Full Text
REGD. No. D. L.-33004/99
EXTRAORDINARY
PART I—Section 1
PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY
No. 186] NEW DELHI, THURSDAY, JUNE 25, 2026/ASHADHA 4, 1948
CG-DL-E-07072026-274209
4781 GI/2026 (1)
2 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
A. BACKGROUND OF THE CASE
1. Indian Jute Mills Association (“IJMA”) and AP Mesta Twine Mills Association
(“AJMA”) (hereinafter also referred to as the “applicants”" or “applicant associations”)
have filed an application on behalf of the domestic industry, for initiation of mid-term
review to examine the need to enhance the anti-dumping duty on imports of Jute
products (hereinafter also referred to as the “subject goods” or the “product under
consideration” or the “PUC”) originating in or exported from Bangladesh and Nepal
(hereinafter also referred to as the “subject countries”). The applicants have submitted
that there is a need for enhancement of duty, since the export price of the product under
consideration have declined, without a commensurate change in the cost of the raw
material; and the foreign producers are exporting volumes in excess of their own
capacity, indicating routing of goods produced by other producers.
2. Anti-dumping investigation concerning imports of the product under consideration was
initiated vide notification dated 21st October 2015. Thereafter, the Authority, vide final
findings Notification No. 14/19/2015-DGAD dated 20th October 2016, recommended
the imposition of anti-dumping duty, which was given effect vide Customs Notification
No. 01/2017-Customs (ADD) dated 5th January 2017, as amended by Customs
Notification No. 11/2017-Customs (ADD) dated 3rd April 2017.
3. The Authority subsequently, initiated an anti-circumvention investigation on 20th March
2018 concerning imports of “jute sacking cloth”, which is a penultimate stage product
of “Jute Sacking Bag” from Bangladesh. Vide Notification No. 7/3/2018-DGAD, dated
19th March 2019, the Authority recommended extension of the existing anti-dumping
duty imposed on sacking bags, and the recommendations were implemented vide
Customs Notification No. 24/2019-Customs (ADD) dated 18th June 2019.
3 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
4. Thereafter, a sunset review was initiated on 28th June 2021 and vide final findings
Notification No. 7/9/2021-DGTR dated 30th September 2022, the Authority found a
need for continuation of duties. The Central Government issued Notification No.
33/2022-Customs (ADD) dated 30th December 2022, continuing the imposition of
duties for a further period of five years.
5. The present mid-term review was initiated in accordance with Section 9A of the Act,
read with Rule 23(1A) of the Rules. The Authority is required to review, on the basis of
a duly substantiated request made by or on behalf of any interested parties, as to
whether the change in circumstances warrant modification of existing anti-dumping
duty.
6. In view of the duly substantiated application with prima facie evidence and in
accordance with Section 9A of the Act, read with Rule 23 of the Rules, the Authority
initiated mid-term review investigation vide Notification No.7/11/2024-DGTR dated
30th June 2025.
B. PROCEDURE
7. The procedure described below has been followed with regard to the investigation:
7.1. Initiation
i. The Authority, issued a public notice published in the Gazette of India Extraordinary
vide Notification No. 7/11/2024-DGTR dated 30th June 2025, initiating mid-term
review investigation concerning imports of the subject goods from subject
countries.
ii. The Authority sent a copy of the initiation notification along with questionnaire to
Embassy of the subject countries in India, known producers / exporters from the
subject countries, known importers / users, industry associations and the domestic
industry as per the email addresses made available by the applicants and
requested them to make their views known, in writing, within the prescribed time
limit.
7.2. Circulation of non-confidential version of the application
i. The Authority provided a copy of the non-confidential version of the application to
the Embassies of the subject countries in India, the known producers/exporters,
importers and users in accordance with Rule 6(3) of the Rules.
7.3. Participation by producers / exporters
i. The Authority sent questionnaires to elicit relevant information to the following
known producers/exporters in the subject countries in accordance with Rule 6(4)
of the Rules:
S.N. | Producers/Exporters | S.N. | Producers/Exporters
Bangladesh
1 | Afzal fibers | 2 | Alijan Jute Mills
3 | Alina Jute Mills | 4 | Amin Jute Mills
5 | And Impex | 6 | Asha Jute Industries
7 | Aziz Fibres | 8 | Bagdad Dhaka
4 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
7 | Aziz Fibres | 8 | Bagdad Dhaka
9 | Bogra Jute Mills | 10 | Daulatpur Jute
11 | Delta Jute Mills | 12 | Glory Jute Ltd
13 | Golden Jute Mills | 14 | Hasan Jute Mills
15 | Hazrat Shah Chandrapuri | 16 | Jaman Jute Mills
17 | Janata Jute Mills | 18 | Jatio Jute Mills
19 | Jessone Jute Industries | 20 | Jobaida Karim Jute
21 | Joy Jule Mills | 22 | Jute Textile
23 | Karnafully Jute | 24 | Keraniganj Jute Fibres
25 | Khalishpur Jute | 26 | Laxman Jute Mills
27 | M. M. Jute Fibre | 28 | Mouna Jute Mills
29 | N. Abdul Malek | 30 | Nabrun Jute Mills
31 | Natore Jute Mills | 32 | Nawhata Jute Mills
33 | Northern Jute Mtg | 34 | Nowapara Jute Mills
35 | Partex Jute Mills | 36 | Platinum Jubilee
37 | Poddar Agro Industries | 38 | Pride Jute Mills
39 | Purabi Trading | 40 | R. M. Jute Diversification
41 | Rabeyu Jute Mills | 42 | Rajbari Jute Mills
43 | Ranu Agro Industries | 44 | Reliance Jute Mills
45 | Roman Jute Mills | 46 | Rupali Bangla
47 | S Jute Industries | 48 | Sagar Jute Spinners
49 | Shah Ismail Gazi | 50 | Shidlow Textile
51 | Sonali Ansh Industries | 52 | Star Jute Mills
53 | The Crescent Jute | 54 | Uttara Jute Fibres
Nepal
1 | Ambika | 2 | Trans Trade Service
3 | Asahi Overseas Traders | 4 | General Overseas Agency
5 | Ashok Trading Concern | 6 | Ghorashyar Enterprises
7 | Atlantic Trading Concern | 8 | Golchha Organization
5 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
9 | B.K. International | 10 | Greentex Enterprises
11 | Baba Enterprises | 12 | Gupta Enterprises
13 | Balaju Enterprises | 14 | Him Interntaional (P) Ltd
15 | Bhudeo Khadya Udyog | 16 | Indra Trade Concern
17 | Bijaya Enterprises | 18 | Jalnex Enterprises
19 | Sangam International Enterprises | 20 | Binit Enterprises
21 | Khatu International | 22 | Brighter Industries (P) Ltd
23 | Laxmi Concern | 24 | Chhagan Mall Traders
25 | Madan Lal Chiranjibi Lal | 26 | Mahesh Overseas Enterprises
| Chhyangle Trade Links |
27 | Diamond Nepal Enterprises | 28 | Nepal United Company (P) Ltd
29 | Digo International (P) Ltd | 30 | New Trade Centre
31 | Dugar Brothers & Sons | 32 | Paban Overseas Concern
33 | Dugar Organization | 34 | R & R Enterprises Pvt. Ltd
35 | Exportex Trading | 36 | Rajshree Enterprises
37 | Gaurav Impex | |
ii. Following producers/exporters from the subject countries have filed the
exporter’s questionnaire response or made any submissions:
S.N. | Producers/Exporters | S.N. | Producers/ Exporters
Bangladesh
1 | Afil Jute Weaving Mills Ltd. | 2 | Afzal Fiber Processing Industries
3 | Ahyan Jute Mills Limited | 4 | Alijan Jute Mills Limited
5 | Alina Jute Mills Limited | 6 | A. M. Jute Industries Limited
7 | Arnu Jute Mills Limited | 8 | Asha Jute Industries Limited
9 | Bogra Jute Mills Limited | 10 | Bonanza Jute Composite & Diverse
| | | Factory Ltd.
