New Delhi, the 3rd March, 2000

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 18^th August, 1999 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 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 Embassies of the Japan, Finland, Germany and the Delegation of European Union (EU) in New Delhi with a request to furnish their views on the preliminary findings;

iv) The Authority provided opportunity to domestic industry and other interested parties to present their views orally. All parties presenting their views orally were requested to file written submissions of the views expressed orally. The parties were advised to collect copies of the views expressed by opposing parties and offer rebuttals, if any.

(v) The Authority made available the public file to all interested parties containing non-confidential version of the evidence submitted by various interested parties, for inspection, upon request;

(vi) Arguments raised by interested parties before announcing of preliminary findings, which have been brought out in the preliminary findings notified earlier have not been repeated herein for sake of brevity. However, arguments raised by the interested parties have been appropriately dealt in the preliminary findings and/or these findings;

(vii) In accordance with Rule16 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.

(viii) **** in the Notification represents information furnished by interested parties on confidential basis and so considered by Authority under the Rules.

2. The submissions made by the interested parties have been examined, considered and dealt at appropriate places herein under:-

3 The product considered in the present investigation is Thermal Sensitive Paper (TSP) originating in or exported from Japan, Finland, Germany and European Union (EU). TSP is primarily used in the Fax Machines ECG Machines, Cash Registers, CAD/CAM registers etc. TSP is classified, under the Custom-sub heading 4809.10 of the Custom Tariff Act, 1975 in the "Carbon or Similar Copying Paper" category. TSP is further classified under the ITC classification for Imports & Exports under the heading 48091009.10 as -Thermal Paper for Fax Machines". The classification is, however, indicative only and in no way binding on the scope of the present investigation.

4. ARGUMENTS BY PETITIONER:

TSP is classified under Chapter 48 of the Custom Tariff Act. and TSP is not categorized under dedicated custom sub-heading. Imports are allowed to be cleared under many customs sub-headings. TSP is being imported under many sub-headings, some of which are 4811.90,4809.10, 4809.90, 4816.20.

The Authority clarifies that the product involved in present investigation is TSP covered under Chapter 48 of Customs Tariff Act. The classification under Customs Tariff Act is only indicative.

6. The petitioner claimed that the TSP produced and sold by them and those imported from the subject countries, are being used inter changeably by the customers in India. The process and technology for manufacturing the product all over world is similar in terms of machinery, raw materials, manufacturing process except for minor differences such as additives, automation in material handling etc. TSP is produced and sold in different thickness in terms of GSM. However, the various sizes serves the same general purpose. Authority held in its preliminary findings that TSP being produced by the domestic industry and those being imported from the subject countries can be used interchangeably and thus are commercially and technically substitutable and therefore, are like articles. No arguments have been raised by interested parties subsequent to Preliminary Findings, in view of the same, Authority confirms that TSP being produced by Domestic Industry and those being imported from subject countries are Like Articles within the meaning of relevant Rules.

7. It was held in the Preliminary Findings that the petition has been filed by M/s. Shree Krishna Paper Mills & Industries Ltd. having its Registered Office at 4830/24, Prahalad Street, Ansari Road, New Delhi and works at Bahadurgarh, Haryana. The petitioner is the sole producer of ihe subject goods in India, The other company M/s. Denmur Fax Rolls Ltd. which had created capacities from the manufacture of TSP in India has since closed it operations. The petitioner accounts for a major proportion of the production of the subject goods in India. None of the interested parties have disputed the standing of petitioners to file petition on behalf of domestic industry. The Authority, therefore, holds that the petitioner fulfils requisite criteria to represent domestic industry, as required under the rules.

