Full Text
REGD. No. D. L.-33004/99
The Gazette of India
CG-DL-E-02052024-254005
EXTRAORDINARY
PART I—Section 1
PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY
No. 120]
NEW DELHI, WEDNESDAY, MAY 1, 2024/VAISAКНА 11, 1946
MINISTRY OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY
(Department of Commerce)
(DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF TRADE REMEDIES)
NOTIFICATION
New Delhi, the 1st May, 2024
PRELIMINARY FINDINGS
Subject: Anti-dumping investigation concerning imports of “Trichloro Isocyanuric Acid"
originating in or exported from China PR and Japan.
A. BACKGROUND OF THE CASE
F. No. 6/20/2023-DGTR.—Having regard to the Customs Tariff Act 1975 as amended from time to time
(hereinafter referred to as "the Act") and the Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of
Antidumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995 thereof, as amended from time
to time (hereinafter referred as the "Anti-Dumping Rules" or "the Rules");
1. Whereas, Bodal Chemicals Limited (hereinafter referred to as the "applicant" or the "domestic industry") filed
an application, before the Designated Authority (hereinafter also referred to as the "Authority") in accordance
with the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 and the Anti-Dumping Rules for initiation of an anti-dumping investigation
concerning imports of the Trichloro Isocyanuric Acid (hereinafter also referred to as the "product under
consideration" or the "subject goods" or "TCCA") originating in or exported from China and Japan (hereinafter
also referred to as the "subject countries").
2. And whereas, in view of the duly substantiated application filed by the applicant, the Authority issued a public
notice vide Notification No. 6/20/2023-DGTR dated 30th September 2023, published in the Gazette of India,
initiating an anti-dumping investigation into imports of the product under consideration from China PR and
Japan in accordance with Rule 5 of the anti-dumping rules to determine the existence, degree and effect of any
alleged dumping of the subject goods and to recommend the amount of anti-dumping duty, which if levied,
would be adequate to remove the alleged injury to the domestic industry.
B. PROCEDURE
3. The procedure described below has been followed with regard to the investigation:
a. The Authority notified the embassies of the subject countries in India about the receipt of the present
anti-dumping application before proceeding to initiate the investigation in accordance with sub-rule (5)
of Rule 5 supra.
b. The Authority issued a public notice dated 30th September 2023, published in the Gazette of India,
Extraordinary, initiating an anti-dumping investigation concerning the import of the subject goods from
subject countries.
с. The Authority sent a copy of the initiation notification to the Governments of the subject countries,
through their embassies in India, known producers and exporters from the subject countries, known
importers/users and the domestic industry as well as other interested parties, as per the addresses made
available by the applicant and requested them to make their views known in writing within the
prescribed time limit.
d. The Authority provided a copy of the non-confidential version of the application to the known
producers/exporters and to the Governments of the subject countries, through their embassies in India, in
accordance with Rule 6(3) of the Anti-Dumping Rules. A copy of the non-confidential version of the
application was provided to other interested parties, wherever requested.
e. The Authority also forwarded a copy of the notice to known producers/exporters from the subject
country, known importers/users in India, other Indian producers and the domestic industry as per the
addresses made available by the applicant and requested them to make their views known in writing
within 30 days of the initiation notification. The Authority sent an Exporter's Questionnaire to the
f. following known producers/exporters to elicit relevant information in accordance with Rule 6(4) of the
Rules:
i. Kemi Industrial Co Ltd
ii. Hebei Jiheng Chemical Co., Ltd
iii. Shandong Lantian Disinfection Technology
iv. Zhucheng Taisheng Chemical Co., Ltd.
v. Nissei Corporation
vi. Qingdao Chengkang Chemical Co.
vii. Aguatec Industrial Co. Limited
viii. Rhonda Industrial Co., Limited
ix. Rizhao Haomiao Biotechnology Co. Ltd
x. Henan Sinowin Chemical Industry Co. Ltd
g. The embassies of the subject countries in India were requested to advise the exporters/producers from
their country to respond to the questionnaire within the prescribed time limit.
h. In response to the initiation of the subject investigation notification, the following producers/exporters
from the subject countries have responded by filing a questionnaire response:
i. Shandong Daming Science & Technology Co., Ltd.
ii. Qingdao Profeliz Biological Technology Co., Ltd.
iii. Hong Kong Sean International Limited
iv. Shandong Lantian Disinfection Technology Co., Ltd.
v. Puyang Cleanway Chemicals Limited
vi. Shandong Goldenstar Water Environment Technology Co., Ltd.
vii. Hebei Xingfei Chemical Co., Ltd.
viii. Nessei Corpoartion
h. The Authority sent Importer's Questionnaire to the following known importers/users of the subject goods
in India calling for necessary information in accordance with Rule 6(4) of the Rules.
a. Ganesh Chem Industries Private Limited
b. Acuro Organics Limited
с. Keshav Hichem Private Limited
d. Paari Chem Resources LLP
e. Padma Polymers
f. Kemox Corporation
g. Phoenix Overseas Ltd.
h. Classic Chemicals
i. Pawar Chemicals
j. Pee Aar Automotive Technologies Private Limited
k. Bharat Jyoti Impex
l. Shree Chemicals Industries Private Limited
i. A copy of the initiation notification and non-confidential version of the application was sent to the
following associations.
i. FIEO
ii. FICO
iii. ASSOCHAM
iv. CII
j. A copy of the initiation notification and non-confidential version of the application was sent to the
following ministries on 6th October 2023 however the Authority has not received any comments:
m. Department of Chemicals and Petrochemicals, Ministry of Chemicals and Fertilizers
n. Ministry of Textiles
o. Ministry of Consumer Affairs
k. In response to the initiation of the subject investigation notification, the following importers/users from
the subject countries have responded by filing a questionnaire response:
i. Nissan Agro Tech India Private Limited
ii. Keshav Biochem Private Limited
l. The Authority made available the non-confidential version of the submissions made by the various
interested parties. A list of all the interested parties was uploaded on the DGTR website along with the
request to all of them to email the non-confidential version of their submissions to all the other interested
parties.
m. Request was made to the DG System to provide the transaction-wise details of imports of the subject
goods for the injury period and also the period of investigation. The Authority has relied upon the DGS
data for computation of the volume of imports and required analysis after due examination of the
transactions.
n. The non-injurious price (NIP) based on the optimum cost of production and cost to make & sell the
subject goods in India based on the information furnished by the domestic industry on the basis of
Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) and Annexure III to the Rules has been worked out so
as to ascertain whether anti-dumping duty lower than the dumping margin would be sufficient to remove
injury to the domestic industry.
o. The period of investigation (POI) for the purpose of the present investigation is 1st April 2022 to 31st
March 2023 (12 months). The examination of trends in the context of injury analysis covered the periods
2019-20, 2020-21, 2021-22 and the period of investigation.
p. The submissions made by the interested parties during the course of this investigation, to the extent
supported with evidence and considered relevant to the present investigation, have been appropriately
considered by the Authority, in these preliminary findings.
q. Information provided by the interested parties on a confidential basis was examined with regard to the
sufficiency of the confidentiality claim. On being satisfied, the Authority has accepted the confidentiality
claims wherever warranted and such information has been considered confidential and not disclosed to
other interested parties. Wherever possible, parties providing information on a confidential basis were
directed to provide sufficient non-confidential version of the information filed on a confidential basis.
r. Wherever an interested party has refused access to, or has otherwise not provided necessary information
during the course of the present investigation, or has significantly impeded the investigation, the Authority
has considered such parties as non-cooperative and recorded the views/observations on the basis of the
facts available.
s. On 9th November 2023, the Authority conducted a virtual meeting where all the interested parties were
invited to give their comments on the scope of the product under consideration and PCN methodology.
t. The Authority has considered all the arguments raised and information provided by all the interested
parties up to this stage, to the extent the same are supported with evidence and considered relevant to the
present investigation. The Authority will further examine the evidentiary documents submitted by the
interested parties subsequent to preliminary findings, which will form the basis for conclusions at the time
of final findings.
u. ‘***' in this notification represents information furnished by an interested party on a confidential basis and
so considered by the Authority under the Rules.
v. The exchange rate adopted by the Authority for the subject investigation is 1 US$ = ₹ 81.06.
C. PRODUCT UNDER CONSIDERATION AND LIKE ARTICLE
4. At the stage of initiation, the product under consideration was defined as "Trichloro Isocyanuric Acid", also
referred to as TCCA.
"3. The product under consideration (‘PUC') in the present petition is “Trichloro Isocyanuric Acid”, also referred to
as TCCA. TCCA is a chemical compound commonly used as a disinfectant, bleaching agent and water treatment
chemical. It is a white crystalline powder with a strong chlorine odour. TCCA is a powerful oxidizing agent and is
widely used in swimming pools, as well as for industrial water treatment and sanitation."
TCCA is a disinfectant, algicide, and bactericide mainly for swimming pools and dyestuffs. It is also used as a
bleaching agent in the textile industry. It is widely used in civil sanitation for pools and spas, preventing and curing
diseases in animal husbandry & fisheries, fruit & vegetable preservation, wastewater treatment, as an algicide for
recycled water in industry and air conditioning, in anti-shrink treatment for woollens, for treating seeds and in
organic chemical synthesis.
The product under consideration is classified under Chapter 29, under tariff codes 2933 6910 and 2933 6990. The
customs classification is only indicative and is not binding on the scope of the present investigation."
C.1 Views of other interested parties
5. The other interested parties have proposed the following PCN methodology for the product under consideration
based on the product type (tablet, granular and powder) and packaging.