11 | Chuadanga Jute Mill | 12 | Ecotrade International
13 | Golden Jute Industries Limited | 14 | Hasan Jute & Spinning Mills
| | | Limited
6 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
15 | Hasan Jute Mills Limited | 16 | Hasem Jute Industries Ltd.
17 | Hazrat Shah Chandrapuri Jute | 18 | Jamuna Jute Industries Ltd.
| Mills Ltd. |
19 | Janata Jute Mills Limited | 20 | Lovely Jute Mills Limited
21 | Mirza Jute Mills Ltd. | 22 | Mouna Jute Mills Ltd.
23 | Natore Jute Mills | 24 | Nawhata Jute Mills Limited
25 | Oriental Jute Mills Ltd. | 26 | Poddar Agro Industries
27 | Rahman Jute Mills (Pvt.) Ltd. | 28 | Rahman Jute Spinners (Pvt.) Ltd.
29 | Rajbari Jute Mills Ltd. | 30 | Roman Jute Mills Limited
31 | Sadat Jute Industries Limited | 32 | Sagar Jute Spinning Mills Ltd.
33 | Salim Agro Industries Limited | 34 | Salim Agro Industries Ltd
35 | Shree Pashupatinath Jute Mills | 36 | Shree Raghupati Jute Mills
| Private Limited | Limited
37 | Sidlaw Textiles (Bangladesh) Ltd. | 38 | Sonali Aansh Industries Limited
39 | Super Jute Mills Limited | 40 | Swastik Jute Mills (P) Ltd.
41 | Wahab Jute Mills Ltd. | |
Nepal
39 | Arihant Multi-Fibres Ltd. | 40 | Baba Jute Mills Private Limited
41 | Shree Pashupatinath Jute Mills | 42 | Shree Raghupati Jute Mills Limited
| Private Limited |
43 | Swastik Jute Mills (P) Ltd. | |
iii. Considering the number of responding exporters/producers from the subject
countries, the Authority proposed sampling of producers from Bangladesh, vide
notification dated 2nd January 2026. After receiving comments from the interested
parties, the Authority notified the following sample, vide notification dated 10th
February 2026. The sample was determined on the basis of stratified sampling
methodology and included producers with different quantum of exports to India.
a. Asha Jute Industries Ltd.
b. A. M. Jute Industries Ltd.
7 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
c. Nawhata Jute Mills Ltd.
d. Ranu Agro Industries Ltd.
e. Super Jute Mills Ltd.
f. Bonanza Jute Composite
g. Lovely Jute Mills Ltd.
h. Natore Jute Mills
i. Poddar Agro Industries
j. Salim Agro Industries Ltd
7.4. Participation by importers / users
i. Questionnaires were also sent to the following known importers, users and the
associations of the subject goods in India seeking necessary information in
accordance with Rule 6(4) of the Rules:
S.N. | Importers/Users | S.N. | Importers/Users
1 | Ahmed Exports | 2 | Alamin Enterprise
3 | Ashim kar & Industries P. Ltd. | 4 | B.G.Udyog
5 | Bengal Jute & Bag Co. | 6 | Bhagtara Jute Industries Pvt. Ltd.
7 | Birla Corporation Ltd. | 8 | Chamundi Explosives Pvt. Ltd.
9 | Chiranjilal Gourishanker & | 10 | Clifton Business Pvt. Ltd.
| Company |
11 | G.N.Commercial Company | 12 | Gaba Overseas Pvt. Ltd.
13 | Gyaniram Agarwal & Company | 14 | Industrial Associates
15 | Industrial Associates Jute Pvt. Ltd. | 16 | J.J.Patel and Brothers
8 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
17 | J.K.Sons & Company | 18 | J.K.Sons Jute Company Pvt. Ltd.
19 | K.L.Jute Products Pvt. Ltd. | 20 | Knap International
21 | Kosmic Hitech Motors Pvt. Ltd. | 22 | Mohan Jute Ltd.
23 | Navin International | 24 | Pacific Jute Ltd.
25 | Privi Exports Pvt. Ltd. | 26 | R. Harilal & Company (Calcutta)
27 | Ramsaran & Sons | 28 | Romy Enterprises
29 | Sarvamangla Pratishthan | 30 | Satyam Impex
31 | Satyendra Packaging Pvt. Ltd. | 32 | SDJ International
33 | Srijoni Impex | 34 | Tuhin Kanz & Co.
35 | Unnati Overseas | 36 | Veer International
37 | Vishwatma Commercial Pvt. Ltd. | 38 | Yucon Overseas Pvt. Ltd.
39 | Eskay International | 40 | Golden Floor
41 | Grover International | 42 | Radha Krishna
43 | Rugs Creation | 44 | Nav Durga
45 | Kailash Chand | |
ii. No response has been filed by any importer / user in the present investigation.
7.5. Period of investigation (POI) and injury period
i. The period of investigation (POI) for the purpose of the present review is April
2024 to March 2025 (12 Months). The injury investigation period shall cover the
April 2021 to March 2022, April 2022 to March 2023, April 2023 to March 2024
and the POI. Since the present review investigation is based on changed
circumstances, comparison will also be made with the period of investigation of
the last concluded review investigation, that is, 2020-2021.
7.6. Further procedure
i. The Authority sent economic interest questionnaire to all known known
producers/exporters, importers and users, domestic industry, and concerned
ministry. The following parties have filed a response to the economic interest
questionnaire.
S.N. | Party | S.N. | Party
1 | Domestic industry | 2 | Afil Jute Weaving Mills Ltd.
3 | Afzal Fiber Processing Industries | 4 | Ahyan Jute Mills Limited
5 | Alijan Jute Mills Limited | 6 | Alina Jute Mills Limited
9 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
7 | Arihant Multi-Fibres Ltd. | 8 | Asha Jute Industries
9 | Baba Jute Mills Private Limited | 10 | Bogra Jute Mills Limited
11 | Bonanza Jute Composite & | 12 | Chuadanga Jute Mill
| Diverse Factory Limited |
13 | Ecotrade International | 14 | Golden Jute Industries Limited
15 | Hasan Jute & Spinning Mills | 16 | Hasan Jute Mills Limited
| Limited |
17 | Hasem Jute Industries Ltd. | 18 | Hazrat Shah Chandrapuri Jute
| | | Mills Limited
19 | Jamuna Jute Industries Ltd. | 20 | Janata Jute Mills Limited
21 | Mirza Jute Mills Ltd. | 22 | Mouna Jute Mills Ltd.
23 | Natore Jute Mills | 24 | Nawhata Jute Mills Limited
25 | Oriental Jute Mills Ltd. | 26 | Poddar Agro Industries
27 | Rahman Jute Mills (Pvt.) Ltd. | 28 | Rahman Jute Spinners (Pvt.) Ltd.
