Full Text
REGD. No. D. L.-33004/99
The Gazette of India
CG-DL-E-01012025-259782
EXTRAORDINARY
PART I-Section 1
PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY
NEW DELHI, MONDAY, DECEMBER 30, 2024/PAUSA 9, 1946
No. 358]
MINISTRY OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY
(Department of Commerce)
(Directorate General of Trade Remedies)
INITIATION NOTIFICATION
New Delhi, the 30th December 2024
CASE No. ADD (SSR) - 05/2024
Subject: Initiation of sunset review anti-dumping investigation on imports of ‘Toluene Di-Isocyanate’
(TDI) originating in or exported from European Union and Saudi Arabia.
1. F. No. 7/14/2024 -DGTR: Having regards to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 as amended from time
to time (hereinafter referred as the 'Act') and the Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment, and
Collection of Anti-Dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules,
1995, as amended from time to time (hereinafter referred to as the 'Rules'), Gujarat Narmada
Valley Fertilizers & Chemicals Limited (hereinafter referred to as the 'applicant') has filed an
application before the Designated Authority (hereinafter referred to as the 'Authority'), for
initiation of sunset review investigation of anti-dumping duty on the imports of Toluene Di-
Isocyanate (TDI) (hereinafter referred to as the 'product under consideration' or 'subject goods'),
originating in or exported from European Union, Saudi Arabia, Chinese Taipei and United Arab
Emirates.
2. In terms of Section 9A (5) of the Act, the anti-dumping duty imposed shall, unless revoked earlier,
cease to have effect on expiry of five years from the date of such imposition, and the Authority is
required to review whether the expiry of duty is likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of
dumping and injury. In accordance with the same, the Authority is required to review, on the basis of
a duly substantiated request made by or on behalf of the domestic industry as to whether the expiry
of duty is likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury.
A. Background of previous investigation.
3. The original anti-dumping investigation concerning imports of subject goods from subject countries
was initiated on 31st January 2020 by the Authority. The preliminary finding was issued on 4th
September 2020, recommending imposition of provisional anti-dumping measures. The Ministry of
Finance imposed vide Customs Notification No. 43/2020-Customs (ADD) dated 2nd December 2020
imposed provisional anti-dumping measures. The Authority vide Notification F. No. 6/43/2019-
DGTR dated 28th January 2021, confirmed the preliminary finding and recommended imposition of
anti-dumping duties for a period of 5 years, which was imposed by the Ministry of Finance vide
Notification No. 28/2021-Customs (ADD), dated 27th April 2021. The said duties were levied for a
period of 5 years, unless revoked earlier, and are set to expire on 1st December 2025.
B. Product under consideration (PUC).
4. The product under consideration in the present investigation is same as defined in the original
investigation which is as follows:
3. The product under consideration in the present investigation is “Toluene Di-Isocyanate
(TDI) having isomer content in the ratio of 80:20”. Toluene di-isocyanate (TDI) is an organic
compound having formula CH3C6H3 (NCO)2. Two of the six possible isomers are
commercially important: 2,4-TDI (CAS: 584-84-9) and 2,6-TDI (CAS: 91-08-7). 2,4-TDI is
produced in the pure state, but TDI is often marketed as 80/20 and 65/35 mixtures of the 2,4
and 2,6 isomers respectively. The product under consideration in the present investigation
concerns TDI having isomer content in the ratio of (80:20). All other grades are beyond the
scope of product under consideration.
4. The product is classified under the Chapter Heading 29 under the code 2929 10 20. The
customs classification is only indicative and is not binding on the scope of the product under
consideration.
5. The present application being a sunset review investigation, the product under consideration
remains the same as defined in the original final finding notification.
C. Like article.
6. The applicant has claimed that there is no significant difference in the product produced by the
domestic industry and the one exported from the subject countries. The product produced by the
domestic industry and imported from the subject countries are comparable in terms of characteristics
such as physical & chemical characteristics, manufacturing process & technology, functions & uses.
product specifications, pricing, distribution & marketing, and tariff classification of the goods. The
two are technically and commercially substitutable and are used by consumers interchangeably. The
present application is for sunset review investigation for the continued imposition of antidumping
duty. The issue of like article has already been examined by the Authority in the original
investigation as well. The product produced by the domestic industry is like article to the product
under consideration produced and imported from the subject countries.
D. Domestic industry and standing.
7. The application has been filed by Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizers & Chemicals Limited.
Applicant is the sole producer of the subject goods in India. The applicant has certified that it has not
imported the goods from the subject countries and that it is not related to any exporter of the subject
goods in the subject countries or importers of the subject goods in India.
