Full Text
REGD. No. D. L.-33004/99
The Gazette of India
CG-DL-E-06032026-270703
EXTRAORDINARY
PART I-Section 1
PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY
No. 48] NEW DELHI, THURSDAY, MARCH 5, 2026/PHALGUNA 14, 1947
AMITABH KUMAR, Designated Authority
MINISTRY OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY
(Department of Commerce)
(DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF TRADE REMEDIES)
INITIATION NOTIFICATION
New Delhi, the 5h March 2026
CASE No. AD (SSR)- 15/2025
Subject: Initiation of sunset review investigation of anti-dumping duties imposed on imports of " Natural Mica
Pearl Industrial Pigments excluding Cosmetic Grade " originating in or exported from China PR.
1. F. No. 7/31/2025-DGTR.—Having regards to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, as amended from time to time
(hereinafter also referred to as the "Act") and the Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of
Anti-dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995, as amended from time
to time (hereinafter also referred to as the “Rules” or the "Anti-Dumping Rules"), Sudarshan Chemical
Industries Limited (hereinafter referred to as “applicant” or “domestic industry") has filed an application with
the Designated Authority for initiation of sunset review investigation for continued imposition of anti-dumping
duties on the imports of 'Natural Mica Pearl Industrial Pigments excluding Cosmetic Grade' (hereinafter also
referred to as “subject goods" or "product under consideration) from China PR (hereinafter referred to as the
"subject country").
2. In terms of Section 9A (5) of the Act, the anti-dumping duty imposed shall, unless revoked earlier, cease to
have effect on expiry of five years from the date of such imposition and the Authority is required to review
whether the expiry of duty is likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury. In accordance
with the same, the Authority is required to review, on the basis of a duly substantiated request made by or on
behalf of the domestic industry as to whether the expiry of duty is likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of
dumping and injury.
A. Background of previous investigation.
3. The original anti-dumping investigation was initiated vide notification no. 6/8/2020-DGTR dated 9th May
2020. Thereafter, the Authority recommended anti-dumping duty vide final findings File No. 6/8/2020-DGTR,
dated the 8th June 2021, which was levied vide Notification No. 47/2019-Customs (ADD) dated 26th August,
2021.
4. Thereafter, based on an application filed by the applicant alleging changed circumstances and need for
enhancement of duties, the Designated Authority initiated a mid-term review investigation vide Notification
No. 7/17/2022-DGTR dated 30th September 2022. The Authority after concluding that there were changed
circumstances, recommended the enhancement of duty vide final finding No. 7/17/2022-DGTR dated 27th
September 2023. Subsequently, the Ministry of Finance imposed amendment to the anti-dumping measures
imposed in the original vide notification No.13/2023-Customs (ADD) dated 22nd November 2023.
5. The aforesaid anti-dumping duty is in force till 27th August 2026. Thus, the present application is being filed
for initiation of sunset review investigation, to examine the need for continuation of existing anti-dumping
duty.
B. Product under consideration.
6. The product under consideration in the present investigation is same as defined in the original investigation
which is as follows:
"7. The product under consideration in the present investigation is "Natural Mica based Pearl Industrial
Pigments excluding cosmetic grade".
"8. The product under consideration is chemically titanium dioxide coated micananeous and lustrous
pearlescent pigment and is commercially known in the marketplace as Titanium Dioxide or Iron Oxide
coated Mica Pearl Pigment or Pearl Lustre Pigments or Pearl Pigments. It is extensively used to impart
colours and other effects such described as certain inorganic_pigments/colouring agents giving
lustrous/shinning frosted effects, such pearlescent effects, metallic effects, for coating. inks and plastics
application."
