the Act) and Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of
Anti Dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules,
1995 (herein after referred to as the Rules), alleging dumping of melamine (
herein after also referred to as subject goods) originating in or exported from
European Union, Iran, Indonesia and Japan (herein after also referred to as
“subject countries”) and requested for initiation of Anti Dumping
investigations for levy of anti dumping duties on the subject goods.
1. Product under Consideration
The product under
consideration in the present petition is Melamine, a tasteless, odorless, and
non-toxic substance. Melamine formaldehyde resin is used for laminates as it
offers good hardness, resistance to scratch, stain, water and heat. Laminates
used in some electrical applications possess high mechanical strength, good
heat resistance and good electrical insulating properties. Asbestos filled
Melamine resins possess very high dielectric strength and high resistance.
Beside the best dimensional stability, Melamine Formaldehyde moulding powder gives clear and bright colors, easily
moldable and offers resistance to surface scratching.
Melamine is reacted with
formaldehyde and made into resins or moulding powder
for making innumerable products of beauty and utility. Melamine is used for
making melamine formaldehyde, which in turn is used in producing downstream
products.
The subject goods is classified under chapter 29 of the Customs Tariff Act at
subheading no. 29336100. The customs classification is however is for reference
purpose only and will have no binding on the scope of the present
investigation.
2. Like
Article
The
applicant has claimed that there are no known differences in subject goods
produced by the petitioner and exported from subject countries. Both products
have comparable characteristics in terms of parameters such as physical &
chemical characteristics, manufacturing process & technology, functions &
uses, product specifications, pricing, distribution & marketing and tariff
classification, etc. The goods produced by the domestic industry are comparable
to the imported goods from subject countries in terms
of essential product properties. The goods offered by the domestic industry are
like article to the goods imported from subject countries.
3. Domestic
Industry Standing
The
present petition is filed by M/s Gujarat State Fertilizers and Chemical Ltd
(GSFC). The petitioner has stated that they have made imports at the time of
their production disruption to facilitate requirements of its small customers,
who wished the petitioner to import the material and supply the same. It has
been submitted by the applicant that bill of entry for these imports for
customs clearance were not filed by them. Further, the imports made by the
petitioner constituted approx 11.78 % of its production, 7.44% of total imports
and 4.57% of consumption in India during the POI. The Authority has examined
the matter and it holds that the Petitioner is not a trader per se and is not
resorting to imports in order to take advantage of dumping. The Authority is of
the view that the focus of GSFC has not turned to imports and the company is
not behaving like an importer trader. The focus of the company continues to be
a producer and do its own production.
It
is noted that the Petitioner is the sole producer of Melamine in India. The
Authority after examining the information on record determines that the
applicant constitutes domestic Industry within the meaning of the Rule 2 and
the application satisfies the criteria of standing in terms of Rule 5 of the
Rules supra.
4. Country
Involved
The
countries involved in the present investigation are European Union, Iran,
Indonesia and Japan.
5. Normal
Value
The
applicant has constructed the normal values of subject goods in respect of
subject countries stating that they are not able to get any documentary
evidence or reliable information with regard to domestic prices in the subject
countries and the same is also not available in the public domain. The
Authority has prima-facie considered the normal value of subject goods in
subject countries on the basis of constructed cost of production including
selling, general and administrative overheads and reasonable profit for subject
countries.
There
is sufficient prima facie evidence with regard to normal values claimed by the
petitioner.
6. Export
Price
Export price of the subject
goods from the subject countries has been determined by considering
transaction-wise import data collected from Secondary Sources. Adjustments have
been made on account of ocean freight, marine insurance, commission, and port
expenses etc. in the exporting country to arrive at ex-factory export price.
There is sufficient prima facie evidence with regard to export price claimed by
the petitioner.
7. Dumping Margin
Normal value and export
price has been compared at ex-factory level, which shows significant dumping
margin in respect of the subject countries. There is sufficient evidence that
the normal value of the subject goods in subject countries is significantly
higher than the ex-factory export price indicating, prima facie, that the
subject goods are being dumped by exporters from subject countries into the
Indian market.
8. Injury and Causal Link
The applicant has furnished
information on various parameters relating to material injury. Analysis of the
information shows that imports from subject countries have increased in the
period of investigation in absolute term as also in relation to production and
consumption in India. Various economic parameters like the loss in market
share, significant decline in the profitability of the domestic industry,
significant deterioration in return on investment and cash profit, prima facie,
indicate collectively and cumulatively that the domestic industry have suffered
material injury on account of dumped imports of subject goods from subject
countries.
9. Initiation of Anti Dumping
Investigations
The Designated Authority, in
view of the foregoing paragraphs, finds that sufficient prima facie evidence of
dumping of the subject goods from the subject countries, injury to the domestic
industry and causal link between the dumping and injury exist. The Authority
hereby initiates an investigation into the alleged dumping, and consequent
injury to the domestic industry in terms of the Rules 5 of the said Rules, to
determine the existence, degree and effect of any alleged dumping and to
recommend the amount of antidumping duty which, if levied, would be adequate to
remove the injury to the domestic industry.
10. Period of Investigation (POI)
The applicant had proposed
April-09 to March-10 as period of investigation and provided relevant
information for this period in the petition. After analyzing the data, the
Authority has found it appropriate to extend the proposed period and has
considered April-09 to June-10 (15 months) as period of investigation for the
present investigation. The injury investigation period will however be 2006-07,2007-08,
2008-09, 2009-10 and POI.
11. Submission of Information
The exporters in the subject
country, Governments through the Embassies, the importers in India known to be
concerned with this investigation and the domestic industry are being addressed
separately to submit relevant information in the form and manner prescribed and
to make their views known to the Designated Authority at the following address:
The Designated Authority
Directorate General of Anti Dumping & Allied Duties,
Ministry of Commerce & Industry,
Department of Commerce,
Government of India,
Room No. 243, Udyog Bhavan,
New Delhi –
110011.
As per Rule 6(5) of Rule
supra, the Designated Authority is also providing opportunity to the industrial
users of the article under investigation and to representative consumer
organizations, who can furnish information relevant to the investigation
regarding dumping, injury and causality. Any other interested party may also
make its submissions relevant to the investigation within the time limit set out
below.
12. Time Limit
Any information relating to
the present investigation should be sent in writing so as to reach the
Authority at the address mentioned above not later than forty days from the
date of publication of this notification. The known exporters and importers,
who are being addressed separately, are however required to submit the
information within forty days from the date of the letter addressed to them
separately.
13. Submission of Information
In terms of Rule 6(7) of the
Rules, the interested parties are required to submit non-confidential summary
of any confidential information provided to the Authority and if in the opinion
of the party providing such information, such information is not susceptible to
summarization, a statement of reason thereof, is required to be provided. In
case where an interested party refuses access to, or otherwise does not provide
necessary information within a reasonable period, or significantly impedes the
investigation, the Designated Authority may record findings on the basis of
facts available and make such recommendations to the Central Government as
deemed fit.
14. Inspection of Public File
In terms of Rule 6(7), the
Designated Authority maintains a public file. Any interested party may inspect
the public file containing non-confidential version of the evidence submitted
by interested parties.