14/28/2002-DGAD - The Central Silk Board, Bangalore has filed a petition on behalf of all cottage/filature/multiend silk reelers and sericulture farmers through their associations 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 Mulberry Raw Silk (not thrown) originating in or exported from China PR and has requested for initiation of anti-dumping investigations and levy of anti-dumping duties.

1. Product Involved: The product under investigation in the present case is Mulberry Raw Silk (not thrown), 2A grade and below originating in or exported from China PR.

Mulberry Raw Silk (not thrown) is classified under Customs sub-heading no. 50.02 of Chapter 50 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 and ITC (HS) Code 50020001. The classification is however indicative only and in no way binding on the scope of the present investigations.

2. Domestic Industry Standing:- The Central Silk Board has filed the petition on behalf of all cottage/filature/multiend silk reelers and farmers located in the states of Karnataka, Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh through their associations, whose details as provided in the petition are given below:-

1. All Silk Reelers Association, near Cocoon Market Kolar - 563101, Karnataka
2. Ramanagaram Silk Reelers Welfare Association, Ramnagaram, Bangalore (Rural), Karnataka
3. Kolar Silk Reelers Industrial Cooperative Society Ltd., Kolar
4. The Progressive Silk Reeler's Industrial Cooperative Society Ltd., Sidlaghatta - 562 105
5. Karnataka State Multiend Silk Reelers Welfare Association (Regd), Main Road, Kumadan Mohalla, Ramnagaram - 571 511, Bangalore (Rural), Karnataka.
6. Tamilnadu State Multiend Reelers Association, No. 61-A, Krishnagiri main Road , Opp: to Government Cocoon Market, Dharmapuri - 636701
7. The Palacode Silk Reeler's Association, Palacode -636 808, (TN)
8. Coimbatore District Silk Producers Association, Coimbatore - 641014 (TN)
9. Dharmapuri District Silk Reeler's Association, 10/81 -C1, Electronic Estate, Hosur - 635 109
10. Commissioner for Sericulture Development and Director of Sericulture, Department of Sericulture, 5^th Floor, M.S. Building, Government of Karnataka., Bangalore - 560 001
11. Director of Sericulture, Deptt of Sericulture, Govt. of Tamil Nadu, Salem
12. Director of Sericulture, Deptt. of Sericulture, Govt. of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad.

2. Country(ies) Involved: The country involved in the present investigations is the Peoples Republic of China, (hereinafter referred to as China PR).
3. Like Goods: The petitioner has claimed that goods produced by it are Like Articles to the goods originating in or exported from China PR. Goods produced by the petitioner are being treated as Like Articles to the goods imported from the subject country within the meaning of the Rules.

5. Dumping and Dumping Margin:

Normal Value: The petitioners have claimed normal value in China on the basis of the price of Mulberry Raw Silk (not thrown) as per the information contained in the International Silk Association (ISA) News letter in China PR.

Export price: The petitioners have claimed export price based on the data published by DGCI&S and on the basis of prices offered by Chinese suppliers for the subject goods to importers in India. Considering the normal value and export price the dumping margin is significantly higher than the de-minimis limit.

There is sufficient evidence that the normal value of the product under consideration in China PR is significantly higher than the price at which it has been exported to India, indicating, prima facie, that the subject goods are being dumped by the exporters from China PR.

6. Injury and Causal Link: The various economic indicators relating to domestic industry such as production, sales, profit/loss etc. collectively and cumulatively, indicates that the domestic industry has suffered injury. There is sufficient prima facie evidence that the imports of the product under consideration have caused material injury to the domestic industry.

7. Initiation of Anti-Dumping Investigation: In view of the foregoing paragraph, the Designated Authority initiates anti-dumping investigations to determine the existence, degree and effect of alleged dumping of the subject goods originating in or exported from the subject country.

8. Period of Investigation: The period of investigation for the purpose of the present investigations is 1^st April, 2001 to 31^st March 2002 (12 months).

9. Submission of Information: The exporters in the subject country and the importers in India known to be concerned are being addressed separately to submit relevant information in the form and manner prescribed and to make their views known to the Designated Authority, Ministry of Commerce, Directorate General of Anti- Dumping, Udyog Bhavan, New-Delhi –110011. 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.

10. Time Limit: Any information relating to the present investigations 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 letter addressed to them separately. It may kindly be noted that no requests whatsoever shall be entertained for extension of the above-stated time limit for submission of the required information.

11. Anti-dumping investigations being a time bound exercise, the Designated Authority may record its findings on the basis of facts available on record in accordance with the Rules supra, if no response is received within the time stipulated or the information is incomplete in any respect.
12. 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.

13. 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 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.

Back