29 | Rajbari Jute Mills Ltd. | 30 | Roman Jute Mills Limited
31 | Sadat Jute Industries Limited | 32 | Sagar Jute Spinning Mills Ltd.
33 | Salim Agro Industries Limited | 34 | Salim Agro Industries Limited
35 | Shree Pashupatinath Jute Mills | 36 | Shree Raghupati Jute Mills Limited
| Private Limited |
37 | Sidlaw Textiles (Bangladesh) Ltd. | 38 | Sonali Aansh Industries Limited
39 | Super Jute Mills Limited | 40 | Swastik Jute Mills (P) Ltd.
41 | Wahab Jute Mills Ltd. | |
ii. Written submissions were also filed during the course of the investigation by the
Government of Nepal and Government of Bangladesh.
iii. The Authority invited views from all interested parties on the scope of product
under consideration and PCN methodology. All the interested parties were
requested to make their views known in writing within the time limit prescribed.
Based on the comments received from the other interested parties, the Authority
notified PCN methodology vide notification dated 1st September 2025.
10 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
iv. The information provided by the interested parties on 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, parties providing information on
confidential basis were directed to provide sufficient non-confidential version of
the information filed on confidential basis.
v. The Authority made available non-confidential version of the evidence presented
by various interested parties. A list of all 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.
vi. Request was made to the DG Systems to provide the transaction-wise details of
imports of the subject goods for the past three years, and the period of
investigation, which was received by the Authority. The Authority has relied upon
the data of DG Systems for computation of the volume of imports and its analysis
after due examination of the transactions, and for comparison and reconciliation
with the responses filed by the exporters.
vii. In accordance with Rule 6(6) of the Anti-Dumping Rules, the Authority provided
opportunity to the interested parties to present their views orally in hearing held
on 5th March 2026. The parties, which presented their views in the oral hearing,
were requested to file written submissions of the views expressed orally, followed
by rejoinder submissions.
viii. The Authority, during the course of the investigation, satisfied itself as to the
accuracy of the information supplied by the interested parties, which forms the
basis of the present final findings to the extent possible and verified the
data/documents submitted by all the interested parties to the extent considered
relevant, practicable and necessary, through desk verification.
ix. The non-injurious price (NIP) based on the optimum cost of production and cost
to make & sell the subject goods in India, on the basis of the information
furnished by the domestic industry and having regard to 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.
x. 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 Final Findings.
xi. The Authority circulated the disclosure statement containing all essential facts
under consideration for making the final recommendations to the Central
Government to all interested parties on 17th June 2026. The Authority has
examined all the post- disclosure comments made by the interested parties in
these final findings to the extent relevant. Any submission which was merely a
reproduction of the previous submission, and which had been adequately
examined by the Authority has been repeated for the sake of brevity.
xii. Wherever an interested party has refused access to, or has otherwise not provided
necessary information during the course of the present investigations, or has
significantly impeded the investigation, the Authority has recorded its observation
on the basis of the facts available.
xiii. *** in these final findings represents information furnished by an interested party
on confidential basis, and so considered by the Authority under the Rules.
xiv. The exchange rate adopted by the Authority for the subject investigation is 1 US$
= ₹ 85.43.
C. PRODUCT UNDER CONSIDERATION AND LIKE ARTICLE
C.1. Views of the other interested parties
8. With regard to the scope of product under consideration and like article, the interested
parties have submitted as follows.
i. As per the initiation notification, the scope of product under consideration
includes jute yarn/twine, hessian fabric, sacking bag, and sacking cloth. However,
11 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
pursuant to anti-circumvention investigation, anti-dumping duty was extended to
imports of sacking cloth from Bangladesh only, and not Nepal. The product scope
needs to be clarified for the same.
ii. The PCN methodology, as notified in the sunset review, should be adopted in the
present case as well.
iii. PCNs should be adopted for Jute yarn/twine, Sacking Bags and Hessian Fabric.
iv. Jute twine exported from Nepal has different characteristics and end usage as
compared to the grades considered in the sunset review. These jute twines cannot
be used to make Sacking cloth, sacking bag or Hessian cloth, but is used for
sewing the mouths of jute bags. An additional PCN as “others” must be added to
include jute twine from Nepal.
v. PCNs must be adopted for product type, that is, CRM/CRT, Hessian, Sacking and
Fabric; Yarn type; yarn count and fabric type.
vi. Separate PCNs is required for Sacking Bags made from different counts of Jute
yarn/twine and of different sizes. Such difference in counts and size result in
variation of cost and prices. The domestic industry also sells sacking bags in
different grades based on counts and size.
vii. PCNs for Sacking bags must be adopted based on wrap count, weft count, bag
size, bag weight and normal packing capacity.
viii. Separate PCNs are required for Hessian Fabric based on differences in counts of
wrap and weft, and weight.
C.2. Views of the domestic industry
9. The following submissions have been made by the domestic industry with regard to the
scope of the product under consideration and like article:
i. Since, no significant developments have taken place over the period with regard to
product scope, the scope of product under consideration as notified in the earlier
investigation should be considered.
ii. The Hon’ble CESTAT in M/s Anwar Jute Spinning Mills Ltd. & Ors. v. Union of
India has held that the three different types of product – yarn, fabric and bag,
were to be considered as one product.
iii. The production process for jute yarn, hessian fabric and sacking product is
different, with differences in raw material and cost of production. Accordingly,
the foreign producers should be asked to provide data for the three product types
separately.
iv. While no PCNs were adopted in the original investigation, the PCNs notified in
the sunset review must be finalised in the review as well.
v. PCNs based on CRM/CRT, Hessian, Sacking and Fabric is incomplete as the
product basket of the domestic industry is wider and includes CB and CRX as
well.
vi. PCNs based on yarn types, fabric type, wrap count, weft count, bag size, bag
weight and packing capacity is not warranted as no evidence has been provided to
show cost and price differences.
12 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
C.3. Examination by the Authority
10. The scope of product under consideration was defined in the previous sunset review
investigation as follows:
“6. The present investigation is a sunset review investigation concerning anti-
dumping duties imposed on imports of “jute products” originating in or exported
from Bangladesh and Nepal. Hence, the PUC in the present investigation is also “jute
products” originating in or exported from Bangladesh and Nepal. The product under
investigation as defined in the original investigation is as follows.
“26. The product under consideration in the present investigation is “Jute
Products” comprising of Jute Yarn/twine (multiple folded/cabled and single),
Hessian Fabrics and Jute Sacking bags. At the time of initiation, the
classification was considered under Chapter 53 and 63 of the 1975 Act and
further subclassified under custom heads 5307, 5310 and 6305. It was stated
that the said customs classification is however only indicative and is in no
way binding on the scope of the present investigation. However, it is later
noted from the data filed by producers/exporters from Nepal that the exports
of yarn/twine have also been made by exporters/ producers of the product
from Nepal under Custom heading no. 5607, which covers Twine, Cordage,
Ropes and Cables whether or not Plaited or Braided and whether or not
impregnated, coated, covered or sheathed with rubber and plastics.
27. The Authority notes that Jute is a natural and an eco-friendly fiber, which
comes from the inner bark of plants. The broad usages of jute include
packaging, geotextiles, protection of rooting plants, making of cloths, bags,
wrapping, boot and shoe lining, fuse yarns, aprons, canal and motor linings,
ropes, strings, upholstery foundation, curtains and furnishing fabrics etc.
Further, Jute can also be mixed with wool for fine yarn and fabric
production.