8. In view of the same, and based on information available on record, the Authority is satisfied that the
applicant constitutes domestic industry within the meaning of Rule 2(b) and the application has been
made 'by or on behalf of the domestic industry'. Further, the application satisfies the requirements of
standing in terms of Rule 5(3), even though the requirements of Rule 5(3) are not applicable in
sunset review application.
E. Subject countries.
9. The subject countries in the present investigation are European Union and Saudi Arabia. In the
original investigation, the duties were also imposed against the imports from Chinese Taipei and
United Arab Emirates. In the present investigation, there are no imports from Chinese Taipei and
United Arab Emirates in the period of investigation and the applicant has not provided any evidence
to establish likelihood of recurrence of dumping and consequent injury. Therefore, Chinese Taipei
and United Arab Emirates have not been considered for sunset review investigation.
F. Continuation of dumping and dumping margin.
Normal Value
10. For the purpose of determining the normal value from subject countries, the applicant has claimed
that it was not able to fetch information relating to the prices of the subject goods in these countries.
The applicant has claimed normal value based on the cost of production in the subject countries
based on best estimates of the cost of the production with reasonable addition for selling, general &
administrative expenses and reasonable profit margins. For the purpose of initiation, the Authority
has considered normal value based on cost of production in India.
Export price
11. The applicant has claimed CIF export price based on market intelligence. The Authority has
computed the export price for the subject countries based on the DGCI&S transaction wise import
data. Since the information is on CIF basis, it has been adjusted for ocean freight, marine insurance,
commission, bank charges, port expenses and inland freight expenses.
Dumping margin.
12. Based on the normal value and the export price determined, as stated above, it is seen that the
dumping margin is positive and significant for European Union and Saudi Arabia. It is seen that the
dumping of the subject goods has continued.
G. Likelihood of recurrence of dumping and injury.
13. The applicant has provided prima facie evidence with respect to the continued injury suffered by the
domestic industry because of the dumped imports. The price undercutting from the subject countries
is positive. The price depression caused by dumped imports have been preventing the applicant from
moving its prices to recover the full cost and achieve a reasonable rate of return. The applicant is
suffering from financial losses. The applicant has also claimed that there is a likelihood of further
injury in the present investigation.
14. The information provided by the applicant, prima facie, shows recurrence of dumping from the
subject countries and likelihood of injury to the domestic industry in case of cessation of the anti-
dumping duty.
H. Initiation of sunset review investigation.
15. On the basis of the duly substantiated application of the applicant, and itself on the basis of the prima
facie evidence submitted by the applicant, substantiating the likelihood of continuation/ recurrence of
dumping and injury, and in accordance with Section 9A(5) of the Act read with Rule 23 (1B) of the
Rules, the Authority hereby initiates a sunset review investigation to review the need for continued
imposition of the duties in force in respect of the subject goods, originating in or exported from the
subject countries and to examine whether the expiry of such duty is likely to lead to continuation or
recurrence of dumping and injury to the domestic industry.
I. Period of investigation (POI).
16. The POI for the investigation is from 1st April 2023 to 30th June 2024 (15 months). The applicant
proposed the period of investigation (POI) from 1st April 2023 – 30th June 2024 (15 months). The
injury examination period covered April 2020 – March 2021, April 2021 – March 2022, April 2022
– March 2023 and the proposed period of investigation. The applicant has requested on the ground that
a comparison of 15-month period proposed with July 23 to June 24 (the next possible 12-month
period), would show that the import volume and value are comparable in volume and price.
17. The period of investigation is appropriate, as it is most recent, within 6 months from the date of
initiation, and includes a complete year of financial accounting period of the domestic industry.
Further, the period considered will not lead to any skewed analysis. Accordingly, the period of
investigation considered for the present investigation is 1st April 2023 to 30th June 2024 (15
months). The injury examination period covers the period April 2020 – March 2021, April 2021 –
March 2022, April 2022 – March 2023 and 1st April 2023 to 30th June 2024.
J. Procedure.
18. The sunset review investigation will cover all aspects of the final findings published vide
Notification F. No. 6/43/2019-DGTR dated 28th January 2021, recommending the imposition of anti-
dumping duty on the imports of the subject goods originating in or exported from the subject
countries.
19. The provisions of Rules 6,7,8,9, 10, II, 16, 17, 18, 19, and 20 of the Rules shall be mutatis mutandis
applicable in this review.