+------------------+----------------+--------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| Field Description| Field format | Values | Explanation |
+==================+================+========+=====================================================+
| Product type | Text | 1 | P = Powder |
| | | | G = Granular |
| | | | T = Tablet |
| | | | O = Others |
+------------------+----------------+--------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| If tablet, | Number or Text | 1 | 1 = Tablet of 200gr |
| eight/tablet | | | 2 = Tablet of 1-199gr |
| | | | 3 = other tablets |
+------------------+----------------+--------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| If granular, | | | 4 = 5-8 mesh |
| mesh/granular | | | 5 = 8-30 mesh |
| | | | 6 = other mesh |
+------------------+----------------+--------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| For powder, | | | P = powder |
| indicate P | | | |
+------------------+----------------+--------+-----------------------------------------------------+
| Packaging | Number | 2 | 01 = Package of 1000 kg |
| | | | 02 = 25 Kg Small bag only |
| | | | 03= 25 Kg Plastic Drum, can or any other cylinder only|
| | | | 04 = 1kg bag in 25 Kg Plastic Drum, can or any other|
| | | | cylinder |
| | | | 05 = one tablet in one bag in a 25 Kg Plastic Drum, can or|
| | | | any other cylinder |
| | | | 06 = 1kg tube in 25 Kg Plastic Drum, can or any other|
| | | | cylinder |
| | | | 07=50 Kg Carbon/fiber Drum, can or any other cylinder|
| | | | only |
| | | | 08 = 1kg bag in 50 Kg Carbon/fiber Drum, can or any other|
| | | | cylinder |
| | | | 09 = one tablet in one bag in a 50 Kg Carbon/fiber Drum, can|
| | | | or any other cylinder |
| | | | 10 = 1kg tube in 50 Kg Carbon/fiber Drum, can or any other|
| | | | cylinder |
| | | | 11 = 50 Kg Plastic Drum, can or any other cylinder only|
| | | | 12 = 1kg bag in 50 Kg Plastic Drum, can or any other|
| | | | cylinder |
| | | | 13 = one tablet in one bag in a 50 Kg Plastic Drum, can or|
| | | | any other cylinder |
| | | | 14 = 1kg tube in 50 Kg Plastic Drum, can or any other|
| | | | cylinder |
| | | | 15 = Others |
+------------------+----------------+--------+-----------------------------------------------------+
C.2 Views of the domestic industry
6. The submissions of the domestic industry with regard to the product under consideration and like article are as
follows:
i. There is no need for framing a PCN for powder, granular and tablet.
ii. There is no consistent difference between the price of tablets and granular.
iii. There is no material difference in the cost of granules and tablets after making powder.
iv. The mesh sizes are achieved at the time of making granules and the difference in cost of making granules
from powder for different mesh sizes are not materially different.
v. No raw material is added at the stage of granulation and the only cost incurred is electricity and labour
charges.
vi. The cost of production should be determined excluding the packaging cost and price adjustments should
be accepted for packaging, consistent with past investigations of the Authority, the exporter's
questionnaire issued by the DGTR, and the exporter's questionnaires issued by various jurisdictions such
as USA, EU, Australia and Turkey, where packaging has been treated as an item of adjustment towards
price differences.
C.3 Examination by the Authority
7. The Authority had granted an opportunity to all the interested parties to file their submissions on the scope of
the PUC and PCNs. Further, the interested parties were asked to provide the details of cost and selling price
differences for different parameters and values as suggested in their proposed PCN methodology.
8. Comments were filed by “Qindao Profeliz Biological Technology Co., Ltd.", "Shandong Lantian Disinfection
Technology Co., Ltd." and "Hong Kong Sean International Limited from China PR and the said
producers/exporters proposed certain PCNs for the product under consideration. However, the
producers/exporters did not provide proper justification and the cost and pricing differences among the
different PCNs proposed.
9. The domestic industry was also asked to provide its comments on the cost and pricing differences in the PCNS
proposed by the producers/exporters. As per the response of the domestic industry, the difference in the cost of
making granules from powder for different mesh sizes is not materially different. Since there is no raw material
added at the stage of granulation the only cost incurred is electricity and labour charges. The domestic industry
has further submitted that as per the import data, the subject goods are imported in granular and tablets only
and that there is no consistent difference between the prices. Tablet has been imported at a price below granular
in several months, and at a price higher than granular in several months. There is no cost difference between
different mesh sizes. Thus, the difference in cost of different mesh sizes is grossly insufficient to frame
different PCNS.
10. Based on the information supplied by the interested parties, the Authority concluded that there is no evidence
to suggest significant cost/price differences among various product forms. Further, it is noted that the
difference in packing cost is not required to be considered as an element of PCN. The interested parties may
claim the same as an adjustment towards the price of the product.
11. Accordingly, vide notification F. No. 6/20/2023-DGTR dated 3rd January 2024 the Authority notified that there
is no change in the scope of the product under consideration as defined in the initiation notification and there is
no need for PCN methodology in the subject investigation.
12. Accordingly, the scope of the product under consideration is provisionally determined as follows.
3. The product under consideration (‘PUC') in the present petition is “Trichloro Isocyanuric Acid”, also referred to
as TCCA. TCCA is a chemical compound commonly used as a disinfectant, bleaching agent and water treatment
chemical. TCCA is a powerful oxidizing agent and is widely used in swimming pools, as well as for industrial water
treatment and sanitation. It can be produced in powder, tablet and granular form.
TCCA is a disinfectant, algicide, and bactericide mainly for swimming pools and dyestuffs. It is also used as a
bleaching agent in the textile industry. It is widely used in civil sanitation for pools and spas, preventing and curing
diseases in animal husbandry & fisheries, fruit & vegetable preservation, wastewater treatment, as an algicide for
recycled water in industry and air conditioning, in anti-shrink treatment for woollens, for treating seeds and in
organic chemical synthesis.
The product under consideration is classified under Chapter 29, under tariff codes 2933 6910 and 2933 6990. The
customs classification is only indicative and is not binding on the scope of the present investigation.
D. SCOPE OF THE DOMESTIC INDUSTRY & STANDING
D.1 Views of other interested parties
13. The other interested parties have not made any submissions with regard to the scope of domestic industry and
standing.
D.2 Views of the domestic industry
14. The submissions of the domestic industry with regard to the scope of domestic industry and standing are as
follows:
i. The present application has been filed by Bodal Chemicals Limited (BCL), which is the sole producer of the
subject goods in India.
ii. The plant for the subject goods was set up by Trion Chemicals Private Limited and BCL acquired a 100%
stake in Trion Chemicals Private Limited.
iii. There are no known differences in the products produced by the domestic industry and the goods
imported from the subject countries.
iv. The domestic industry has not imported the subject goods from the subject countries and is not related to
any exporter of the subject goods in the subject countries or importer of the subject goods in India.
D.3 Examination by the Authority
15. Rule 2(b) of the Anti-Dumping Rules defines the domestic industry as under:
“(b) “domestic industry” means the domestic producers as a whole engaged in the manufacture of the like article and
any activity connected therewith or those whose collective output of the said article constitutes a major proportion of
the total domestic production of that article except when such producers are related to the exporters or importers of
the alleged dumped article or are themselves importers thereof in such case the term 'domestic industry' may be
construed as referring to the rest of the producers".
16. The application has been filed by Bodal Chemicals Limited (BCL). The applicant is the sole producer of the
subject goods in India. The plant was set up by Trion Chemicals Private Limited and BCL acquired a 100%
stake in the company. The company commenced commercial production on ***.
17. The applicant has stated that they have not imported the subject goods from the subject countries and that they
are not related to any exporter of the subject goods in the subject countries or importer of the subject goods in
India. Further, the production of the applicant accounts for the entirety of the total domestic production. Thus,
the applicant constitutes domestic industry as defined under Rule 2(b) of the Anti-Dumping Rules, and the
application satisfies the requirement of standing in terms of Rule 5(3) of the Anti-Dumping Rules.
E. CONFIDENTIALITY
E.1 Views of other interested parties
18. The other interested parties have not made any submissions with regard to the confidentiality claimed by the
domestic industry. However, in response to the submissions made by the domestic industry, the interested
parties have submitted as under.
i. The producers/exporters have provided the list of the products and production volume while the domestic
industry has not provided the products sold by them in the non-confidential version of the application.
ii. The producers/exporters have disclosed the related parties in their questionnaire responses.
iii. The producers/exporters have provided the production process.
iv. Since the producers/exporters have not claimed Market Economy status, the details related to the raw
materials are not relevant for working out the Normal Value. The expenses/adjustments reported for
exports to India are incurred on an actual basis.
v. Information on exports to India including details of importers and adjustments is highly business sensitive
and disclosure of the same will have serious consequences.
E.2 Views of the domestic industry
19. The domestic industry has not made any submissions with regard to the confidentiality claimed by the other
interested parties.
i. The producers/exporters have claimed the names of the products produced and sold are confidential.
ii. The producers/exporters have claimed the information with regard to related parties engaged in the
production of the subject goods has been claimed confidential.
iii. The producers/exporters have claimed the writeup of the broad stage-wise production process and the raw
materials used in the production of the subject goods have been claimed confidential.
iv. The producers/exporters have claimed the channel of distribution for the sale of the subject goods has
been claimed confidential.
v. The producers/exporters have claimed the methodology used for reporting certain adjustments is
confidential.
vi. The producers/exporters have claimed that the subject goods produced by the domestic industry do not
meet the quality standards without any evidence or information.
E.3 Examination by Authority
20. The Authority made available the non-confidential version of the information provided by the various parties to
all the other interested parties as per Rule 6(7).
21. With regard to confidentiality of information, Rule 7 of Anti-dumping Rules provides as follows:
"Confidential information: (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-rules (2), (3) and (7)of rule 6, sub-rule(2)
of rule12,sub-rule(4) of rule 15 and sub-rule (4) of rule 17, the copies of applications received under sub-rule (1) of
rule 5, or any other information provided to the designated authority on a confidential basis by any party in the
course of investigation, shall, upon the designated authority being satisfied as to its confidentiality, be treated as such
by it and no such information shall be disclosed to any other party without specific authorization of the party
providing such information.
(2) The designated authority may require the parties providing information on a confidential basis to furnish a non-
confidential summary thereof and if, in the opinion of a party providing such information, such information is not
susceptible to summary, such party may submit to the designated authority a statement of reasons why summarization
is not possible.