28. Raw jute in the form of bates is processed in jute mills to produce
products like jute yarn/twine, hessian fabric, sacking bags, and other
13 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
products. The manufacturing process of Jute entails different stages such as
selection of jute for a batch, piecing up, softening and lubricating,
conditioning or piling, breaker carding, finisher carding, first drawing,
second drawing, third drawing and spinning.
7. The subject goods are classified under Chapter 53 and 63 of the Customs Tariff Act
and have been further sub-classified under custom heading 53101013, 63051040,
53101012 5307 1010 and 53072000. The said customs classification is, however, only
indicative and is in no way binding on the scope of the present investigation. Further,
this being a sunset review investigation, the scope of the PUC remains the same as it
was in the original investigation.
9. It is also noted that post the issuance of the final findings in the original
investigation, the Authority conducted an anti-circumvention investigation. Through
its final finding dated 19th March 2019. the Authority concluded that the duties
imposed on jute sacking bag was being circumvented through exports of jute sacking
cloth from Bangladesh and consequently through Customs Notification No. 24/2019-
Customs (ADD) anti-dumping duty was also extended on jute sacking cloth imported
from Bangladesh.”
11. The scope of the product under consideration is therefore confirmed as below.
“Jute Products” comprising of Jute Yarn/twine (multiple folded/cabled and single),
Hessian Fabrics and Jute Sacking bags.”
12. It is also noted that post the original investigation, the authority vide anti circumvention
final findings Notification No. 7/3/2018-DGAD, dated 19th March 2019 concluded that
the sacking bag was being circumvented through export of sacking cloth from
Bangladesh. Therefore, sacking cloth imported from Bangladesh have also been
included, keeping in view the Customs Notification No. 24/2019-Customs (ADD) dated
18th June 2019. Information on sacking cloth has been considered in the present
investigation wherever found appropriate by the Authority. It is noted that the duties on
sacking bag gets extended to sacking cloth and the duties on sacking cloth is co-
terminus with sacking bag.
13. The Authority invited comments on the product scope and PCN methodology. The
submissions made by various parties on the scope of PCN were examined in detail. The
Authority found no merit in the arguments presented by the interested parties with
regard to the adoption of PCN methodology for three product types – Sacking Cloth,
Sacking Bag, and Hessian Fabric. The other interested parties have failed to show any
significant differences in cost of production within such product types, based on the
parameters identified. Consequently, no PCN methodology was adopted for these types
of products, as has also been the consistent practice of the Authority in the previous
investigations on subject goods.
14 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
14. As regards jute yarn / twine, the following PCN methodology was notified vide
Notification dated 1st September 2025.
Type of Yarn | 1st Digit for type of yarn | Weight of Yarn | 2nd Digit for weight of yarn
Sacking | 1 | Upto 14 LBS | A
| | More than 14 LBS and upto 20 LBS | B
| | More than 20 LBS and upto 24 LBS | C
| | More than 24 LBS and upto 28 LBS | D
| | More than 28 LBS | E
Hessian | 2 | Upto 8 LBS | A
| | More than 8 LBS and upto 12 LBS | B
| | More than 12 LBS and upto 16 LBS | C
| | More than 16 LBS and upto 20 LBS | D
| | More than 20 LBS and upto 24 LBS | E
| | More than 24 LBS and upto 28 LBS | F
CB | 3 | Upto 8 LBS | A
| | More than 8 LBS and upto 12 LBS | B
| | More than 12 LBS and upto 16 LBS | C
| | More than 16 LBS and upto 20 LBS | D
| | More than 20 LBS and upto 24 LBS | E
| | More than 24 LBS and upto 28 LBS | F
CRT/CRX | 4 | Upto 8 LBS | A
| | More than 8 LBS and upto 12 LBS | B
| | More than 12 LBS and upto 16 LBS | C
| | More than 16 LBS and upto 20 LBS | D
| | More than 20 LBS and upto 24 LBS | E
| | More than 24 LBS and upto 28 LBS | F
CRM | 5 | Upto 8 LBS | A
| | More than 8 LBS and upto 12 LBS | B
| | More than 12 LBS and upto 16 LBS | C
| | More than 16 LBS and upto 20 LBS | D
| | More than 20 LBS and upto 24 LBS | E
| | More than 24 LBS and upto 28 LBS | F
15. As regards the contention that a separate PCN should be made for twine from Nepal,
the parties have not provided any information to show that jute twine from Nepal
results in a different product type with different characteristics. Further, the argument
was also examined in the sunset review, and it was concluded as below.
“167. The exporters from Nepal have stated that the PCN for the yarn exported by
them has been not appropriately framed. The Authority notes that the yarn
produced by the exporters is used for the purpose of sewing the mouths of sacking
bags. Further, it has been admitted by the exporters that the domestic industry
15 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
also uses the produces and sells the same yarn which is used for sewing the
mouth of sacking bags. Therefore, based on the information/documents furnished
by the exporters/producers, the Authority has placed the jute yarn produced by
the exporters from Nepal in the relevant PCN category.”
16. In any case, the interested parties have not shown any difference in the cost of jute
twine compared to the sacking, hessian, CB, CRT/CRX, and CRM. In absence of any
evidence of differences in costs and prices, the Authority does not find merit in the
contention that the twine should be considered separately.
17. The subject goods are classified under Chapter 53 and 63 of the Customs Tariff Act and
have been further sub-classified under Customs heading 53101013, 63051040,
53101012 5307 1010 and 53072000. The said Customs classification is, however, only
indicative and is in no way binding on the scope of the present investigation
18. The Authority notes that there are no significant differences in the product produced by
the applicant domestic producers and the product imported from the subject countries.
The product produced by the applicant domestic producers and imported from the
subject countries are comparable in terms of physical & chemical properties, functions
& uses, product specifications, pricing, distribution & marketing and tariff
classification of the goods. The product produced by the applicant domestic producers
and that imported from the subject countries are being used interchangeably by the
consumers. In view of the same, the product manufactured by the applicant domestic
producers is considered as like article to the product being imported from the subject
countries.
D. DOMESTIC INDUSTRY AND STANDING
D.1. Views of the other interested parties
19. The domestic industry has made the following submissions with regard to domestic
industry and standing.
i. The supporters have not provided information in compliance to Trade Notice
13/2018.
ii. It should be verified that the applicant domestic producers account for at least
25% of the total domestic production of like article.
D.2. Views of the domestic industry
20. The domestic industry has made the following submissions with regard to domestic
industry and standing.
i. The application was filed by IJMA and AP Mesta Twine Mills Association with
the 8 applicant domestic producers.
ii. Application was supported by 11 producers of the product prior to initiation.
16 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
D.3. Examination by the Authority
21. 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”
22. The application has been filed by Indian Jute Mills Association (IJMA). The following
members of the applicant associations have participated as domestic producers and
have filed the requisite information:
i. Bowreah Jute Mills Private Limited
ii. Caledonian Jute & Industries Ltd
iii. Cheviot Company Limited
iv. Gloster Limited
v. Hoogly Infrastructure Private Limited
vi. Ludlow Jute & Specialities Limited
vii. The Naihati Jute Mills Co. Limited
viii. Neelam Jute Co. Limited
23. Post filing of the application, the Authority received support letters from the following
domestic producers:
i. Ambica Jute Mills
ii. Anglo India Jute & Textile Industries Private Limited
iii. Bally Jute Company Limited
iv. Birla Corporation Limited
v. Budge Budge Co. Limited
vi. Calcutta Jute Manufacturing Co. Limited
vii. Jagatdal Jute & Industries Limited
viii. Kamarhatty Co. Limited
ix. Mahadeo Jute & Industries Limited
x. The Hooghly Mills Company Limited
xi. Vijai Shree Private Limited
17 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
24. The other interested parties have contended that the support letters filed by the
supporters may be disregarded on account of non-filing of the relevant information in
terms of Trade Notices 13/2018. However, having regard to trade notice 4/2021 dated
16 June 2021and consistent practice of the Authority, the Authority has considered the
support offered by the other domestic producers. The production of the applicant
domestic producers and the supporters is summarized below.
