Ministry of Commerce & Industry

                                    (Department of Commerce)

Directorate General of Anti-Dumping & Allied Duties

 

 

                                                                        New Delhi, the   March 2, 2005.

 

                                                Initiation Notification

                                                  (Mid-term Review)

 

 

Subject: Initiation of Mid-term Review of anti-dumping duty imposed on imports into India of Borax Decahydrate (BDH) originating in or exported from Turkey.

 

 

No. 15/1/2005-DGAD  - Whereas having regard to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, as amended in 1995 and the Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of Duty or Additional Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules), vide Notification No. 14/40/2002-DGAD dated 21st November 2003, the Designated Authority  (hereinafter referred to as the Authority) notified its final findings recommending definitive anti-dumping duty on import of Borax Decahydrate  (hereinafter also referred to as subject goods) originating in or exported from the Turkey  and China .

 

And whereas definitive anti-dumping duty was imposed on the subject goods vide Customs Notification No. 2/2004-Customs dated 7.1.2004.

 

2.         Request for Review

 

            Whereas the Rules require the Authority to review, from time to time, the need for continued imposition of Anti-Dumping Duty and if it is satisfied, on the basis of positive information received by it that there is no justification for continued imposition of such duty, the authority may recommend to the Central Government for its withdrawal. Notwithstanding, the above provision, the authority is required to review, on the basis of positive information submitted by any interested party substantiating the need for a review, provided that a reasonable period of time has elapsed since the imposition of the definitive anti-dumping duty, whether continued imposition of the duty is necessary to offset dumping, whether the injury would be likely to continue or recur if the duty were removed or varied, or both.

 

            In terms of the above provision, the producer M/s ETI Holdings, Turkey and exporter M/s Borochemie international Pte Ltd, Singapore has filed a request for a changed circumstances mid-term review of the anti-dumping duty in force.

 

3.         Grounds for Review

 

 

            The producer M/s ETI Holdings, Turkey and exporter M/s Borochemie International Pte Ltd, Singapore has listed the following grounds for changed circumstances review

 

  1. The CIF export price to India has increased and the landed value is higher than the reference price fixed.
  2. The Customs duty on BDH has been reduced from 30% to 20%.
  3. The normal value has come down significantly.

 

This change in circumstances has been considered appropriate to initiate a review.

 

 

4.         Initiation

 

Having regard to the positive information provided by the applicant indicating the changed circumstances necessitating a review of the measure in force, the Designated Authority now considers that a mid-term review of the Anti-dumping Duty is appropriate in view of the changed circumstances, in terms of the provision of  Rule 23 supra.

 

            Having decided to review the final findings notified vide Notification No 14/40/2002-DGAD dated 21st November 2003, the Authority hereby initiates the investigations in terms of the Rules, to review whether continued imposition of the duty on imports of Borax Decahydrate originating in or exported from the Turkey is necessary to offset dumping, whether the injury would be likely to continue or recur if the duty were removed or varied, or both.

 

5.         Product under consideration

 

            The product involved in the original investigation and the current review is Borax Decahydrate (BDH) falling under heading No.284019 in Chapter 28 of the First Schedule to the said Customs Tariff Act and ITC HS classification. This classification, however, is indicative only and, in no way, binding on the scope of the present investigation. 

 

6.         Procedure

 

The investigation will determine whether continued imposition of the duty is necessary to offset dumping, whether the injury is likely to continue or recur if the duty were removed or varied, or both.

 

(i)                 The review will cover all aspects of Notification No 14/40/2002-DGAD dated 21st November 2003. The period of investigation (POI) for the purpose of this review will be 1st January 2004  to 31st December 2004. However, injury analysis shall cover the years from 2000-01 to POI.

(ii)               The country involved in this investigation is Turkey.  

(iii)             The provisions of Rules 6,7,8,9,10,11,16,17,18,19 and 20 of the Anti-Dumping Rules supra shall be mutatis mutandis applied in this review.

 

 

7.   Submission of Information

 

            The exporters in subject country, their government through their embassy in India, the importers and users in India known to be concerned and the domestic industry are being addressed separately to submit relevant information in the form and manner prescribed and to make their views know to the:

 

The Designated Authority

Directorate General of Anti-Dumping and Allied Duties (DGAD)

Ministry of Commerce & Industry

Department of Commerce

Udyog Bhavan

New Delhi-110011

Fax No.91-11-23014418

 

            Any other interested party may also make its submissions relevant to the investigation in the prescribed form and manner within the time limit set out below. Any party making confidential submissions before the Authority is required to file a non-confidential version of the same, for placing the same in the public folder for inspection by all other interested parties to the investigation.

 

8.                  Time Limit

 

Any information relating to the present review and any request for hearing should be sent in writing so as to reach the Authority at the address mentioned above not later than forty days (40 days) form the date of publication of this review notification. If no information is received within the prescribed time limit or the information received is incomplete, the Designated Authority may record its findings on the basis of the facts available on record in accordance with the Rules supra.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

9.         Inspection of Public File

 

 

            In terms of Rules 6(7), any interested party may inspect the public file containing non-confidential version of the submissions made by other interested parties before the Designated Authority. In case an interested party refuses access to, or otherwise does not provide necessary information within a reasonable period, or significantly impedes the investigation, the Authority may records its findings on the basis of the facts available to it and make such recommendations to the Central Government as deemed fit.

 

 

                                                                       

 

                                                                                                (Dr. Christy Fernandez)

                                                                                                Designated Authority