13. EXAMINATION BY AUTHORITY:

2. As per information furnished by petitioner, the quantum of imports of subject goods during 1997-98 was 114.28 lac Sq, Meter with share of Japan at 47.24%. The other member countries of European represented 42.7% the total imports (i.e. Finland 30.8%, Germany 6.5% and Sweden 5.4%). Based on the prima-facia evidence of quantum of imports from subject countries being higher than de-minimus Authority initiated the investigation. During the POI, based on consolidation of information on imports, furnished by Domestic industry and the importers, Authority notes that quantum of imports of subject goods in India during P0I was 116.95 lac Sq. Meter. The share of Japan and Germany in total imports was to the extent of 91.4% and 6.50% respectively. There was no import of TSP in to India from Finland during POI and all the imports from EU were represented by exports from Germany. Since the member states of European Union have a common customs territory and there are no customs barriers within EU, for the purpose of present investigation, considers EU as a single entity for de-minimus test as required under the Rules. The Authority notes that quantum of imports from EU are more than the de-minimus, as required under the Rules. Accordingly, the levies of duties have been considered by Authority, as discussed herein under in these findings:-

16. ARGUMENTS RAISED BY ALL INDIA THERMAL PAPER DEALERS

17. ARGUMENT BY EUROPEAN UNION:

1. The company sole *** kg (**** Million Sq. Meter) of TSP in domestic market at an invoice price of D.M. **** Million The company allowed cash discount up to **** % on the negotiated price. The Customers are allowed credit terms for payment, with credit period extending up to **** days. Some of the sales in domestic market are made directly while in other transactions, a commission ranging up to **** % is allowed. The company further allows quantity discounts depending upon the quantity of Thermal Paper lifted by individual customers. The sales in the domestic market are made by the company at Ex-factory level as well as on CIF basis. In assessment Ex-factory domestic sales price, the Authority has considered cash discount Commission, interest and Inland freight on actual basis. However, the quantity discount have not been considered by Authority, as the amount is not known at the time of sales and is contingent upon specific quantities, being lifted by individual clients. Based on the above, the Ex-factory domestic sales price as indicated by M/s. Mitsubishi Hitec Paper works out to US$**** per Sq. Meter.
2. The company was requested to make available details on its cost of production. No details of same could be furnished by the company. However, it was confirmed by the exporters that contribution towards fixed cost from sales of subject goods in domestic market are lower than actual fixed cost. In view of above, Authority has not considered sales of subject goods in Domestic market as viable sales.
3. In the absence of details of cost of production, Authority has assessed Normal Value in case of M/s. Mitsubishi HiTec Paper based on best available information. Accordingly, Normal Value for the exporter has been considered by Authority based on constructed cost of production of subject goods as US$0.133 per Sq. Meter.

1. The response to the information solicited by the Designated Authority was received only from M/s. Mitsubishi Paper Mills Ltd,, Japan. However, the information furnished by the company was found to be inadequate. In the absence of requisite information from exporter, Authority in its Preliminary Findings had considered Normal value based on the best available information in case of M/s. Mitsubishi Paper Mills Ltd, and other exporters from Japan. Accordingly, cost of production of TSP in India was adopted as basis for constructed cost in Japan after allowing for the reasonable margins for profits and normal value of TSP was taken at US$0.133 per Sq. Meter for all exporters from Japan.
2. The assessment of Normal Value, as detailed above, has not been dispute by any of the exporters from Japan. However, M/s. All India Thermal Paper Dealers Association in their submissions before the Authority furnished copies of invoices for sale by M/s. Marubani Corpn., Japan indicating third country sales by the exporter from Japan. It was claimed by them that the evidence furnished by it be relied upon for Normal Value, based on third country sales.
3. The Authority notes that some of these invoices indicates third country export prices ranging from US$**** to US$**** per Sq. Meter. However, the Anti-Dumping Rules requires that such third country sales could be considered as evidence of Normal Value provided it is in the ordinary course of trade and such sales price ensures for recovery of both fixed and variable costs and administrative, selling and general costs of production. In the absence of any response from exporters from Japan, Authority could not verify whether third country export sales, based on evidence furnished by All India Thermal Paper Dealers Association, provides for recovery of all the cost of manufacture and these sales are in ordinary course of trade. Moreover, the determination of Normal Value, as per Preliminary Findings, has not been contested by any of the exporters from Japan.
4. In view of the above, Authority has considered Normal Value in case of exporters from Japan, based on best available information. According the Authority has considered Normal Value at US$ 0.133 per Sq. Meter.

24. DELHI PAPER PRODUCTS CO. PVT. LTD.