SN | Particulars | Unit | Volume (MT) | Share in Production
Applicant domestic producers
1 | Bowreah Jute Mills Private Limited | MT | *** | ***
2 | Caledonian Jute & Industries Ltd | MT | *** | ***
3 | Cheviot Company Limited | MT | *** | ***
4 | Gloster Limited | MT | *** | ***
5 | Hoogly Infrastructure Private Limited | MT | *** | ***
6 | Ludlow Jute & Specialities Limited | MT | *** | ***
7 | The Naihati Jute Mills Co. Limited | MT | *** | ***
8 | Neelam Jute Co. Limited | MT | *** | ***
A | Production of applicant producers | MT | 2,74,917 | 28%
B | Production of supporters | | 1,72,860 | 17%
C | Production of other domestic producers | MT | 5,40,233 | 55%
D | Total Indian production | MT | 9,88,010
Source: Statement of Indian production submitted by domestic industry in its injury
annexures. Production of supporters as per support letters filed
25. It is noted that the production of applicant domestic producers constitutes a major
proportion of the total domestic production. Further, as per the information on record,
applicant domestic producers have not imported the product under consideration from
the subject countries during the period of investigation. The applicant domestic
producers are also not related to any importer or exporter of the product under
consideration. In view of the same, the Authority concludes that the applicant domestic
producers constitute domestic industry under Rule 2(b) of the Anti-Dumping Rules.
E. CONFIDENTIALITY
E.1. Views of the other interested parties
26. The interested parties have made the following submissions with regard to
confidentiality:
i. The comments made by applicants were time-barred, since they have been filed
subsequent to the 7 day deadline prescribed in the initiation notification.
18 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
ii. The interested parties have complied with the requirements under Rule 7 of Anti-
Dumping Rules, and Trade Notice No. 10/2018. The claim that excessive
confidentiality has been claimed is without any basis.
iii. The domestic industry has not disclosed information regarding production
process, raw materials, names and addresses of other Indian producers and other
information as required to be disclosed under Trade Notice 10/2018.
iv. The applicants have not provided its list of members and members which have
supported or opposed or remained neutral to the application. The applicant
associations have claimed the minutes of meeting as confidential.
E.2. Views of the domestic industry
27. The domestic industry has made the following submissions with regard to
confidentiality:
i. The applicants had duly sought an extension of time from the Authority for filing
comments on confidentiality regarding the responses received. The applicants
have filed their submissions within the extended timeline. It may be noted that the
applicants have filed submissions with regard to the accuracy and adequacy of
responses, and not just confidentiality.
ii. The applicants have provided sufficient non-confidential summaries of the
information provided on a confidential basis except for those which are not
susceptible to summarization, unlike the responding interested parties who have
resorted to excessive confidential information.
iii. The interested parties have claimed the nature of adjustments to normal value and
export price as confidential, which is excessive.
iv. The exporters/producers have resorted to undue confidentiality by claiming
confidentiality on some of the key information relating to goods produced, related
parties, shareholders, financial statements, list of documents provided,
manufacturing process, exchange rate, costing methodology applied, adjustments
with regard to by-product, raw materials, etc.
v. The responding producers have not disclosed the types of subject goods produced
by them.
E.3. Examination by the Authority
28. The submissions made by the other interested parties and the domestic industry with
regard to confidentiality have been examined as under:
29. The Authority made available the non-confidential version of the information provided
by the various parties to other interested parties as per Rule 6(7) of the Anti-Dumping
Rules. With regard to confidentiality of information submitted by the interested parties,
Rule 7 of the Rules provides as follows:
19 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-rules (2), (3) and (7) of rule 6,
sub-rule (2) of rule 12, 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 perry without specific authorization of the party
providing such information.
(2) The designated authority may require the parties providing information on
confidential basis to furnish non-confidential summary thereof and if, in the
opinion of a party providing such information, such information is not susceptible
of 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 authorize its disclosure in a generalized or summary form, it may disregard
such information.
30. The information provided by the interested parties on a confidential basis was
examined with regards to 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 sufficient nonconfidential version of the information filed on a confidential
basis.
31. The Authority notes that the domestic industry and the other interested parties have
shown good cause for the confidentiality claimed. The information for which disclosure
has been sought by the parties is business proprietary information, the disclosure of
which would be prejudicial to the business interests of the parties.
F. SCOPE AND GROUNDS OF THE PRESENT REVIEW
F.1. Views of the other interested parties
32. The other interested parties have made the following submissions with respect to the
scope of review:
i. The scope of mid-term review cannot be limited to only re-determination of
duties. As per the provisions of Rule 23(1A), the Authority may vary the duty
only if injury is likely to occur, which implies that a comprehensive mid-term
review is required.
20 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
ii. Under Rule 23(1A), while withdrawal of anti-dumping duty is mentioned,
enhancement of duty is not mentioned specifically. Therefore, while in general,
the mid-term review shall examine whether the duty may be withdrawn, duty may
be enhanced only in case of exceptions, that is, if the injury to the domestic
industry gets aggravated compared to the original investigation.
iii. Based on the observations of Supreme Court in Rishiroop Polymers v. Designated
Authority and High Court in Nirma Limited v. Union of India, a mid-term review
requires re-determination of injury margin. However, the injury margin may be
re-determined only if the Authority comes to a conclusion that the domestic
industry has suffered injury.
iv. Rule 23(1A) and Article 11.2 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement do not provide for
re-quantification of injury margin, without undertaking comprehensive injury
examination.
v. The reliance on the case of Aluminium Alloy Road Wheels is misplaced, since in
that case, the domestic industry had only sought re-quantification of duty for
certain select producers / exporters.
vi. The Manual of Operating Practices also notes that the review inquiry should be
limited to seeing whether the conditions which existed at the time of original
imposition of duty have altered to such an extent that there is no longer any
justification for continued imposition of duty.
vii. The scope of present review must remain confined to the original objective of re-
examining the dumping margin and injury margin, and no changes should be
made to the product categories, or duty structure. The request of the domestic
industry to impose the same quantum of duty on all product types cannot be
accepted.
viii. Since the scope of product under consideration includes different products, which
cannot be interchanged, a single rate of duty cannot be imposed for all products.
Even in other investigations, such as alloy steel chisel/ tool and hydraulic rock
breaker in fully assembled condition and rubber chemicals, the Authority has
notified different duties for different products.
ix. Since the applicants have not discharged its obligation to provide positive
information, substantiating the need for review, the review should be terminated,
particularly against Nepal.
x. As held by CEGAT in the case of Kalyani Steel Ltd. v. Designated Authority, the
party requesting for initiation of mid-term review, is required to submit positive
information substantiating the need for review.
xi. The domestic industry has not shown a change in circumstances of lasting nature.