(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-rule (2), if the designated authority is satisfied that the request for
confidentiality is not warranted or the supplier of the information is either unwilling to make the information public or
to authorise its disclosure in a generalized or summary form, it may disregard such information."
22. The information provided by the interested parties on a confidential basis was examined with regard to the
sufficiency of such claims. On being satisfied, the Authority has accepted the confidentiality claims, wherever
warranted, and such information has been considered confidential and not disclosed to the other interested
parties. Wherever possible, the parties providing information on a confidential basis were directed to provide a
sufficient non-confidential version of the information filed on a confidential basis. The Authority also notes
that all interested parties have claimed their business-related sensitive information as confidential.
F. NORMAL VALUE, EXPORT PRICE AND DUMPING MARGIN
F.1 Views of other interested parties
23. The other interested parties have not made any submissions with regard to normal value, export price and
dumping margin.
F.2 Views of the domestic industry
24. The submissions of the domestic industry with regard to the normal value, export price and dumping margin
are as follows:
i. China PR should be treated as a non-market economy in accordance with Article 15(a)(i) of China's
Accession Protocol and the normal value should be determined in terms of Annexure I, Rule 7 of the
Rules.
ii. The domestic industry has determined the normal value based on the price in a market economy third
country. For this purpose, it has considered the exports of the product under consideration from India to a
third country.
iii. The domestic industry has submitted that the producers of the subject goods are concentrated only in a
few countries and apart from the subject countries, the subject goods are produced in the USA and Spain.
Therefore, the appropriate market economy third country can only be the USA or Spain. Since the
domestic industry itself has exported the subject goods to the USA, it has taken the landed price of the
goods exported from India to USA to determine the normal value. Since normal value has been
determined based on the price in a market economy third country, other bases of determination are not
relied upon.
iv. For Japan, the domestic industry has submitted that it made efforts to determine normal value based on
the direct selling price in these countries but there was no publicly available evidence for the same.
Accordingly, the domestic industry has determined the cost of production in the country. For this purpose,
the domestic industry relied upon the import price of caustic soda in Japan based on information available
on the Trade Map. Additionally, the domestic industry has determined prices of the other raw materials
and utilities, as well as other factors of cost of production on the basis of available information and
adjusted for addition of selling, general and administrative expenses and reasonable profits.
v. Export price must be determined considering the volume and value of imports for the proposed period of
investigation adopted from the published DGCIS data after due adjustments are made to determine the ex-
factory price.
vi. The dumping margin for the subject countries is not only above the de minimis levels, but also significant.
F.3 Examination by the Authority
25. Under section 9A(1)(c), the normal value in relation to an article means:
"i) The comparable price, in the ordinary course of trade, for the like article, when meant for consumption in the
exporting country or territory as determined in accordance with the rules made under sub-section (6), or
ii) when there are no sales of the like article in the ordinary course of trade in the domestic market of the exporting
country or territory, or when because of the particular market situation or low volume of the sales in the domestic
market of the exporting country or territory, such sales do not permit a proper comparison, the normal value shall be
either:
(a) comparable representative price of the like article when exported from the exporting country or territory or an
appropriate third country as determined in accordance with the rules made under sub-section (6); or
the cost of production of the said article in the country of origin along with reasonable addition for administrative,
selling and general costs, and for profits, as determined in accordance with the rules made under sub-section (6);
(b) Provided that in the case of import of the article from a country other than the country of origin and where the
article has been merely transshipped through the country of export or such article is not produced in the country of
export or there is no comparable price in the country of export, the normal value shall be determined with reference
to its price in the country of origin."
26. The Authority notes that the following producers/exporters of the subject goods have filed exporter's
questionnaire responses:
a. Shandong Daming Science & Technology Co., Ltd.
b. Qingdao Profeliz Biological Technology Co., Ltd.
c. Hong Kong Sean International Limited
d. Shandong Lantian Disinfection Technology Co., Ltd.
e. Puyang Cleanway Chemicals Limited
f. Shandong Goldenstar Water Environment Technology Co., Ltd.
g. Hebei Xingfei Chemical Co., Ltd.
h. Nessei Corpoartion
F.3.1 Determination of Normal Value and Export Price
Normal Value for China
27. The Authority notes the following relevant provisions with regard to the determination of normal value for
China PR. Provisions under Para 7 and Para 8 of Annexure I to the Anti-Dumping Rules are as under:
“7. In case of imports from non-market economy countries, normal value shall be determined on the basis of the price
or constructed value in a market economy third country, or the price from such a third country to other countries,
including India, or where it is not possible, on any other reasonable basis, including the price actually paid or
payable in India for the like product, duly adjusted, if necessary, to include a reasonable profit margin. An
appropriate market economy third country shall be selected by the designated authority in a reasonable manner
[keeping in view the level of development of the country concerned and the product in question] and due account shall
be taken of any reliable information made available at the time of the selection. Account shall also be taken within
time limits; where appropriate, of the investigation if any made in a similar matter in respect of any other market
economy third country. The parties to the investigation shall be informed without unreasonable delay of the aforesaid
selection of the market economy third country and shall be given a reasonable period of time to offer their comments.
“8. (1) The term “non-market economy country” means any country which the designated authority determines as not
operating on market principles of cost or pricing structures, so that sales of merchandise in such country do not
reflect the fair value of the merchandise, in accordance with the criteria specified in subparagraph (3).
(2) There shall be a presumption that any country that has been determined to be, or has been treated as, a non-
market economy country for purposes of an antidumping investigation by the designated authority or by the competent
authority of any WTO member country during the three-year period preceding the investigation is a non-market
economy country. Provided, however, that the non-market economy country or the concerned firms from such country
may rebut such a presumption by providing information and evidence to the designated authority that establishes that
such country is not a non-market economy country on the basis of the criteria specified in sub-paragraph (3)
(3) The designated authority shall consider in each case the following criteria as to whether: (a) the decisions of the
concerned firms in such country regarding prices, costs and inputs, including raw materials, cost of technology and
labour, output, sales and investment, are made in response to market signals reflecting supply and demand and
without significant State interference in this regard, and whether costs of major inputs substantially reflect market
values; (b) the production costs and financial situation of such firms are subject to significant distortions carried over
from the former non-market economy system, in particular in relation to depreciation of assets, other write-offs,
barter trade and payment via compensation of debts; (c) such firms are subject to bankruptcy and property laws
which guarantee legal certainty and stability for the operation of the firms, and (d) the exchange rate conversions are
carried out at the market rate. Provided, however, that where it is shown by sufficient evidence in writing on the basis
of the criteria specified in this paragraph that market conditions prevail for one or more such firms subject to anti-
dumping investigations, the designated authority may apply the principles set out in paragraphs 1 to 6 instead of the
principles set out in paragraph 7 and in this paragraph.
(4) Notwithstanding, anything contained in sub-paragraph (2), the designated authority may treat such country as a
market economy country, on the basis of the latest detailed evaluation of relevant criteria, which includes the criteria
specified in sub-paragraph (3), has been, by publication of such evaluation in a public document, treated or
determined to be treated as a market economy country for the purposes of anti-dumping investigations, by a country
which is a Member of the World Trade Organization.”
28. At the stage of initiation, the Authority proceeded with the presumption of treating China PR as a non-market
economy country. Upon initiation, the Authority advised the producers/exporters in China PR to respond to the
notice of initiation and provide information on whether their data/information could be adopted for normal
value determination. The Authority sent copies of the market economy treatment/supplementary questionnaire
to all the known producers/ exporters in China PR to provide relevant information in this regard.
29. Article 15 of China's Accession Protocol in WTO provides as follows:
"(a) In determining price comparability under Article VI of the GATT 1994 and the Anti-Dumping Agreement, the
importing WTO Member shall use either Chinese prices or costs for the industry under investigation or a methodology
that is not based on a strict comparison with domestic prices or costs in China based on the following rules:
If the producers under investigation can clearly show that market economy conditions prevail in the industry
producing the like product with regard to the manufacture, production and sale of that product, the importing WTO
Member shall use Chinese prices or costs for the industry under investigation in determining price comparability;
The importing WTO Member may use a methodology that is not based on a strict comparison with domestic prices or
costs in China if the producers under investigation cannot clearly show that market economy conditions prevail in the
industry producing the like product with regard to manufacture, production and sale of that product.
(b) In proceedings under Parts II, III and V of the SCM Agreement, when addressing subsidies described in Articles
14(a), 14(b), 14(c) and 14(d), relevant provisions of the SCM Agreement shall apply; however, if there are special
difficulties in that application, the importing WTO Member may then use methodologies for identifying and measuring
the subsidy benefit which take into account the possibility that prevailing terms and conditions in China may not
always be available as appropriate benchmarks. In applying such methodologies, where practicable, the importing
WTO Member should adjust such prevailing terms and conditions before considering the use of terms and conditions
prevailing outside China.
(c) The importing WTO Member shall notify methodologies used in accordance with subparagraph (a) to the
Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices and shall notify methodologies used in accordance with subparagraph (b) to
the Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures.
(d) Once China has established, under the national law of the importing WTO Member, that it is a market economy,
the provisions of subparagraph (a) shall be terminated provided that the importing Member's national law contains
market economy criteria as of the date of accession. In any event, the provisions of subparagraph (a)(ii) shall expire
15 years after the date of accession. In addition, should China establish, pursuant to the national law of the importing
WTO Member, that market economy conditions prevail in a particular industry or sector, the non-market economy
provisions of subparagraph (a) shall no longer apply to that industry or sector.”
30. The Authority notes that while the provisions of Article 15 (a)(ii) of China PR's Accession Protocol have
expired with effect from 11th December 2016, the provision under Article 2.2.1.1 of the Anti-Dumping
Agreement read with an obligation under 15(a)(i) of the Accession Protocol require criterion stipulated in Para
8 of Annexure 1 of Anti-Dumping Rules to be satisfied through the information/data to be provided in the
supplementary questionnaire for claiming MET status. The Authority notes that no producer or exporter from
China PR has submitted market economy treatment or supplementary questionnaire response. Therefore, the
normal value computation for these producers/exporters is required to be determined in terms of provisions of
Para 7 of Annexure-1 of Anti-Dumping Rules.