7. The subject goods are classified under Chapter 32 of the Customs Tariff Act under the subheading 320611. In
the mid-term review, it was found that that post imposition of anti-dumping duty, the product under
consideration was also being imported under different HSN codes. The duties were therefore extended to HS
codes 3206 49 90, 3206 19 00, 3204 17 59, 3204 17 39, 3204 17 20, 3204 17 90 and 3207 10 40 also. The
same codes have been considered for the present investigation. The customs classification is only indicative
and is not binding on the scope of the product under consideration
8. The applicant has proposed the following PCN methodology.
+-------------------+-----------------------------------------+
| Type of Pigment | N - Natural mica pigment |
+-------------------+-----------------------------------------+
| Application | A- Automotive |
| | N - Non-automotive. |
+-------------------+-----------------------------------------+
| Colour | S - Silver |
| | G - Gold |
| | I- Iridescent |
| | E - Earth tones (Bronze/ Copper/ Maroon)|
| | O - others |
+-------------------+-----------------------------------------+
| Particle Size (D50) | A - Super fine (below 15) |
| | B- Fine (15-20) |
| | C- Medium (20.1-30) |
| | D-Large (30.1-50) |
| | E - Very large (above 50) |
+-------------------+-----------------------------------------+
9. The interested parties in the subject investigation may provide their comments on the PUC/PCN methodology,
if any, within 15 days from the date of initiation of this investigation.
C. Like article.
10. The applicant has submitted that there are no significant differences in the product produced by the applicant
and those imported from the subject country, and both are like articles. The product produced by the applicant
and those imported from the subject country is comparable in terms of essential product characteristics such as
physical and chemical characteristics, manufacturing process & technology, functions & usage, product
specifications, pricing, distribution & marketing and tariff classification of the goods. Consumers can use and
have been using the two interchangeably. The two are technically and commercially substitutable, and hence,
should be treated as 'like article' under the Rules. The issue of like article has already been examined by the
Authority in the original investigation and the mid-term review investigation as well. The product produced by
the domestic industry is like article to the product under consideration produced and imported from the subject
country.
D. Domestic industry and standing.
11. The application has been filed by Sudarshan Chemical Industries Limited. The applicant is the sole producer of
the product under consideration in India. The applicant has imported the product under consideration from
China. It is seen that the imports of the product under consideration are miniscule in volume when seen in
relation to total production and total imports.
12. Based on the information provided, it is seen that the applicant constitutes 'domestic industry' within the
meaning of Rule 2(b) of the Rules, and the application satisfies the criteria of standing in terms of Rule 5(3) of
the Rules.
E. Subject country.
13. The subject county for the present SSR investigation is China PR.
F. Period of investigation.
14. The applicant had proposed 01 October 2024 31 September 2025 as the period of investigation. The
Authority has considered the period proposed by the applicant for the purpose of the investigation. The injury
investigation period will cover the period of 2022-23, 2023-24, 2024-25 and the period of investigation.
G. Basis of alleged dumping.
Normal value
15. The applicant has cited and relied upon Article 15(a) (i) of China's Accession Protocol and has claimed that
China PR should be treated as a non-market economy and that producers from China PR should be directed to
demonstrate that market economy conditions prevail in the industry with regard to the production and sales of
the product under consideration. Unless the producers from China PR show that such market economy
conditions prevail, their normal value should be determined in accordance with Para 7 and 8 of Annexure-I to
the Anti-Dumping Rules, 1995.
16. The applicant has submitted that data relating to cost and price in market economy third country is not
available. Since large number of PCN are involved export data cannot be relied upon. Therefore, the applicant
has claimed normal value based on price payable in India based on cost of production of the domestic industry.
For the purpose of initiation, the normal value has been determined based on price paid or payable in India with
reasonable adjustments for SGA expenses and profit in India.
17. The interested parties are advised to offer their comments and make duly substantiated claims with regard to
methodology to be adopted for determination of normal value.
Export price
18. The export price of the product under consideration has been determined by considering the CIF price of the
product under consideration as reported in DG Systems data. Adjustments have been claimed for ocean freight,
marine insurance, commission, bank charges, port expenses, handling expense, inland freight, credit costs and
inventory carrying cost.
Dumping margin
19. The normal value and the export price have been compared at the ex-factory level. It is prima facie seen that
the dumping margin is positive. This prima facie establishes that product under consideration is continued to be
dumped in the domestic market of India by the exporters from the subject country.