The increase in prices during the period of investigation shows that decline in
prices is not of lasting nature.
xii. The price of Hessian cloth claimed by the applicants appears to be irregular, since
Hessian cloth is a high value product. The price is significantly different than the
prices as per the data of exporters.
xiii. Even as per the information provided by the applicants themselves, the decline in
prices is overstated.
21 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
xiv. The pattern of fluctuations in the import prices shows that prices have increased
in one period, and declined in the next, which indicates normal market variability.
There is no evidence of a persistent downward trend in prices.
xv. The decline in export price may be due to a number of factors such as changes in
global demand, exchange rate fluctuations, freight costs, or competitive market
dynamics, and is not necessarily indicative of dumping.
xvi. Amongst the sampled producers from Bangladesh, while the raw jute prices
declined by 1%, the price of subject goods has increased by 18% compared to the
previous year.
xvii. In support of the claim that raw jute prices have not declined, the applicants have
relied upon raw jute prices in India, and not in Nepal. The prices of raw jute in
Nepal have shown a decline, as evident from Trade Map data for exports of raw
jute from Nepal to India.
xviii. Raw material cost is only one component of cost and prices may decline due to
productivity, economies of scale, contractual obligations, and market competition.
xix. Comparison of prices of subject goods with prices of raw jute would demonstrate
that the prices are not influenced only by raw jute prices.
xx. The domestic industry has admitted in its own application that the prices of
sacking bags and sacking cloth have not declined. In view of the same, sacking
bags and sacking cloth should be excluded from the scope of review.
xxi. The arguments with regard to exports being made beyond installed capacities
have been made only in respect of producers in Bangladesh. No evidence in this
regard has been provided for Nepal.
xxii. The responses filed by the responding producers in the investigation would reveal
that the exports of product under consideration are less than the installed capacity,
contrary to the claims of the domestic industry. In fact, the installed capacity is
almost 50% more than the production capacity of the foreign producers.
F.2. Views of the domestic industry
33. The following submissions have been made by the domestic industry with regard to the
scope of review:
i. The provisions of Rule 23(1A) make it clear that the anti-dumping duty shall be to
the extent necessary to counter dumping causing injury. Since the duties are no
longer effective in countering the dumping, there is a need for re-quantification of
duties.
ii. The application proforma also identifies various factors relevant for initiation of a
mid-term review, and is not limited to the parameters identified by the interested
parties.
iii. The request for a comprehensive review has been made by interested parties for
the first time in their rebuttal submissions in the hearing. No such request was
made in response to the initiation.
iv. The scope of review should be limited, as in the mid-term review concerning
imports of Aluminium Alloy Road Wheels. However, should the Authority find it
22 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
appropriate to conduct a comprehensive review, the relevant information has
already been placed on record.
v. Contrary to arguments of interested parties, a fresh and independent
determination of injury is not necessary in a mid-term review. The Supreme
Court in Rishiroop Polymers v. Designated Authority has held that the findings
recorded regarding existence of injury at the time of original imposition of duty
must be considered to continue to remain valid, unless it is proved to be
otherwise.
vi. The interested parties have relied upon a selective interpretation of Rule 23(1A),
which provides for the duty to be “removed” or “varied”. Thus, the Rules
necessarily encompass modification of duty in any direction.
vii. The Rules mandate the Authority to assess whether the duty continues to be
warranted, which includes examination of whether the current level of duty is
adequate to address dumping and injury.
viii. If the interpretation of the interested parties is accepted, it would imply that the
Authority would be precluded from enhancing duty in the face of intensified
dumping or injury.
ix. The reliance on the decision in case of M/s Nirma Limited by opposing parties is
misplaced, as a review is not intended to be a de novo investigation into injury.
x. Contrary to arguments of the interested parties, there is a difference in
modification of product scope and modification of duty structure. The duty
structure can be modified in a mid-term review, and the same does not change the
product scope.
xi. There has been a decline in the import prices for all products, barring sacking bag
and sacking cloth from Bangladesh.
xii. The decline in import price is not commensurate with a decline in the prices of
raw jute, as evident from the prices of jute published on the website of the Jute
Commissioner, prices published by Jute Bailers Association and the data of the
domestic industry.
xiii. Since the current duties are not aligned with the prevailing export prices, there is
a need for enhancement of duties.
xiv. With the decline in prices, the import volumes have increased across all product
categories, despite no material change in the demand. The increase in imports is
especially pronounced in case of Hessian fabric.
xv. The same trends shall be witnessed if comparison is made with period of
investigation of the previously conducted sunset review.
xvi. The pattern of trade by responding producers reveal sustained decline in export
prices, and shifting trade behaviour in the context of applicable duties.
xvii. The decline in prices, coupled with the increase in imports and price suppression,
imply that the changes are structural in nature, and are not temporary fluctuations.
xviii. The interested parties have relied upon misleading data in their analysis of price
change. The appropriate analysis shall be between the prices in the period of
investigation of the previous sunset review, and the present period of
investigation.
23 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
xix. The reliance by interested parties on the price trends of a subset of exporters is
self-serving and does not reflect industry-wide trends.
xx. Considering the particular market situation in Bangladesh, the limited correlation
drawn by the interested parties cannot be considered as reflecting true market
dynamics.
xxi. The attempt to distinguish prices of jute in Nepal and India is not appropriate, as
producers in Nepal import jute from India and Bangladesh.
xxii. Certain producers in Bangladesh have exported product volumes far exceeding
their capacities.
xxiii. Considering the admission by interested parties that the installed capacities are
50% higher than the production, the increase in exports to India cannot be
explained based on normal production patterns and indicates export orientation
driven by pricing behaviour.
xxiv. Sacking bags and sacking cloth cannot be excluded from the scope of
investigation, as the product under consideration has been consistently defined as
a single product.
F.3. Examination by the Authority
34. The present review was initiated as per Rule 23(1A), which, inter-alia, provides as
follows:
“(1A) The designated authority shall review the need for the continued imposition
of any anti-dumping duty, where warranted, on its own initiative or upon request
by any interested party who submits positive information substantiating the need
for such review, and a reasonable period of time has elapsed since the imposition
of the definitive anti-dumping duty and upon such review, the designated
authority shall recommend to the Central Government for its withdrawal, where
it comes to a conclusion that the injury to the domestic industry is not likely to
continue or recur, if the said anti-dumping duty is removed or varied and is
therefore no longer warranted.”
35. The Authority issued an Office Memorandum dated 18th June 2019 providing for
review, which, inter-alia, provides as follows:
“6. Any interested party, including domestic industry, can seek a review under
rule 23 and 24 of AD and CVD Rules respectively to alter the quantum or form of
existing AD/ CVD duty. The changed circumstances which may warrant a review
may include changes in raw material prices, costs, duty structure, exchange rate
etc. The Authority would consider a fresh POI for such a review and evaluate all
key parameters viz dumping margin or subsidy margin, injury margin and landed
value for this chosen POI. The modified AD/ CVD, including the form, would be
based on this comprehensive re-computation.”
