No.14/24/2003-DGAD
Government of India
Ministry of Commerce & Industry
(Department of Commerce)
New Delhi, the 9th
June 2004
INITIATION NOTIFICATION
Subject: Initiation
of Anti-dumping Investigations concerning import of Narrow Woven fabrics originating in or
exported from China and Chinese Taipei.
M/s Sky Industries Limited, Mumbai, has filed a petition before
the Designated Authority (hereinafter referred to as the Authority) in accordance with the
Customs Tariff (Amendment) Act, 1995 and Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and
Collection of Anti-Dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules,
1995 alleging dumping of Narrow Woven Fabrics originating in or exported from China , Chinese Taipei and Hong Kong and has requested for initiation of anti-dumping
investigations and levy of anti-dumping duties.
1. PRODUCT UNDER CONSIDERATION
The product under investigation in the present case is
Narrow Woven Fabric having pile weave, made up of man made fibres, used as fastening tape
(henceforth referred to also as subject goods). In
market parlance, the subject goods are known by various synonyms such as ‘hook and look tape fasteners’,
‘velcro tapes’, ‘fastening tapes’, ‘fasteners’ etc.
Regardless of the nomenclature used, the product under consideration is narrow woven fabric having pile weave. The subject
goods are produced in various sizes depending upon specific end use and these are
described in terms of peel strength, sheer strength and light fastness. Narrow Woven
Fabrics has been defined under the Customs Tariff Act as follows
“Narrow Woven Fabrics means a) woven fabrics of a width not
exceeding 30 centimeters whether woven as such or cut from wider pieces, provided with
selvages (woven, gummed or otherwise made) on both edges; b) Tubular woven fabrics of a
flattened width not exceeding 30 centimeters and c) bias binding with folded edges, of a
width when unfolded not exceeding 30 centimeters.”
The Authority notes from the above definition that the product
under consideration is a narrow woven fabric, as described earlier, which is below 30
centimetres in width. The wide woven fabrics as classified under the various customs
classification under chapter 54 are not included in the scope of the investigation. Hook
and loop fasteners are generally made from man made fibres (yarns), nylon (nylon 6 and
nylon 6.6), polyester etc. The subject goods is a combination of two separate woven tapes,
one called the hook tape and other a loop tape, which when placed in contact with other
displays excellent fastening properties. The subject goods offers hundreds of potential
closure systems (fastening applications) for a wide range of applications. Major uses of
subject goods are in industries such as garment industry, leather garments/furnishings,
surgical and orthopedic apparatus, shoes and footwear manufacturing, luggage/bag
manufacturers, toys, plastic goods, automobile upholstery and various other industry
segments. The subject goods are classified under chapter 58 under sub heading
No.5806.1000. The petitioner has claimed that there are a number of types (sizes) in which
the subject goods are produced and sold and these are differentiated in terms of width and
length of the fabric. The sizes typically vary between 12 mm to 125 mm of width and length
in which the product is commercially produced and sold is 25 meters though it can be
produced in any length depending upon the customer’s requirement. In the petition,
the petitioner has, therefore, converted entire data in terms of equivalent of 1 meter
length and 25 mm of width and weight of the same has been taken as 8.0 grams. The
Authority proposes to consider weight of the product as the unit of measurement for the
purpose of present investigation.
Investigations are being initiated with respect to product under
consideration irrespective of the classification under which they are being imported.
Customs classifications are indicative only and in no way binding on the scope of
investigations.
2. DOMESTIC
INDUSTRY STANDING
The petition has been filed by M/s Sky Industries Limited,
Mumbai. As per the letter received from M/s. Narrow Elastic Manufacturers Association of
India, there are three major producers apart
from the petitioner who manufacture the subject goods in India. These are M/s. Siddartha
Filaments Private Limited, Surat, Siddartha Magic Tapes Private Limited, Gujarat and Magic
Fasteners Private Limited, Rohtak, Haryana. After examining the details of Indian
production, it is seen that the production of the petitioner constitutes a major
proportion of the Indian production though the petition is supported by M/s. Magic
Fasteners and Siddartha Magic Tapes. The Authority after examining the above, determines
that the petitioner is a major producer of subject goods in India accounting for a major
proportion of the production of the subject goods in India and therefore the petitioner constitutes a domestic Industry within
the meaning of the rule 2(b) and it satisfies
the criteria of standing to file the petition in terms of Rule 5(3)(a) of the Rules supra.