31. The Authority notes that none of the producers/exporters from China PR has filed the supplementary
questionnaire response to rebut the presumptions as mentioned in para 8 of Annexure – I of the Rules. Under
these circumstances, the Authority has to proceed in accordance with para 7 of Annexure – I of the Rules.
32. It is noted that paragraph 7 of Annexure-I to the AD Rules stipulates three methods of constructing the normal
value for Non-Market Economies: (a) on the basis of price or constructed value in a market economy third
country; (b) export price from a third country to other countries, including India; and (c) on any other
reasonable basis. The Authority notes that under the provisions of paragraph 7 of Annexure-I to the AD Rules,
the normal value must first be determined on the basis of the price or constructed value in a surrogate country,
or the price of the exports from such country to other countries, including India.
33. At the stage of filing the application, the domestic industry provided the calculation for the normal value based
on the price in a market economy third country. The domestic industry considered exports made by it to USA
and has taken the price of such goods in USA to determine the normal value. The applicant has provided that
the producers of the subject goods are concentrated only in a few countries, including USA and Spain. There is
no information furnished by any other party with respect to the price or constructed value of the subject goods
produced in a market economy third country.
34. It is noted that where the normal value is determined on the basis of price or constructed value in a market
economy third country, the market economy third country is required to be determined having regard to the
level of development of the country concerned and the product in question. In this regard, the domestic
industry could not provide proper justification for how USA can be considered as an appropriate market
economy third country. Further, apart from the subject countries in the present investigation, imports into India
from other countries are very low in volume.
35. Therefore, the Authority has decided to construct normal value based on the third method, i.e., on any other
reasonable basis including the price actually paid or payable in India. The Authority has constructed the normal
value on the basis of the price paid or payable in India.
36. For this purpose, the Authority has considered the optimized cost of production of the domestic industry, with a
reasonable addition of selling, general and administrative expenses and profits.
Export price for Shandong Lantian Disinfection Technology Co, Qingdao Profeliz Biological Technology Co.,
Ltd and Hong Kong Sean International Limited
37. Shandong Lantian Disinfection Technology Co (“Lantian”) is a producer of the subject goods in China PR.
Lantian has exported the subject goods directly to unrelated customers in India. Lantian has also exported the
product under consideration through its subsidiary Qingdao Profeliz Biological Technology Co (Qingdao).
Qingdao has directly exported the product under consideration to unrelated customers in India. In some cases,
Qingdao has further sold the goods to related traders in China Hong Kong Sean International Limited
(HKIL). HKSIL has exported the goods to unrelated customers in India.
Lantian → Unrelated customer in India
Lantian → Qingdao→ HKSIL→ Unrelated customer in India
Lantian → Qingdao→ Unrelated customer in India
38. It is noted that during the POI, Lantian has exported *** MT of the PUC directly to unrelated customers in
India and *** MT through a related trader. The adjustments towards inland freight, ocean freight, insurance,
port expenses, credit cost and bank charges claimed, have been accepted for the purpose of present preliminary
findings. Accordingly, the Authority has provisionally determined the export price, as mentioned in the
dumping margin table below.
Export price for Puyang Cleanway Chemicals Limited
39. Puyang Cleanway Chemicals Limited (“Puyang") is a producer of the subject goods in China PR. Puyang has
exported the subject goods directly to unrelated customers in India.
40. It is noted that during the POI, Puyang has exported *** MT of the PUC directly to unrelated customers in
India. The adjustments towards inland freight, ocean freight, insurance and port expenses have been accepted
for the purpose of present preliminary findings. Accordingly, the Authority has provisionally determined the
export price, as mentioned in the dumping margin table below.
Export price for Shandong Goldenstar Water Environment Technology Co., Ltd, Weifang Alpha International
Trading Co., Ltd and Qingdao Thor Industrial Co., Ltd, Hydrotech Investment Corporation Limited
41. Shandong Goldenstar Water Environment Technology Co., Ltd. ("Goldenstar") is a producer of the subject
goods in China PR. Goldenstar has exported the subject goods through related and unrelated traders in India.
Weifang Alpha International Trading Co., Ltd (Alpha International) is a related trader of Goldenstar that has
exported the product under consideration to un-related customers in India. Goldenstar has also sold the product
under consideration through two unrelated traders - Hydrotech Investment Corporation Limited (Hydrotech)
and Qingdao Thor Industrial Co., Ltd (Thor International) which have exported the product under consideration
to unrelated customers in India.
Goldenstar → Hydrotech → Unrelated customer in India
Goldenstar → Alpha International → Unrelated customer in India
Goldenstar → Thor Industrial → Unrelated customer in India
42. It is noted that during the POI, Goldenstar has exported *** MT of the PUC through its related traders and ***
MT through unrelated traders to unrelated customers in India. The adjustments towards inland freight, port
expenses and credit costs have been accepted for the purpose of present preliminary findings. Accordingly, the
Authority has provisionally determined the export price, as mentioned in the dumping margin table below.
Export price for Hebei Xingfei Chemical Co., Ltd. (“Hebei”) and Hydrotech Investment Corporation Limited
43. M/s. Hebei Xingfei Chemical Co., Ltd. filed a questionnaire response as a producer and Hydrotech
Investment Corporation Limited as an exporter. Analysis of questionnaire responses showed that the
company reported exports of *** MT in April 2022. Analysis of documents however shows that the company
has invoiced the material on 10 March 2022 and 31 March 2022. However, the invoice date has been
reported as 2 April 22 and 15 April 22 in Appendix 3B. It is, thus, noted that the company has misrepresented
the date of export in its exports to India data. Since the commercial invoice provided by the company clearly
showed that the goods were invoiced on 10 March 2022 and 31 March 22, i.e., prior to POI, the Authority
has provisionally not determined the dumping margin in respect of exports made by the producer.
Export price for Shandong Daming Science and Technology Co. Ltd
44. Shandong Daming Science and Technology Co., Ltd (“Daming") is a producer of the subject goods in China
PR. Daming has exported the subject goods directly to unrelated customers in India.
45. It is noted that during the POI, Daming has exported *** MT of the PUC directly to unrelated customers in
India. The adjustments towards inland freight, ocean freight, insurance, port expenses and bank charges have
been accepted for the purpose of present preliminary findings. Accordingly, the Authority has provisionally
determined the export price, as mentioned in the dumping margin table below.
Export price for all non-cooperative producers/exporters from China PR
46. The export price for other non-cooperative producers/exporters from China has been determined based on facts
available in terms of Rule 6(8) of the Rules.
Normal value for Japan
47. It is noted that Nissei Corporation, an exporter/trader from Japan has filed a response to the Exporter
Questionnaire Response. However, no producer from Japan has filed a response and provided the information
required for the calculation of normal value. Since the dumping margin is determined for the producer, and not
the exporter, no individual margin can be accorded to Nissei Corporation. No other producer from Japan has
filed a response. Accordingly, the Authority has determined the normal value for producers and exporters of
Japan based on facts available and the same is mentioned in the dumping margin table below.
Export price for Japan
48. The export price for producers/exporters has been determined based on facts available in terms of Rule 6(8) of
the Rules.
F3.3. Dumping Margin
The normal value, export price and dumping margin determined in the present investigation are as follows:
Dumping Margin Table
+------------------------------------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------+
| Producer | Normal Value (USD/MT) | Export Price (USD/MT) | Dumping Margin (USD/MT) | Dumping Margin (%) | Dumping Margin (Range)|
+================================================+=======================+=======================+=========================+====================+=======================+
| China | | | | | |
+------------------------------------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------+
| Shandong Goldenstar Water Environment | *** | *** | *** | *** | 55-65 |
| Technology Co., Ltd | | | | | |
+------------------------------------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------+
| Puyang Cleanway Chemicals Limited | *** | *** | *** | *** | 40-50 |
+------------------------------------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------+
| Shandong Daming Science and Technology Co. Ltd | *** | *** | *** | *** | 50-60 |
+------------------------------------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------+
| Shandong Lantian Disinfection Technology Co | *** | *** | *** | *** | 60-70 |
+------------------------------------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------+
| Any Other | *** | *** | *** | *** | 70-80 |
+------------------------------------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------+
| Japan | | | | | |
+------------------------------------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------+
| Any Other | *** | *** | *** | *** | 5-15 |
+------------------------------------------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------+
G. ASSESSMENT OF INJURY AND CAUSAL LINK
G.1 Views of other interested parties
49. The other interested parties have not made any submissions with regard to injury and causal link.
G.2 Views of the domestic industry
50. The following submissions have been made by the domestic industry with regard to the injury and causal link;
i. Despite the presence of the domestic industry, the imports have dominated the entire market. The
imports constitute ***% of the market share during the period of investigation.
ii. The volume of imports from the subject country was *** times the Indian production in the period of
investigation, despite there being no demand-supply gap in the country. This clearly shows that the
exporters are flooding the Indian market to drive out the domestic industry.
iii. Even though the imports declined between 2020-21 and 2021-22, that was due to a decline in
consumption owing to Covid related situations. However, the situation changed during the period of
investigation and the imports were the highest during the period of investigation, increasing sharply by
149%.
iv. The dumped imports are undercutting the prices of the domestic industry, and the undercutting is
significantly positive during the period of investigation.
v. The subject imports have continuously caused strain on the prices of the domestic industry as they were
priced lower than the selling price of the domestic industry throughout the injury period.
vi. In the period of investigation, the cost of sales increased sharply. However, despite the increase in costs,
the exporters did not increase their prices proportionately and the same were below the cost of sales.
vii. The imports are priced below the variable cost of the domestic industry. This means that it is not
possible for the domestic industry to compete with the import price. This creates a demand for the
imported goods.
viii. The dumped imports have had a suppressing effect on the prices of the domestic industry.
ix. Due to the multiple shutdowns, the domestic industry had only ***% of its capacity available. Despite
this, the domestic industry has been able to utilize only ***% of its deployed capacity during the period
of investigation. Thus, the domestic industry has utilized a meagre ***% of its total capacity available.
x. The share of the domestic industry in the demand is a meagre ***%, despite having sufficient capacity
to meet the Indian demand.
xi. It has sold only *** % of its production in the domestic market, which is also at a loss.
xii. Due to the constant pressure of dumped imports, the domestic industry has not been able to dispose of
its production sufficiently. As a result, the domestic industry was forced to undertake exports at losses to
dispose of their inventories to avoid piling up the goods.
xiii. Even the average inventory holding period of the domestic industry is too high to allow sustainable
operations, at *** months.
xiv. In the period of investigation, the profitability of the domestic industry has declined by nearly 587%
when compared to the previous year. The domestic industry has faced losses of nearly *** with cash
losses and a negative return of ***%.
xv. The applicant had to shut down its plant multiple times during the injury period and shut down its
operation on ***, due to continuous dumping from the subject countries and has not been able to restart
it during the period of investigation.
xvi. There is a critical need for the imposition of an interim duty in the present case. because the domestic
industry has been struggling to maintain its operations, leaving aside reaching desired levels.