H. Likelihood of continuation or recurrence of injury and causal link
20. The applicants have provided prima facie evidence with respect to the continued injury suffered by the
domestic industry because of the dumped imports. The price undercutting and price suppression caused by
dumped imports have prevented the domestic industry to recover the full cost and achieve a reasonable rate of
return. The applicants are suffering from financial losses, significant decline in cash profits, and negative return
on capital employed. The applicants have also claimed that there is a likelihood of further injury in the present
investigation and provided information on surplus capacities, capacity expansion, likely suppressing effect of
imports and other information.
21. The information provided by the applicant, prima facie, shows likelihood of continuation of dumping from the
subject country and the consequent injury to the domestic industry in case of cessation of the anti-dumping
duties
I. Initiation of sunset review investigation.
22. On the basis of the duly substantiated application of the applicant, and having satisfied itself on the basis of the
prima facie evidence submitted by the applicant, substantiating the likelihood of continuation/ recurrence of
dumping and injury, and in accordance with Section 9A(5) of the Act read with Rule 23 (1B) of the Rules, the
Authority hereby initiates a sunset review investigation to review the need for continued imposition of the
duties in force in respect of the subject goods, originating in or exported from the subject country and to
examine whether the expiry of such duty is likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury
to the domestic industry.
J. Procedure
23. Principles, as given in Rule 6 of the Rules, will be followed for the present investigation.
K. Submission of information.
24. All the interested parties are required to register themselves on SETU Portal (https:// setu. dgtr. gov. in/).
All communications and submissions from the interested parties shall be uploaded on the SETU portal under
their registered name and corresponding case ID- AD/SSR/28112025/01. It should be ensured that the narrative
part of the submission is in searchable PDF/MS-Word format and data files are in MS-Excel format.
25. The known producers/exporters in the subject country, the government of the subject country through its
embassy in India, and the importers and users in India known to be concerned with the subject goods are being
informed separately to enable them to file all the relevant information in the form and manner prescribed
within the time limit set out below. All such information must be filed in the form and manner as prescribed by
this initiation notification, the Rules, and the applicable trade notices issued by the Authority.
26. Any other interested party may also make its submissions relevant to the investigation in the form and manner
prescribed within the time limit set out below. Any party making any confidential submission before the
Authority is required to make a non-confidential version of the same available to the other parties.
27. The interested parties are further advised to keep a regular watch on the official website of the Directorate
General of Trade Remedies at www.dgtr.gov.in and SETU portal https://setu.dgtr.gov.in/) for any
updated information with respect to this investigation. Interested parties are directed to regularly visit
the website of DGTR www.dgtr.gov.in to stay apprised with the further developments in the subject
investigation and remain informed regarding notices that may be issued from time to time regarding
questionnaire formats, PCN methodology, PCN discussion/meeting schedule, notice of oral hearing,
disclosure, corrigendum, amendment notifications, and other such information.
L. Time limit.
28. Any information relating to the present investigation should be uploaded on the SETU portal
(https://setu.dgtr.gov.in) under their registered name and corresponding case ID- AD/SSR/28112025/01. Both
versions of each submission, the confidential version (CV) and the non-confidential version (NCV) must be
uploaded in the respective designated columns within 37 days from the date on which the nonconfidential
version of the application filed by the domestic industry would be circulated by the Authority or transmitted to
the appropriate diplomatic representative of the exporting country as per Rule 6(4) of the AD Rules, 1995. If no
information is received within the stipulated time limit or the information received is incomplete, the Authority
may record its findings based on the facts available on record and in accordance with the AD Rules, 1995.
29. All the interested parties are hereby advised to intimate their interest (including the nature of interest) in the
instant matter and file their questionnaire responses within the above time limit as stipulated in this notification
through SETU portal only.
30. The 15-day period to file comments on the scope of the PUC/ PCN Methodology shall run concurrently with
the time limit mentioned above in this Initiation Notification.