24 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
36. The domestic industry has submitted that the current duties are no longer aligned with
prevailing export prices and are inadequate to address the injurious effects of dumped
imports, and that continuation of the existing duty structure is defeating the remedial
intent of the measure. Some of the interested parties have contended that a review under
Rule 23 may be undertaken only to examine the need for continued imposition of duty,
and not for re-quantification of duty. It is further noted that it has been the consistent
practice of the Authority to vary the duty rates during mid-term review. The Authority
notes that it has conducted reviews for re-quantification of duty under Rule 23 in the
past as well. One of such reviews, concerning imports of Acrylonitrile Butadiene
Rubber (NBR) was challenged before the Supreme Court, and was found consistent
with the provisions of Rule 23 by the Apex Court. Therefore, the present review cannot
be considered to be beyond the provisions of Rule 23. Further, Rule 23(1) mentions that
“any anti-dumping duty imposed under the provision of section 9A of the Act, shall
remain in force, so long as and to the extent necessary, to counteract dumping, which is
causing injury.” The meaning of the word “to the extent” means the extent or degree of
duty. Thus, this rule allows the Authority to vary the degree (quantum) of duty.
37. Further, the Designated Authority has vide Office Memorandum dated 18th June 2019,
issued a guideline stating that any interested party, including the domestic industry,
could seek initiation of a review under Rule 23 to alter the quantum or form of duty.
Therefore, the applicants are justified in proceeding for an application under the
provisions of Rule 23.
38. Some of the interested parties have claimed that the Authority should examine injury to
the domestic industry. The Authority notes that the scope of the mid-term review is
different from original investigations and sunset reviews. In a mid-term review, the
Authority is required to investigate and determine the need for the continued imposition
of an anti-dumping duty in force, where warranted, on its own initiative or upon request
by any interested party which submits positive information substantiating the need for
such a review, after elapse of reasonable period of time since the imposition of the
definitive anti-dumping duty. Further, the Designated Authority is required to determine
whether injury to the domestic industry is not likely to continue or recur, if the anti-
dumping duty in force is removed or varied. If the Authority comes to a conclusion that
the anti-dumping in force is no longer warranted, the Authority shall recommend to the
Central Government for its withdrawal.
39. The Authority has previously noted as follows with regard to the scope of a mid-term
review in 4,4 Diamino Stilbene 2, 2 Disulphonic Acid (DASDA), originating in or
exported from China PR.
“The language of the rules concerning sunset review and midterm review has
been deliberately kept different so as to emphasize more on the cautiousness of
establishing the need for withdrawal. The emphasis on word ''not” likely in Rule
25 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
23 (IA) of AD Rules, signifies a higher and stringent obligation while examining
premature withdrawal of-antidumping duty.”
40. The same is also consistent with the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case
of Rishiroop Polymers v. Designated Authority [2006 (196) E.L.T. 385 (S.C.)], wherein
it was noted as follows.
“35. Otherwise also, we are of the opinion that scope of the review inquiry by the
Designated Authority is limited to the satisfaction as to whether there is
justification for continued imposition of such duty on the information received by
it. By its very nature, the review inquiry would be limited to see as to whether the
conditions which existed at the time of imposition of anti-dumping duty have
altered to such an extent that there is no longer justification for continued
imposition of the duty. The inquiry is limited to the change in the various
parameters like the normal value, export price, dumping margin, fixation of non-
injury price and injury to domestic industry. The said inquiry has to be limited to
the information received with respect to change in the various parameters. The
entire purpose of the review inquiry is not to see whether there is a need for
imposition of anti-dumping duty but to see whether in the absence of such
continuance, dumping would increase and the domestic industry suffer.
36. It is of vital importance to note that in the initial imposition of duty, the
appellant has accepted the position that determination of injury by the
Designated Authority was proper and in conformity with the requirements of
Annexure-II of the Anti-Dumping Rules. The appellant did not challenge the final
finding of the Designated Authority before the Tribunal that parameters
mentioned in para (iv) of Annexure-II had not been considered or satisfied. We
have declined the permission to the appellant to raise this point before us in Civil
Appeal Nos. 773 and 774 of 2001 which were directed against the final findings
recorded by the Designated Authority based on which the Government of India
had imposed the anti-dumping duty for a period of five years. Under Section
9A(1), the said initial imposition of anti-dumping duty is ordinarily contemplated
to be continued and remain in effect for a full period of five years, at the end of
which it would be subject to sunset review, the possible consequence of which
would be the extension of the operation of the period of anti-dumping duty for
another period of five years. This is subject to the provisions of subrule (1) of
Rule 23 of the Anti-Dumping Rules, under which the Designated Authority is
empowered to review the anti-dumping duty imposed from time to time. Having
regard to the scheme of the above mentioned provisions of the statute, once anti-
dumping duty has been initially imposed, it would be ordinarily continued for five
years unless on a review it is found by the Designated Authority that there has
been such a significant change in the facts and circumstances, that it is
considered necessary either to withdraw or modify appropriately the anti-
dumping duty which has been imposed. It is, therefore, clear that unless the
26 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
Designated Authority suo motu or the applicant for review is in a position to
establish clearly that there has been a significant change in the facts and
circumstances relating to each of the basic requirements or conditions precedent
for imposing duty, the finding given by the Designated Authority at the time of
initial imposition of anti-dumping duty must be considered to continue to hold the
field.
37. The final findings recorded by the Designated Authority at the time of initial
imposition of anti-dumping duty on the existence of injury to the domestic
industry must be considered to continue to remain valid, unless it is proved to be
otherwise, either by the Designated Authority in suo motu review or by the
applicant seeking review. In the present case, the review had been initiated by the
Designated Authority. Neither the Designated Authority nor the appellant had
placed any material on record which could possibly displace the findings given by
the Designated Authority at the stage of initial anti-dumping duty. In the absence
of any new material, the Designated Authority is not required to apply afresh all
parameters or criteria enumerated in para (iv) of Annexure-II, which had already
been done at the initial stage of imposition of anti-dumping duty. There is no
material on record to show that there was a change in the parameters or the
criteria relating to the injury which would warrant withdrawal of anti-dumping
duty. Nevertheless, the Designated Authority has still analysed the issue of injury
in detail in the Mid Term Review findings and has considered all the criteria or
parameters enumerated in Annexure-II. There is, therefore, no merit or substance
in the appellant’s contention regarding non-compliance with Annexure-II.”
41. Therefore, the Authority notes that the Authority is not required to conclude existence
of injury, in order to arrive at a conclusion that continued imposition of anti-dumping
duty is necessary. Based on the provisions of Rule 23(1A) and the decision of the
Supreme Court cited above, the Authority is required to examine, if based on factors
brought on record in the review, the injury to the domestic industry is not likely to
continue or recur, if duty is withdrawn. The Authority has examined the same in the
present investigation.
42. Concerning the need for enhancement of duty, the domestic industry has submitted as
under.
a. There has been decline in the export price of subject goods.
b. Decline in export prices not in consonance with the decline of prices of raw jute
which constitutes the major cost of subject goods.
c. Exports are being made by producers beyond their installed capacity indicating
routing of goods produced by other producers.
43. The Authority shall, therefore, examine whether there has been a change in the export
prices, of a lasting nature, such that it affects the determination of normal value, export
price, dumping margin and injury margin. The Authority shall, thereafter, examine the
27 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
need for modification in the current quantum of duty. Further, the Authority shall also
examine if the evidence indicates that the foreign producers have exported volumes in
excess of their capacities.
F.3.1 Decline in the export price of subject goods
44. The Authority has examined the transaction-wise import data for the period of
investigation. It is noted that export prices of the subject goods from the subject
countries have shown a material decline over the injury period. The increase in period
of investigation has not offset the decline faced in the previous periods.