G.3 Examination by the Authority
51. Rule 11 of Antidumping Rules read with Annexure II provides that an injury determination shall involve
examination of factors that may indicate injury to the domestic industry, "... taking into account all relevant
facts, including the volume of dumped imports, their effect on prices in the domestic market for like articles
and the consequent effect of such imports on the domestic producers of such articles...". In considering the
effect of the dumped imports on prices, it is considered necessary to examine whether there has been a
significant price undercutting by the dumped imports as compared with the price of the like article in India, or
whether the effect of such imports is otherwise to depress prices to a significant degree or prevent price
increases, which otherwise would have occurred, to a significant degree. For the examination of the impact of
the dumped imports on the domestic industry in India, indices having a bearing on the state of the industry such
as production, capacity utilization, sales volume, inventory, profitability, net sales realization, the magnitude
and margin of dumping, etc. have been considered in accordance with Annexure II of the Anti-Dumping Rules.
52. The Authority has examined the arguments and counterarguments of the interested parties with regard to injury
to the domestic industry. The injury analysis made by the Authority hereunder addresses the various
submissions made by the interested parties.
G.3.1 Cumulative assessment of injury
53. Article 3.3 of the WTO agreement and para (iii) of Annexure II of the Rules provides that in case where
imports of a product from more than one country are being simultaneously subjected to anti-dumping
investigations, the Authority will cumulatively assess the effect of such imports, in case it determines that:
a. The margin of dumping established in relation to the imports from each country is more than two per cent
expressed as a percentage of export price and the volume of the imports from each country is three per
cent (or more) of the import of like article or where the export of individual countries is less than three per
cent, the imports collectively account for more than seven per cent of the import of like article, and
b. Cumulative assessment of the effect of imports is appropriate in light of the conditions of competition
between the imported article and the like domestic articles.
54. The Authority notes that:
a. The subject goods are being dumped into India from the subject countries. The margin of dumping from
each of the subject countries is more than the de minimis limits prescribed under the Rules.
b. The volume of imports from each of the subject countries is individually more than 3% of the total volume
of imports.
с. Cumulative assessment of the effects of import is appropriate as the imports from the subject countries not
only directly compete with the like articles offered by each of them but also the like articles offered by the
domestic industry in the Indian market.
55. In view of the above, the Authority considers that it is appropriate to assess the effect of dumped imports of the
subject goods from China PR and Japan on the domestic industry.
G.3.2 Volume effect of the dumped imports
a) Assessment of demand / apparent consumption
56. The Authority has defined, for the purpose of the present investigation, demand or apparent consumption of the
product concerned in India as the sum of the domestic sales of the domestic industry and other Indian
producers and imports from all sources. The demand so assessed is given in the table below.
+-------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Particulars | Unit | 2019-20 | 2020-21 | 2021-22 | POI |
+===================+==========+===========+===========+===========+=====+
| Sales of applicant| MT | *** | *** | *** | *** |
+-------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Trend | Indexed | 100 | 39 | 1,345 | 1,173|
+-------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Subject imports | MT | 4,414 | 1,742 | 1,917 | 6,433|
+-------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Other imports | MT | 0 | 42 | 21 | 100 |
+-------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Consumption | MT | *** | *** | *** | *** |
+-------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Trend | Indexed | 100 | 40 | 53 | 155 |
+-------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
57. It is seen that the demand for the subject goods declined in 2020-21 but increased gradually thereafter.
b) Import Volumes from the subject countries
58. With regard to the volume of the dumped imports, the Authority is required to consider whether there has been
a significant increase in dumped imports, either in absolute terms or relative to production or consumption in
India. For the purpose of injury analysis, the Authority has relied on the transaction-wise import data procured
from DG Systems. The import volumes of the subject goods from the subject country and share of the dumped
import during the injury investigation period are as follows:
+---------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Particulars | Unit | 2019-20 | 2020-21 | 2021-22 | POI |
+=====================+==========+===========+===========+===========+=====+
| Subject imports | MT | 4,414 | 1,742 | 1,917 | 6,433|
+---------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| China | MT | 4,211 | 1,710 | 1,705 | 6,203|
+---------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Japan | MT | 203 | 33 | 212 | 230 |
+---------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Other Countries | MT | - | 42 | 21 | 100 |
+---------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Total imports | MT | 4,414 | 1,784 | 1,938 | 6,533|
+---------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Production | MT | *** | *** | *** | *** |
+---------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Subject import in relation to: | | | | | |
+---------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Total imports | % | 100 | 98 | 99 | 98 |
+---------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Production | % | *** | *** | *** | *** |
+---------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Trend | Indexed | 100 | 401 | 344 | 257 |
+---------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Consumption | % | *** | *** | *** | *** |
+---------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Trend | Indexed | 100 | 98 | 82 | 94 |
+---------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
59. It is seen that-
a. The imports declined between 2020-21 and 2021-22, but significantly increased thereafter and were the
highest during the period of investigation.
b. The imports from the subject countries constitute almost the entirety of the imports into the country, with a
share of ***% during the period of investigation.
c. The imports in relation to production were higher in the base year but declined in 2020-21. Again, the subject
imports increased substantially in the POI.
d. The subject imports in absolute terms are highest in the POI and have increased by around 236% compared to
the previous year.
e. The imports in relation to consumption have increased by 11% as compared to the previous year.
60. The domestic industry has also emphasized that the imports from the subject countries decreased in 2020-21
and 2021-22 due to Covid but have increased by 236% during the period of investigation.
+------------------+----------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
| Particulars | Unit | 2019-20 | 2020-21 | 2021-22 | 2022-23 |
+==================+==========+=========+=========+=========+=========+
| Subject imports | MT | 4,414 | 1,742 | 1,917 | 6,433 |
+------------------+----------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
| Rate of increase | % | -61% | 10% | 236% | |
+------------------+----------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
61. It is seen that after declining in 2020-21, the imports have increased at a significant rate during the period of
investigation.
G.3.3 Price effect of the dumped imports
62. In terms of Annexure II (ii) of the Rules, with regard to the effect of the dumped imports on prices, the
Authority is required to consider whether there has been a significant price undercutting by the dumped imports
as compared with the price of the like product in India, or whether the effect of such imports is otherwise to
depress prices to a significant degree or prevent price increases, which otherwise would have occurred, to a
significant degree.
a) Price undercutting
63. Price undercutting has been determined by comparing the net sales realization of the domestic industry with the
landed price of the imports for the period of investigation. It is seen that the price undercutting is positive and
significant during the period of investigation.
+-------------------+----------+-----------+
| Particulars | Unit | POI |
+===================+==========+===========+
| Net selling price | ₹/MT | *** |
+-------------------+----------+-----------+
| Landed Price | ₹/MT | 1,55,707 |
+-------------------+----------+-----------+
| Price undercutting | ₹/MT | *** |
+-------------------+----------+-----------+
| Price undercutting | % | *** |
+-------------------+----------+-----------+
| Range | Range | 30-40% |
+-------------------+----------+-----------+
64. It is noted that during the period of investigation, the subject imports were undercutting the prices of the
domestic industry. Further, the price undercutting was significant.
b) Price suppression/depression
65. In order to determine whether the dumped imports are depressing the domestic prices and whether the effect of
such imports is to suppress prices to a significant degree or prevent price increases which otherwise would
have occurred in the normal course, the changes in the costs and prices over the injury period, were compared
as below.
+-------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Particulars | Unit | 2019-20 | 2020-21 | 2021-22 | POI |
+=========================+==========+===========+===========+===========+=====+
| Cost of Sales (Domestic)| ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | *** |
+-------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Trend | Indexed | 100 | 89 | 74 | 111 |
+-------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Selling Price | ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | *** |
+-------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Trend | Indexed | 100 | 98 | 130 | 144 |
+-------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Landed Price | ₹/MT | 1,17,929 | 1,05,265 | 1,66,360 | 1,55,707|
+-------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Trend | Indexed | 100 | 89 | 141 | 132 |
+-------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
66. It is noted that the landed value of the imports was below the selling price of the domestic industry throughout
the injury period.
67. During the period of investigation, the cost of sales of the domestic industry sharply increased. However, the
prices of imports have reduced and were much below the cost of sales of the domestic industry. This prevented
the domestic industry from increasing its price in line with the increase in cost. It is, therefore, noted that the
imports have prevented price increases, which otherwise, would have occurred.
68. The domestic industry has also claimed during the period of investigation, the prices of one of the raw
materials i.e., cyanuric acid increased by 70%. However, the landed price of the goods has not increased.
Accordingly, the domestic industry was not able to increase its prices commensurate with the increase in raw
material cost.