K. Submission of information
20. All communication should be sent to the Designated Authority via email at email addresses dd19-
dgtr@gov.in and dd18-dgtr@gov.in with a copy to adv11-dgtr@gov.in and adg16-dgtr@gov.in. It
must be ensured that the narrative part of the submission is in searchable PDF/MS-Word format and
data files are in MS-Excel format.
21. The known producers/exporters in the subject country, the government of the subject country through
its Embassy in India, and the importers and users in India who are known to be associated with the
product under consideration are being informed separately to enable them to file all the relevant
information within the time limits mentioned in this initiation notification. All such information must
be filed in the form and manner as prescribed by this initiation notification, the Rules, and the
applicable trade notices issued by the Authority.
22. 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.
23. Any party making any confidential submission before the Authority is required to make a non-
confidential version of the same available to the other interested parties.
24. Interested parties are further directed to regularly visit the official website of the Directorate General
of Trade Remedies (https://www.dgtr.gov.in/) to stay updated and apprised with the information as
well as further processes related to the investigation.
L. Time limit
25. Any information relating to the present investigation should be sent to the Authority via email at
email addresses dd19-dgtr@gov.in and dd18-dgtr@gov.in with a copy to adv11-dgtr@gov.in and
adg16-dgtr@gov.in within thirty days from the date of the receipt of the notice as per the Rule 6(4)
of the Rules. It may, however, be noted that in terms of explanation of the said Rules, the notice
calling for information and other documents shall be deemed to have received within one week from
the date on which it was sent by the Authority or transmitted to the appropriate diplomatic
representative of the exporting countries. If no information is received within the prescribed time-
limit or the information received is incomplete, the Authority may record its findings on the basis of
the facts available on record in accordance with the Rules.
26. All the interested parties are hereby advised to intimate their interest (including the nature of interest)
in the instant matter and file their questionnaire responses within the above time limit.
M. Submission of information on confidential basis.
27. Where any party to the present investigation makes confidential submissions or provides information
on a confidential basis before the Authority, such party is required to simultaneously submit a non-
confidential version of such information in terms of Rule 7(2) of the Rules and in accordance with
the relevant trade notices issued by the Authority in this regard.
28. Such submissions must be clearly marked as 'confidential' or 'non-confidential' at the top of each
page. Any submission that has been made to the Authority without such markings shall be treated as
'non-confidential' information by the Authority, and the Authority shall be at liberty to allow other
interested parties to inspect such submissions.
29. The confidential version shall contain all information which is, by nature, confidential, and/or other
information, which the supplier of such information claims as confidential. For the information
which is claimed to be confidential by nature, or the information on which confidentiality is claimed
because of other reasons, the supplier of the information is required to provide a good cause
statement along with the supplied information as to why such information cannot be disclosed.
30. The non-confidential version of the information filed by the interested parties should be a replica of
the confidential version with the confidential information preferably indexed or blanked out (where
indexation is not possible) and such information must be appropriately and adequately summarized
depending upon the information on which confidentiality is claimed.
31. The non-confidential summary must be in sufficient detail to permit a reasonable understanding of
the substance of the information furnished on a confidential basis. However, in exceptional
circumstances, the party submitting the confidential information may indicate that such information
is not susceptible to summary, and a statement of reasons containing a sufficient and adequate
explanation in terms of Rule 7 of the Rules, 1995, and appropriate trade notices issued by the
Authority, as to why such summarization is not possible, must be provided to the satisfaction of the
Authority.
32. The interested parties can offer their comments on the issues of confidentiality claimed by the other
interested parties within 7 days from the date of circulation of the non-confidential version of the
documents.
33. Any submission made without a meaningful non-confidential version thereof or a sufficient and
adequate cause statement in terms of Rule 7 of the Rules, and appropriate trade notices issued by the
Authority, on the confidentiality claim shall not be taken on record by the Authority.
34. The Authority may accept or reject the request for confidentiality on examination of the nature of the
information submitted. If the Authority is satisfied that the request for confidentiality is not
warranted or if the supplier of the information is either unwilling to make the information public or
to authorize its disclosure in generalized or summary form, it may disregard such information.
N. Inspection of public file.
35. A list of registered interested parties will be uploaded on the DGTR's website along with the request
therein to all of them to email the non-confidential version of their submissions to all other interested
parties. Failure to circulate nonconfidential version of submissions/response/information might lead
to consideration of an interested parry as non-cooperative.
O. Non-cooperation.
36. In case where an interested party refuses access to or otherwise does not provide necessary
information within a reasonable period, or significantly impedes the review 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.
DARPAN JAIN, Designated Authority