MINISTRY
OF COMMERCE
NOTIFICATION
No.11/1/97/ADD--Having regard to the Customs Tariff Act 1975 as amended in 1995 and
the Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of Anti Dumping Duty on
Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995, thereof:
A. PROCEDURE
1. The procedure described below has been followed:
i) The
Designated Authority (hereinafter also referred to as the Authority) notified preliminary
findings vide notification dated the 23rd Sept.,
1998 and requested the interested parties to make their views known in writing within
forty days from the date of its publication; .
ii) The
Authority forwarded a copy of the preliminary findings to the known interested parties,
who were requested to furnish their views, if any, on the preliminary findings within
forty days of the date of the letter;
iii) The
Authority also forwarded a copy of the preliminary findings to the Embassy of the
People’s Republic of
iv) The Authority
provided an opportunity to all interested parties to present their views orally on
v) The
Authority made available the public file to all interested parties containing
non-confidential version of all evidence submitted by various interested parties, for
inspection, upon request;
vi) Argument raised
by the interested parties before announcing the preliminary findings, which have been
brought out in the preliminary findings notified have not been repeated herein for sake of
brevity. However, the arguments raised by the interested parties have been appropriately
dealt in the preliminary findings and/or these findings;
vii) In accordance
with Rule 16 of the Rules supra, the essential facts/basis considered for these findings
were disclosed to known interested parties and comments received on the same have also
been duly considered in these findings.
B. VIEWS
OF PETITIONERS, EXPORTERS, IMPORTERS AND OTHER INTERESTED PARTIES AND EXAMINATION BY
AUTHORITY
2. None of
the exporters from China PR and importers in
3. The arguments raised by the interested parties have been examined, considered and, wherever appropriate, dealt in the relevant paras herein below.
C. PRODUCT UNDER
CONSIDERATION, LIKE ARTICLES AND DOMESTIC INDUSTRY
4. Product
under consideration in the present investigations is Lovastatin. There is no dispute on
the product under consideration and, therefore, the Authority confirms preliminary
findings with regard to product under consideration, Petitioners and domestic industry:
5. There is
no dispute that the petitioner is the only producer of Lovastatin in
6. There is
no dispute that the goods produced by the domestic industry are a like article to the
product under consideration.
7. In view of
the forgoing, the Authority confirms preliminary findings with regard to the product under
consideration; like article, and domestic industry.
D. DUMPING
8. The Authority notes that there is no response from any exporter or producer in China PR even after the preliminary findings.
9. Normal
value in the preliminary findings was determined on the basis of constructed -value of
Lovastatin in
10. Export price in the
preliminary findings was determined on the basis of quotations raised by the Chinese
exporters. The claim of the petitioner that the exporter from China PR has reduced the
export price from US $ 4300 pmt in Nov., 1996 to US $ 2490 pmt in June, 1997 has also not
been disputed. None of the importers furnished any information with regard to imports of
Lovastatin, even though some of the parties confirmed not having imported any material.
11. The Authority confirms
preliminary findings with regard to determination of dumping and dumping margin.
E. INJURY
AND CAUSAL LINK
12.
None of the interested parties have controverter the preliminary findings with
regard to injury to the domestic industry and causal link between dumping and injury. The
Authority, therefore, relies upon the details brought out in the preliminary findings and
holds that material injury was caused to the domestic industry by the dumped imports from
F. FINAL
FINDINGS
13. The Authority, after considering the foregoing, concludes that:
(a)
Lovastatin
originating in or exported from China PR has been exported to
(b)
The domestic
industry has suffered material injury;
(c)
The injury has
been caused to the domestic industry by the dumping of the subject goods originating in or
exported from
14. The Authority confirms
the preliminary findings with regard to imposition of antidumping duty and recommends
imposition of definitive anti-dumping duty on all imports of Lovastatin (as per details
brought in the para relating to product under consideration in these findings as also in
the preliminary findings) falling under chapter 29 originating in or exported from the
People’s Republic of China. The anti-dumping duty shall be the difference between Rs.
191869 per kg. and the landed price of imports per kg.
15. Landed value of
imports for the purpose shall be the assessable value as determined by the customs under
the Customs Act, 1962 and all duties of customs except duties levied under Section 3, 3A,
8B, 9 or 9A, as the case may be, of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975.
16. Subject to above, the
Authority confirms the preliminary findings dated 23.09.1998.
17. An appeal against this order shall lie to the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal in accordance with the Act supra.
RATHI
VINAY JHA,
Designated
Authority & Addl. Secy.