31. Extension due to Modification of PUC/PCN: An extension of time by 15 days shall be granted if the Authority,
through a subsequent notice, modifies the PUC, and PCN that was not previously proposed or is different from
the initiation notification. This extension of 15 days shall be granted from date of such notification of modified
PUC and PCN. Extension of time by 15 days stated in this paragraph is not applicable in instances where there
is no change in the PUC, and PCN methodology after initiation of investigation. Requests for a further
extension of time, beyond the 15-day extension (if granted), will ordinarily not be considered except in case of
exceptional circumstances, in line with the Rule 6(4) of the AD Rules.
32. Any request for an extension must be submitted by the concerned parties through the SETU portal at least one
day before the original deadline. Requests submitted after this time will not be considered
M. Submission of information on a confidential basis.
33. Where any party to the present investigation makes confidential submissions or provides information on a
confidential basis before the Authority, such party is required to simultaneously submit a non-confidential
version of such information in terms of Rule 7(2) of the Rules and in accordance with the relevant trade notices
issued by the Authority in this regard. Failure to adhere to the above may lead to rejection of the
response/submissions.
34. The parties making any submission (including Appendices/ Annexures attached thereto), before the Authority
including questionnaire responses, are required to file confidential and non-confidential versions separately.
35. Such submissions must be clearly marked as 'confidential' or 'non-confidential' at the top of each page. Any
submission that has been made to the Authority without such markings shall be treated as 'non-confidential'
information by the Authority, and the Authority shall be at liberty to allow other interested parties to inspect
such submissions.
36. The confidential version shall contain all information which is, by nature, confidential, and/or other
information, which the supplier of such information claims as confidential. For the information which is
claimed to be confidential by nature, or the information on which confidentiality is claimed because of other
reasons, the supplier of the information is required to provide a good cause statement along with the supplied
information as to why such information cannot be disclosed.
37. The non-confidential version of the information filed by the interested parties should be a replica of the
confidential version with the confidential information preferably indexed or blanked out (where indexation is
not possible) and such information must be appropriately and adequately summarized depending upon the
information on which confidentiality is claimed.
38. The non-confidential summary must be in sufficient detail to permit a reasonable understanding of the
substance of the information furnished on a confidential basis. However, in exceptional circumstances, the
party submitting the confidential information may indicate that such information is not susceptible to summary,
and a statement of reasons containing a sufficient and adequate explanation as to why such summarization is
not possible, must be provided to the satisfaction of the Authority.
39. The interested parties can offer their comments on the issues of confidentiality within 7 days from the date of
circulation of the non-confidential version of the documents.
40. The Authority may accept or reject the request for confidentiality on examination of the nature of the
information submitted. If the Authority is satisfied that the request for confidentiality is not warranted or if the
supplier of the information is either unwilling to make the information public or to authorize its disclosure in
generalized or summary form, it may disregard such information.
41. Any submission made without a meaningful non-confidential version thereof or a sufficient and adequate cause
statement in terms of Rule 7 of the Rules, and appropriate trade notices issued by the Authority, on the
confidentiality claim shall not be taken on record by the Authority.
N. Inspection of public file.
42. All non-confidential versions of submissions made by any interested parties will be accessible to other
interested parties through their respective login on the SETU portal.
O. Non-cooperation.
43. In case any interested party refuses access to and otherwise does not provide necessary information within a
reasonable period or within the time stipulated by the Authority in this initiation notification, or significantly
impedes the investigation, the Authority may declare such interested party as non-cooperative and record its
findings based on the facts available and make such recommendations to the Central Government as it deems
fit.
AMITABH KUMAR, Designated Authority
Uploaded by Dte. of Printing at Government of India Press, Ring Road, Mayapuri, New Delhi-110064
and Published by the Controller of Publications, Delhi-110054. GORAKHA NATH
YADAVA
Digitally signed by GORAKHA NATH
YADAVA
Date: 2026.03.06 16:08:52 +05'30'
Login to read full text