3. COUNTRIES INVOLVED
The Authority after preliminary examination has determined that
imports from Hong Kong are de-minimus in volume terms and are therefore excluded from
investigations. The countries involved in the present investigation are China PR and
Chinese Taipei (hereinafter also referred to as subject countries).
4. LIKE GOODS
The petitioner has claimed that goods produced by it are like
articles to the goods originating in or exported from subject countries. There is no
significant difference in the subject goods produced by the petitioner and those exported
from subject countries. Petitioner claims
that the two are technically and commercially substitutable. Therefore, for the purpose of present
investigation, the goods produced by the petitioner are being treated as Like Articles of
the product imported from the subject countries within the meaning of the Rules, supra.
5. NORMAL
VALUE
The
petitioner has claimed the normal value of subject goods in Taiwan as per a copy of
quotation given by one of Taiwanese Company for their exports to USA. Though the prices
given in the quotation is CIF, it has been adjusted to arrive at ex-factory prices. In
addition, the petitioner has also constructed normal value based on estimates of cost of
production along with the supporting evidences in respect of raw material prices, wages,
financing costs, power costs, etc. to arrive at the normal value of subject goods in
Taiwan. In case of China PR, the petitioner has claimed that China PR has to be treated as
a non-market economy and normal value has to be determined in accordance with the para 7
of Annexure I. The authority notes that there is sufficient evidence of normal value
claimed for the subject goods from China PR and Chinese Taipei.
6.
EXPORT PRICE
The Petitioner has claimed the
export price of subject goods from the subject countries based on the import data provided
by the DGCIS and evidence of actual imports made by the various importers. Adjustments have been claimed on account of ocean
freight, marine insurance, inland transportation in the country of exports, port handling
and port charges to arrive at the Export Price at ex-factory level. There is
sufficient evidence of export price and the adjustments claimed for the subject goods from
subject countries.
7.
DUMPING MARGIN
There is, prima facie, evidence that
Normal Value of the subject goods in the subject countries is significantly higher than
the ex-factory export price indicating prima facie that the subject goods are being dumped
by exporters from the subject countries.
8. INJURY AND CAUSAL LINK
Petitioner has furnished information on various parameters
relating to material injury to the domestic industry. Parameters such as increase in
volume of imports from subject countries, decline in the import prices, increase in the
market share of imports from subject countries, decline in the market share of the
domestic industry, decline in the domestic selling price, low return in investment, price
undercutting, price depression and price suppression, prima facie, indicate collectively
and cumulatively that the domestic industry has suffered material injury on account of
dumping of subject goods from subject countries.
9.
INITIATION OF ANTI DUMPING INVESTIGATIONS
The Designated Authority, in view of
the foregoing paragraphs, initiates anti-dumping investigations into the existence, degree
and effect of alleged dumping of the subject goods originating in or exported from the
subject countries.
10.
PERIOD OF INVESTIGATION
The Period of Investigation for the
purpose of the present investigation is 1st January 2003 to 31st
December 2003 (12 months).
11.
SUBMISSION OF INFORMATION
The exporters in the subject
countries and the importers in India known to be concerned with this investigation are
being addressed separately to submit relevant information in the form and manner
prescribed and to make their views known to the Designated Authority, Directorate General
of Anti Dumping & Allied Duties, Ministry of Commerce & Industry, Department of
Commerce, Government of India, Udyog Bhavan, New Delhi – 11 00 11.
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 which is 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. It may be noted that no request, whatsoever, shall be
entertained for extension in the prescribed time limit.
13.
INSPECTION OF PUBLIC FILE
In terms of Rule 6(7), any
interested party may inspect the public file containing non-confidential version of the
evidence submitted by other interested parties. In case where an interest party refuses
access to, or otherwise does not provide necessary information within a reasonable period,
or significantly impedes the investigation, the Authority may record its findings on the
basis of the facts available to it and make such recommendations to the Central Government
as deemed fit.
(A. SENGUPTA)
DESIGNATED AUTHORITY