+-------------------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
| Period | 2019-20 | 2020-21 | 2021-22 | 2022-23 |
+=========================+=========+=========+=========+=========+
| Caustic Soda Lye Prices | *** | *** | *** | *** |
+-------------------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
| Trend | 100 | 48 | 86 | 131 |
+-------------------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
| Cyanuric acid | *** | *** | *** | *** |
+-------------------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
| Trend | 100 | 82 | 79 | 135 |
+-------------------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
| Cost of raw materials | *** | *** | *** | *** |
+-------------------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
| Trend | 100 | 70 | 74 | 125 |
+-------------------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
G.3.4 Economic parameters of the domestic industry
69. Annexure II to the Anti-Dumping Rules requires that the determination of injury shall involve an objective
examination of the consequent impact of dumped imports on domestic producers of such products. With regard
to the consequent impact of dumped imports on domestic producers of such products, the Rules further provide
that the examination of the impact of the dumped imports on the domestic industry should include an objective
and unbiased evaluation of all relevant economic factors and indices having a bearing on the state of the
industry, including actual and potential decline in sales, profits, output, market share, productivity, return on
investments or utilization of capacity; factors affecting domestic prices, the magnitude of the margin of
dumping; actual and potential negative effects on cash flow, inventories, employment, wages, growth, ability to
raise capital investments. The various injury parameters relating to the domestic industry are discussed herein
below.
a) Production, capacity, capacity utilization and sales volumes
70. Capacity, production, sales and capacity utilization of the domestic industry over the injury period were as
below:
+--------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Particulars | Unit | 2019-20 | 2020-21 | 2021-22 | POI |
+====================+==========+===========+===========+===========+=====+
| Installed Capacity | MT | *** | *** | *** | *** |
+--------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Trend | Indexed | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
+--------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Production | MT | *** | *** | *** | *** |
+--------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Trend | Indexed | 100 | 401 | 344 | 257 |
+--------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Capacity Utilization| % | *** | *** | *** | *** |
+--------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Trend | Indexed | 100 | 401 | 345 | 257 |
+--------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Domestic Sales | MT | *** | *** | *** | *** |
+--------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Trend | Indexed | 100 | 39 | 1345 | 1172|
+--------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Export Sales | MT | *** | *** | *** | *** |
+--------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Trend | Indexed | 100 | 94 | 197 | 83 |
+--------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
71. It is seen that -
a. The domestic industry shut down its plant on *** and has not been able to restart it during the period of
investigation.
b. The capacity utilization of the domestic industry was ***% of the installed capacity during the period of
investigation.
с. The domestic sales are negligible, in comparison to the total capacity and total production.
d. The domestic industry has been able to sell only ***% of its production in the domestic market.
72. It is also seen from the information provided that the domestic industry exported the majority of its production
during the period of investigation at losses, clearly showing that the domestic industry was constrained to
export the product to restrict inventory pile up.
+-------------------------+-------+-------+
| Particular | UOM | Rs/MT |
+=========================+=======+=======+
| Selling price (exports) | Rs/MT | *** |
+-------------------------+-------+-------+
| Cost of sales (exports) | Rs/MT | *** |
+-------------------------+-------+-------+
| Profit | Rs/MT | (***) |
+-------------------------+-------+-------+
b) Market share
73. Market share of the domestic industry and of imports was as shown in the table below:
+-------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Market share | Unit | 2019-20 | 2020-21 | 2021-22 | POI |
+===================+==========+===========+===========+===========+=====+
| Domestic industry | %-Indexed| 100 | 100 | 1700 | 500 |
+-------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Subject imports | %-Indexed| 100 | 98 | 83 | 94 |
+-------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Other Imports | %-Indexed| 100 | 50 | 50 | |
+-------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
74. It is noted that despite being the sole producer of the subject goods in India and having the capacity of approx.
90% of the demand, the share of the domestic industry in the Indian market is only *** %. The imports from
the subject countries have continued to dominate the Indian market throughout the injury period with a ***%
share during the period of investigation.
c) Inventories
75. Inventory position of the domestic industry over the injury period is given in the table below:
+-------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Particulars | Unit | 2019-20 | 2020-21 | 2021-22 | POI |
+===================+==========+===========+===========+===========+=====+
| Opening Inventory | MT | *** | *** | *** | *** |
+-------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Closing Inventory | MT | *** | *** | *** | *** |
+-------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Average Inventory | MT | *** | *** | *** | *** |
+-------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Trend | Indexed | 100 | 154 | 182 | 99 |
+-------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
76. It is noted that the average inventories of the domestic industry have continuously increased till 2021-22 and
have decreased only during the period of investigation. However, the domestic industry has nevertheless, not
been able to dispose of its production in the domestic market. Further, it is seen that the average inventory
holding period of the domestic industry is *** days.
d) Profitability, cash profits and return on capital employed
77. Profitability, return on investment and cash profits of the domestic industry over the injury period are given in
the table below:
+-------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Particulars | Unit | 2019-20 | 2020-21 | 2021-22 | POI |
+=========================+==========+===========+===========+===========+=====+
| Cost of sales (domestic)| ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | *** |
+-------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Trend | Indexed | 100 | 89 | 74 | 111 |
+-------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Selling price | ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | *** |
+-------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Trend | Indexed | 100 | 98 | 130 | 144 |
+-------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Profit/ (loss) | ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | *** |
+-------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Trend | Indexed | -100 | -75 | 11 | -59 |
+-------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Profit/ (loss) | ₹ Lacs | *** | *** | *** | *** |
+-------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Trend | Indexed | -100 | -29 | 142 | -679|
+-------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Cash Profit | ₹ Lacs | *** | *** | *** | *** |
+-------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Trend | Indexed | -100 | -25 | 450% | -575|
+-------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Return of investment | % | *** | *** | *** | *** |
+-------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Trend | Indexed | -100 | -72 | 33 | -89 |
+-------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
78. It is noted that that -
a. The domestic industry was in losses in the first two years of the injury period but in 2021-22, it earned
profits. However, during this period, the profitability was low, and the domestic industry earned a return
of only ***% on capital employed.
b. During the period of investigation, the profitability of the domestic industry has deteriorated by nearly
***% compared to the previous year.
с. The applicant has incurred losses and cash losses and is suffering negative return on investment during
the period of investigation. The applicant has faced a negative return on investment of ***%.
e) Employment, productivity and wages
79. The Authority has examined the information relating to employment, wages and productivity, as given below.
+--------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Particulars | Unit | 2019-20 | 2020-21 | 2021-22 | POI |
+==========================+==========+===========+===========+===========+=====+
| No. of employees | Nos. | *** | *** | *** | *** |
+--------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Trend | Indexed | 100 | 126 | 132 | 134 |
+--------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Salaries & Wages | ₹ Lacs | *** | *** | *** | *** |
+--------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Trend | Indexed | 100 | 115 | 151 | 147 |
+--------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Productivity per day | MT/Days | *** | *** | *** | *** |
+--------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Trend | Indexed | 100 | 400 | 300 | 300 |
+--------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Productivity per employee| MT/Nos | *** | *** | *** | *** |
+--------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
| Trend | Indexed | 100 | 320 | 260 | 180 |
+--------------------------+----------+-----------+-----------+-----------+-----+
80. It is noted that the no of employees and salaries were the highest during the period of investigation but the
productivity per employee has reduced after 2020-21, in response to the decline in production. The domestic
industry has not claimed injury on this account.
f) Growth
+--------------------------+----------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
| Particulars | Unit | 2019-20 | 2020-21 | 2021-22 | 2022-23 |
+==========================+==========+=========+=========+=========+=========+
| Production | % | - | 301% | -14% | -26% |
+--------------------------+----------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
| Domestic sales | % | - | -61% | 3319% | -13% |
+--------------------------+----------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
| Profit/Loss | % | - | -71% | -582% | -587% |
+--------------------------+----------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
| Cash Profits | % | - | -75% | -1872% | -228% |
+--------------------------+----------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
| Return on capital employed| % | - | 5 | 18 | -22 |
+--------------------------+----------+---------+---------+---------+---------+
81. It is noted that production of the domestic industry increased in 2020-21, but showed decline thereafter. The
domestic sales also increased in 2021-22 and then decreased in the period of investigation. The domestic
industry has been in losses throughout the injury period, which were the highest in the period of investigation.
Therefore, the domestic industry has faced deterioration in respect of all parameters.
g) Impact on the ability to raise capital investment
82. The domestic industry has incurred steep losses and is facing negative returns. The EBIDTA is negative and
has only deteriorated over the injury period. The negative EBIDTA shows that the domestic industry is not
earning enough to even meet its present obligations and there is a negative impact on the ability to raise capital
investment.
h) Factors affecting prices
83. It is noted that the domestic industry has not been able to increase its prices to a remunerative level during the
period of investigation. The imports have forced the domestic industry to sell the goods below cost. Further,
the low-priced imports have also resulted in low market share, and underutilized capacity which ultimately
forced the applicant to close its operations. Thus, the subject imports have affected the prices of the domestic
industry.
i) The magnitude of dumping
84. There is significant dumping of the subject goods from the subject countries which has destroyed the
conditions of fair competition in the market.
G.3.5 Overall assessment of injury
85. The examination of the imports of the subject product and the performance of domestic industry clearly shows
that:
i. Despite the fact that the domestic industry has enough capacity to cater to the approx. 90% entire
Indian demand, the imports have dominated the market.
ii. The imports reduced in 2020-21 and 2021-22 but increased by 236% thereafter and were the highest
during the period of investigation.
iii. The imports are ***% higher than the production of the domestic industry and constitute ***% of the
Indian market.
iv. The imports from the subject countries constitute 100% of imports of the product under consideration
in India.
v. The subject imports are undercutting the prices of the domestic industry. The price undercutting was
positive and significant during the period of investigation.
vi. The imports have prevented the increase in the selling price of the domestic industry, which otherwise
should have occurred.
vii. Despite the increase in the prices of the raw materials during the period of investigation, the exporters
have not increased the landed price of the imports.
viii. Despite having a capacity of *** MT, the deployed capacity of the domestic industry was only ***
MT.
ix. The domestic industry was forced to shut down its plant on *** and has been unable to restart it during
the period of investigation.
x. The share of the domestic industry in the demand is only ***% and it has sold only ***% of its
production in the domestic market.
xi. The domestic industry was forced to export the subject goods at losses to dispose of their inventories.
The domestic industry exported the majority of its production during the period of investigation.
xii. The average inventory holding period of the domestic industry is very high during the period of
investigation.
xiii. The domestic industry is suffering significant financial losses. The domestic industry has faced losses
with cash losses and a negative return on investment during the period of investigation.
xiv. The imports have adversely impacted the ability of the domestic industry to raise further capital
investments.
xv. The dumping margin is positive and significant.
xvi. The imports are affecting the prices of the domestic industry.
86. In view of the foregoing, the Authority provisionally concludes that the domestic industry has suffered material
injury.
G3.6 Non-attribution analysis and causal link
87. Having examined the existence of injury, volume and price effects of dumped imports on the prices of the
domestic industry, the Authority has examined whether injury to the domestic industry can be attributed to any
factor, other than the dumped imports, as listed under the Rules.
a) Volume and value of imports from third countries
88. It is noted that there are no imports from any other country. The imports from the subject countries constitute
100% of the imports in India. Therefore, the injury is not attributable to imports from third countries.
b) Contraction in demand
89. The Authority notes that the demand for the subject goods decreased in 2020-21 but increased again in 2021-22
and the period of investigation. The domestic industry has not suffered injury due to a contraction in demand.
c) Pattern of consumption
90. It is noted that there has been no material change in the pattern of consumption of the product under
consideration, which could have caused injury to the domestic industry.
d) Conditions of competition and trade restrictive practices
91. The Authority notes that there is no evidence of conditions of competition or trade restrictive practices that are
responsible for the claimed injury to the domestic industry.
e) Developments in technology
92. The Authority notes that there has been no change in technology for the production of the subject goods that
could have caused injury to the domestic industry since it has set up a new plant for the production of the
subject goods.
f) Productivity
93. The Authority notes that the productivity of the domestic industry has increased over the injury period.
Therefore, the domestic industry has not suffered injury on this account.
g) Export performance of the domestic industry
94. The injury information examined hereinabove relates only to the performance of the domestic industry in terms
of its domestic market. Thus, the injury suffered cannot be attributed to the export performance of the domestic
industry.
h) Performance of other products
95. The Authority has only considered data relating only to the performance of the subject goods. Therefore, the
performance of other products produced and sold is not a possible cause of injury to the domestic industry.
G3.7 Conclusions on causal link
96. While other known factors listed under the Rules have not caused injury to the domestic industry, the Authority
notes that the following parameters show that injury to the domestic industry is caused by the dumped imports.
i. There is dumping of the subject goods from the subject countries.
ii. The import volume was the highest in the period of investigation. The imports declined in the previous
two years only because of demand decline due to Covid.
iii. The volume of imports also increased in relation to the consumption and production of the domestic
industry and is ***% in relation to the Indian production.
iv. Imports control ***% of the market, preventing the domestic industry from gaining a share in the
market.
v. The subject imports are significantly undercutting the prices of the domestic industry.
vi. The cheaper prices have created a strain on the prices of the domestic industry, preventing price
increases, which otherwise would have occurred.
vii. Even when the prices of raw materials increased in the period of investigation, the prices of the imports
did not increase.
viii. The domestic industry has severely under-utilized capacities, with only ***% of the installed capacity.
ix. Even after producing at lower levels, it was forced to rely on exports to dispose of its production. The
exports are equivalent to ***% of the production.
x. The domestic sales are low, with the domestic industry holding a market share of only ***%.
xi. The domestic industry was forced to shut down its operations in order to cut down its losses and avoid
excessive inventory.
xii. The domestic industry has incurred losses and cash losses throughout the injury period except in 2021-
22 when the landed price increased. Even the return on investment in the period of investigation was
negative.
97. The Authority, thus, provisionally concludes that there exists a causal link between the dumping of the subject
goods and injury to the domestic industry.
H. INDIAN INDUSTRY'S INTEREST & OTHER ISSUES
H.1. Submissions by other interested parties
98. The other interested parties have not made any submissions with regard to the Indian industry's interest.
H.2 Submissions by the domestic industry
99. The domestic industry has made the following submissions with regard to the Indian industry's interest:
i. There is no demand-supply gap in the country for the subject goods.
ii. The domestic industry has the capacity to cater to the entire Indian demand and in case of increased
demand, it has the infrastructure to increase its capacity to *** MT.
iii. The domestic industry has invested nearly * *** crores to set up the plant for the subject goods and make
India self-sufficient.
iv. If the current situation continues, the domestic industry will have no option but to permanently shut down
its operations and India will once again become import dependent.
v. In light of the widening trade deficit, it is important to rely more on domestic production capacities.
Imposition of duties would allow conservation of the outgoing foreign exchange favourable balance of
payment account.
vi. TCCA is not a major input or raw material for the downstream industry and consequently it is not a major
cost to it either.
vii. The downstream industry is likely to bear the increase in the cost of the product since it forms a minuscule
part of its cost.
viii. The impact of the imposition of anti-dumping duty on TCCA in nearly 0.0008%.
ix. Dodhiya Chem Tex Private Limited, Mumbai is planning to set up a plant for TCCA which would ensure
that there is no monopoly in India and that the users would have enough sources in the domestic market as
well.
x. The technology to manufacture the product under consideration is available in the USA and Spain and a
plant for production has been recently set up in Bangladesh. The product under consideration can be
imported at fair prices from other sources also.
H.3 Examination by the Authority
100. The Authority notes that the primary objective of anti-dumping duties is to rectify the injury inflicted upon the
domestic industry by the unjust trade practices of dumping, thereby fostering an environment of open and
equitable competition in the Indian market. This is not merely a regulatory measure, but a matter of national
interest. The imposition of anti-dumping measures is not designed to curtail imports from the subject countries
arbitrarily. Rather, it is a mechanism to ensure a level playing field. The Authority acknowledges that the
persistence of anti-dumping duties may influence the price levels of the product in India. However, it is crucial
to note that the essence of fair competition in the Indian market will remain unscathed by the continuation of
these measures. Far from diminishing competition, the imposition of anti-dumping measures serves to prevent
the accrual of unfair advantages through dumping practices. It safeguards the consumers' access to a broad
selection of the subject goods. Thus, anti-dumping duties are not a hindrance but a facilitator of fair-trade
practices.
101. The Authority issued the initiation notification, inviting views from all interested parties including importers,
users and consumers. An Economic Interest Questionnaire was also prescribed to allow various stakeholders,
including the domestic industry, producers/exporters and importers/users/consumers to provide relevant
information concerning the present investigation, including the possible effect of anti-dumping duty on their
operations.
102. The Authority notes that no user of the subject goods has stepped forward to participate before the Authority or
furnished a response to the Economic Interest Questionnaire. Furthermore, no party has presented any evidence
to indicate the adverse effect of the duties in force. This lack of evidence and silence of the stakeholders
underscores the Authority's position and reinforces the necessity of anti-dumping measures to ensure fair trade
practices.
103. The Authority notes that prior to the establishment of the plant by the domestic industry, India was completely
import dependent. The domestic industry has heavily invested in the plant to manufacture the subject goods
and make India self-reliant. According to the domestic industry, if the dumping from the subject countries
continues, the domestic industry will have no option but to permanently shut down its operations.
104. The domestic industry has highlighted that the users will not be adversely impacted by the duties because of
the low impact of the duties on the end product. The domestic industry has submitted the impact of measures
on the end-consumers in the table below. It is noted that the impact of the duties is quite minuscule. Moreover,
the domestic industry has stated that since the subject goods are merely used as a disinfectant to clean the
water, it is not a major cost to it either. The Authority notes that TCCA is used as a disinfectant and for water
treatment. Thus, it is not a major input or raw material for the downstream industry.
+-------------------------------------+------------------+-----------+
| Particulars | Unit | Value |
+=====================================+==================+===========+
| Water Rates in Gujarat | ₹/ 1000 Litres | 56.59 |
+-------------------------------------+------------------+-----------+
| Water Rates in Gujarat | ₹/Litres | 0.057 |
+-------------------------------------+------------------+-----------+
| TCCA Consumption - 1,00,000 litres | Gram | 300 |
+-------------------------------------+------------------+-----------+
| TCCA Rate | ₹/MT | 1,64,996 |
+-------------------------------------+------------------+-----------+
| TCCA Rate | ₹/gram | 0.16 |
+-------------------------------------+------------------+-----------+
| Cost of Water + TCCA - 1,00,000 litres| Gram | 49,55,538 |
+-------------------------------------+------------------+-----------+
| Proposed ADD | ₹/MT | *** |
+-------------------------------------+------------------+-----------+
| ADD | ₹/Gram | *** |
+-------------------------------------+------------------+-----------+
| Cost of TCCA - ADD | *** | *** |
+-------------------------------------+------------------+-----------+
| Percentage impact on end Product | | 0.0008% |
+-------------------------------------+------------------+-----------+
105. The Authority further notes that the imposition of anti-dumping duty will not lead to scarcity of the subject
goods in India. It is noted that anti-dumping duty does not restrict imports but ensures that imports are
available at fair prices. The imposition of duty would, therefore, not affect the availability of the product. In
any case, in addition to the existing capacity the domestic industry has the machinery and infrastructure to
readily install an additional capacity of *** MT. Therefore, the capacity of the domestic industry is more than
the demand in India, thereby ensuring that there remains sufficient supply in the country. Further, the domestic
industry has stated that it has the infrastructure to increase its capacity, in case there is an increase in the Indian
demand.
106. Further, the Authority notes that although the subject imports constitute 100% of the imports into the country,
the technology to manufacture the product is available in the USA and Spain as well. Further, the domestic
industry has claimed that a plant for production of the product has been recently set up in Bangladesh. Thus,
the goods can be imported from Bangladesh, USA and Spain, in case of imposition of duties. Further, the
domestic industry has submitted that Dodhiya Chem Tex Private Limited is planning to set up a plant for the
production of the subject goods. This would ensure healthy competition in the Indian market.
I. MAGNITUDE OF INJURY MARGIN
107. The Authority has determined Non-Injurious Price for the domestic industry on the basis of principles laid
down in the Rules read with Annexure III, as amended. The non-injurious price of the product under
consideration has been determined by adopting the verified information/data relating to the cost of production
for the period of investigation. The non-injurious price has been considered for comparing the landed price
from the subject country for calculating the injury margin. For determining the non-injurious price, the best
utilisation of the raw materials by the domestic industry over the injury period has been considered. The same
treatment has been carried out with the utilities. The best utilisation of production capacity over the injury
period has been considered. It is ensured that no extraordinary or non-recurring expenses are charged to the
cost of production. A reasonable return (pre-tax @ 22%) on average capital employed (i.e. average net fixed
assets plus average working capital) for the product under consideration was allowed as pre-tax profit to arrive
at the non-injurious price as prescribed in Annexure III of the Rules and being followed.
108. The landed price for the cooperative exporters has been determined on the basis of the data furnished by the
exporters. For all the non-cooperative producers/exporters from the subject countries, the Authority has
determined the landed price based on the facts available.
109. Based on the landed price and non-injurious price determined as above, the injury margin for
producers/exporters has been determined by the Authority and the same is provided in the table below:
+------------------------------------------------+--------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+-------------------+----------------------+
| Producer | NIP (USD/MT) | Landed Price (USD/MT) | Injury Margin (USD/MT)| Injury Margin (%) | Injury Margin (Range)|
+================================================+==============+=======================+=======================+===================+======================+
| China | | | | | |
+------------------------------------------------+--------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+-------------------+----------------------+
| Shandong Goldenstar Water Environment | *** | *** | *** | *** | 30-40 |
| Technology Co., Ltd | | | | | |
+------------------------------------------------+--------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+-------------------+----------------------+
| Puyang Cleanway Chemicals Limited | *** | *** | *** | *** | 30-40 |
+------------------------------------------------+--------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+-------------------+----------------------+
| Shandong Daming Science and Technology Co. Ltd | *** | *** | *** | *** | 30-40 |
+------------------------------------------------+--------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+-------------------+----------------------+
| Shandong Lantian Disinfection Technology Co | *** | *** | *** | *** | 40-50 |
+------------------------------------------------+--------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+-------------------+----------------------+
| All Others | *** | *** | *** | *** | 50-60 |
+------------------------------------------------+--------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+-------------------+----------------------+
| Japan | | | | | |
+------------------------------------------------+--------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+-------------------+----------------------+
| Any | *** | *** | *** | *** | 5-15 |
+------------------------------------------------+--------------+-----------------------+-----------------------+-------------------+----------------------+
J. CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATIONS
110. After examining the submissions made by the interested parties and issues raised therein; and considering the
facts available on record, the Authority provisionally concludes that:
i. The application for initiation of the anti-dumping investigation against imports of Trichloro Isocyanuric
Acid from China PR and Japan was filed by Bodal Chemicals Limited. The applicant is the sole producer
of the subject goods and constitutes domestic industry for the purpose of the present investigation
ii. The product under consideration is Trichloro Isocyanuric Acid also referred to as TCCA which is a
chemical compound commonly used as a disinfectant, bleaching agent and water treatment chemical.
iii. There is no change in the scope of the product under consideration as defined in the initiation notification
and there is no need for PCN methodology in the subject investigation.
iv. Since no producer from China PR has filed a request for market economy treatment, China PR has been
considered as a non-market economy and the normal value has been determined based on the price
payable in India which is based on the cost of production of the domestic industry.
v. Considering the normal value and export price determined, the dumping margin for the subject goods
from the China and Japan is positive.
vi. The demand for the subject goods declined in 2020-21 but has gradually increased thereafter.
vii. The imports from the subject countries constitute the entirety of the imports into the country and were the
highest in the period of investigation.
viii. The subject imports were undercutting the prices of the domestic industry.
ix. The landed value of the imports was below the selling price as well as the cost of the domestic industry.
x. The cost of sales of the domestic industry increased during the period of investigation but the prices of
imports have reduced.
xi. The imports have prevented price increases, which otherwise, would have occurred. Thus, the imports
have suppressed the prices of the domestic industry.
xii. As regards the effect of such dumped on the economic parameters of the domestic industry, the following
conclusions were reached:
a. The domestic industry was forced to shut down its operations due to the continuous dumping.
b. The domestic industry has suffered from underutilized capacities throughout the injury period and
sold a very small share of its production in the domestic market.
c. The imports have dominated the market share throughout the injury period.
d. The average inventories of the domestic industry have continuously increased till 2021-22 and have
decreased only during the period of investigation.
e. The domestic industry has suffered from losses, cash losses and negative returns.
f. The domestic industry was forced to export the subject goods in order to avoid inventory
accumulation.
xiii. The domestic industry has suffered injury as a result of the dumped goods from the subject countries. The
injury margin is significant.
xiv. No other factor appears to have caused injury to the domestic industry. It is noted that domestic industry
has suffered material injury as a result of the dumped imports.
xv. The anti-dumping duty is in the interest of the public. This is evident from the following:
a. The domestic industry has made significant investments in the plant to manufacture the subject
goods and make India self-reliant.
b. The impact of the duties on the downstream industry is less than 0.001% and is minuscule.
Moreover, the subject goods are not a major cost to the downstream industry.
c. The imposition of duty would, therefore, not affect the availability of the product. The domestic
industry has the capacity to cater to almost the entire Indian demand and has the infrastructure to
increase its capacity, in case there is an increase in the Indian demand.
d. The goods can be imported from other sources including USA Spain and Bangladesh. Moreover, as
per the domestic industry, Dodhiya Chem Tex Private Limited is planning to set up a plant for the
production of the subject goods.
111. The Authority notes that the investigation was initiated and notified to all interested parties and adequate
opportunity was given to the domestic industry, exporters, importers and other interested parties to provide
positive information on the aspect of dumping, injury and causal link. Having initiated and conducted the
investigation into dumping, injury and causal link in terms of the provisions laid down under the Anti-
Dumping Rules, the Authority is of the view that imposition of provisional duty is required to offset dumping
and injury, pending completion of the investigation. Therefore, the Authority considers it necessary and
recommends the imposition of provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of the subject goods from the subject
countries.
112. Having regard to the lesser duty rule followed by the Authority, the Authority recommends the imposition of
provisional anti-dumping duty equal to the lesser margin of dumping and the margin of injury, so as to remove
the injury to the domestic industry. Accordingly, the Authority recommends imposition of provisional anti-
dumping duty on the imports of the subject goods, originating in or exported from subject countries, from the
date of notification to be issued in this regard by the Central Government, equal to the amount mentioned in
Col. 7 of the duty table appended below.
Duty Table
+--------+----------+----------------------------+-------------------+-------------------+-------------------------------------------+--------+------+----------+
| S. no. | Heading | Description | Country of Origin | Country of Export | Producer | Amount | Unit | Currency |
+========+==========+============================+===================+===================+===========================================+========+======+==========+
| 1 | 29336990 | Trichloro Isocyanuric Acid | China PR | China PR | Shandong Goldenstar Water Environment | 650 | MT | USD |
| | 29336910 | | | | Technology Co., Ltd | | | |
+--------+----------+----------------------------+-------------------+-------------------+-------------------------------------------+--------+------+----------+
| 2 | -do- | -do- | China PR | China PR | Puyang Cleanway Chemicals Limited | 657 | MT | USD |
+--------+----------+----------------------------+-------------------+-------------------+-------------------------------------------+--------+------+----------+
| 3 | -do- | -do- | China PR | China PR | Shandong Daming Science And Technology | 666 | MT | USD |
| | | | | | Co.,Ltd | | | |
+--------+----------+----------------------------+-------------------+-------------------+-------------------------------------------+--------+------+----------+
| 4 | -do- | -do- | China PR | China PR | Shandong Lantian Disinfection Technology | 791 | MT | USD |
| | | | | | Co., Ltd. | | | |
+--------+----------+----------------------------+-------------------+-------------------+-------------------------------------------+--------+------+----------+
| 5 | -do- | -do- | China PR | All countries | Any Producer other than those mentioned | 870 | MT | USD |
| | | | | including China PR| in SN 1 To 6 | | | |
+--------+----------+----------------------------+-------------------+-------------------+-------------------------------------------+--------+------+----------+
| 6 | -do- | -do- | All countries | China PR | Any | 870 | MT | USD |
| | | | other than China | | | | | |
| | | | PR and Japan | | | | | |
+--------+----------+----------------------------+-------------------+-------------------+-------------------------------------------+--------+------+----------+
| 7 | -do- | -do- | Japan | All countries | Any | 170 | MT | USD |
| | | | | including Japan | | | | |
+--------+----------+----------------------------+-------------------+-------------------+-------------------------------------------+--------+------+----------+
| 8 | -do- | -do- | All countries | Japan | Any | 170 | MT | USD |
| | | | other than China | | | | | |
| | | | PR and Japan | | | | | |
+--------+----------+----------------------------+-------------------+-------------------+-------------------------------------------+--------+------+----------+
K. FURTHER PROCEDURE
113. The procedure as mentioned below would be followed subsequent to notifying the preliminary findings:
i. The Authority invites comments on these provisional findings from all interested parties within 30 days from
the publication of these findings, and the same, to the extent considered relevant by the Authority, would be
considered in the final findings.
ii. The Authority would conduct an oral hearing in terms of rule 6(6) to provide an opportunity to the interested
parties to present their views relevant to the subject investigation.
iii. The date of the oral hearing will be published on the DGTR website (dgtr.gov.in).
iv. The Authority would conduct further verification to the extent deemed necessary.
v. The Authority would disclose the essential facts as per the anti-dumping rules before giving its final findings.
ANANT SWARUP, Designated Authority
Login to read full text