Comparison of prices over the injury period
Product | Unit | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | 2023-24 | 2024-25
Bangladesh
Hessian | ₹/MT | 1,24,991 | 1,16,134 | 89,927 | 1,04,334
Yarn | ₹/MT | 99,614 | 86,923 | 73,415 | 77,643
Sacking bags / cloth | ₹/MT | 1,01,156 | 88,584 | 79,093 | 82,753
Nepal
Hessian | ₹/MT | 1,24,558 | 1,18,552 | 1,07,957 | 1,04,983
Yarn | ₹/MT | 87,947 | 75,495 | 59,814 | 66,341
Sacking bags | ₹/MT | 1,05,543 | 91,434 | 82,462 | 84,802
Source: Prices of product under consideration as per DG Systems data.
45. From the foregoing, it is noted that there has been a sharp decline in the prices of the
subject goods over the injury period. While the Authority agrees with the contention of
the other parties that the prices have increased during the period of investigation as
compared to the previous year, the prices continue to be much lower if compared with
the base year.
46. However, it is noted that since the present case relates to change in circumstances, the
change must be seen from the last investigation, that is, the period of investigation of
the sunset review. Accordingly, the Authority has compared the price of the product
during the present period of investigation with the period of investigation of the
previous sunset review, that is, 2020-21. It is noted that barring sacking, the prices of all
products have declined during this period.
Comparison with prices in period of investigation of sunset review
Product | Unit | 2020-21 (SSR POI) | 2024-25 (MTR POI) | Change
Bangladesh
Hessian | ₹/MT | 1,12,435 | 1,04,334 | -7%
Yarn | ₹/MT | 88,506 | 77,643 | -12%
Sacking bags / cloth | ₹/MT | 78,237 | 82,753 | 6%
28 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
Nepal
Hessian | ₹/MT | 1,21,225 | 1,04,983 | -13%
Yarn | ₹/MT | 75,005 | 66,341 | -12%
Sacking bags | ₹/MT | 85,956 | 84,802 | -1%
Source: Prices of product under consideration as per DG Systems data for present
period of investigation, and prices in 2020-21 as per final findings of sunset review.
47. The interested parties have claimed that the decline in prices is isolated, aberrational
and temporary. However, the Authority does not find any merit in the same. While it is
observed that the prices have registered a slight increase compared to the previous year,
there has undoubtedly been a sustained decline in prices over the period.
48. It is further noted that the decline in prices has resulted in an increase in import
volumes over the period. It is seen that the imports declined in 2021-22, compared to
2020-21, but have increased significantly thereafter.
Comparison of volumes over the injury period
Product | Unit | 2020-21 (SSR POI) | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | 2023-24 | 2024-25
Bangladesh
Hessian | MT | 921 | 208 | 632 | 1,982 | 1,370
Yarn | MT | 61,364 | 32,271 | 50,177 | 60,853 | 56,323
Sacking bags / cloth | MT | 49,627 | 37,214 | 43,842 | 80,980 | 59,829
Imports from Bangladesh | MT | 1,11,912 | 69,693 | 94,652 | 1,43,815 | 1,17,523
Nepal
Hessian | MT | 32,304 | 28,670 | 26,694 | 26,172 | 33,381
Yarn | MT | 6,937 | 3,449 | 3,255 | 3,417 | 2,723
Sacking bags | MT | 27,606 | 10,922 | 14,918 | 16,868 | 12,788
Imports from Nepal | MT | 66,847 | 43,041 | 44,868 | 46,456 | 48,893
Total imports from | MT | 1,78,759 | 1,12,734 | 1,39,520 | 1,90,272 | 1,66,416
subject countries | | | | | |
Source: Volume as per DG Systems data for present injury period, and as per final
findings of sunset review for period of investigation of sunset review.
49. Certain interested parties have claimed that the decline in export price may be due to
factors such as changes in global demand, exchange rate fluctuations, freight costs, or
competitive market dynamics, and is not necessarily indicative of dumping. However,
the interested parties have failed to provide any information or evidence(s) regarding
which of these factors affects export price, and to what extent. Any change in freight
costs would not impact the re-determination of dumping margin, as the same shall be
based on ex-factory prices. As regards global demand, the same is not relevant to the
determination of trend of prices in India. If the prices have declined due to competition
between different producers, the same may nevertheless constitute dumping. Therefore,
29 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
the Authority does not find any merit in the argument that the decline in prices does not
indicate intensified dumping in India.
50. The Authority, therefore, considers that the decline in export prices is not temporary.
Further, such decline in prices has resulted in an increase in imports into India, despite
the duties in force. In view of the above, the Authority holds that there has been a
material decline in export prices of the subject goods from the subject countries, and
that such decline in prices has been of a lasting nature.
F.3.2 Decline in export prices not in consonance with movement in raw jute prices
51. The domestic industry has claimed that the decline in export price is not in line with the
prices of raw jute. Raw jute constitutes the principal raw material for manufacture of
the subject goods. Raw jute in the form of bales is processed in jute mills to produce
jute yarn/twine, hessian fabric, sacking bags and other products, and the manufacturing
process involves multiple stages including carding, drawing and spinning. The
domestic industry has provided information as per website of Jute Commissioner and
the Jute Bailers Association. The other interested parties have disputed the reliance on
such information on the basis that the comparison of export price should be made with
the price of raw jute in the subject countries. The Authority agrees with the submissions
of the other interested parties. The Authority notes that if the decline in export price is
in line with the prices of raw jute in the subject countries, such decline shall be
considered as justified in line with cost decline. However, if the prices of subject goods
have declined in excess of prices of raw jute in the country of export, the decline in
price of subject goods would be considered excessive and inconsistent with changes in
raw material prices.
52. For this purpose, the Authority has considered the price of imports of raw jute from
Bangladesh into India, since India accounts for the largest share of exports of raw jute
from Bangladesh. Further, India is the largest exporter of raw jute to Nepal. In view of
the same, the price of exports of raw jute from India to Nepal have been considered.
The DGCI&S published data shows as under.
Comparison with prices over the injury period
Product | Unit | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | 2023-24 | 2024-25 | Change over period
Bangladesh
Hessian | ₹/MT | 1,24,991 | 1,16,134 | 89,927 | 1,04,334 | -17%
Yarn | ₹/MT | 99,614 | 86,923 | 73,415 | 77,643 | -22%
Sacking bags / cloth | ₹/MT | 1,01,156 | 88,584 | 79,093 | 82,753 | -18%
Price of Raw jute – | ₹/MT | 71,885 | 68,381 | 55,268 | 59,953 | -17%
Export to India | | | | | |
Nepal
Hessian | ₹/MT | 1,24,558 | 1,18,552 | 1,07,957 | 1,04,983 | -16%
Yarn | ₹/MT | 87,947 | 75,495 | 59,814 | 66,341 | -25%
Sacking bags | ₹/MT | 1,05,543 | 91,434 | 82,462 | 84,802 | -20%
Price of Raw jute – | ₹/MT | 69,351 | 59,465 | 51,199 | 59,242 | -15%
Import from India | | | | | |
Source: Prices of product under consideration as per DG Systems data.
Prices of raw jute taken as per DGCI&S published data concerning imports of raw
jute from Bangladesh into India, and exports of raw jute from India to Nepal
53. The Authority notes that the prices of raw jute have also declined over the period. The
price of Hessian from Bangladesh and Nepal, and the price of Sacking from
Bangladesh have declined in tandem. However, the decline in price of yarn from both
the subject countries, and sacking from Nepal is comparatively higher.
30 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
54. The Authority also notes that the present review requires examination of change in
circumstances compared to the investigation period, in which the margins were
previously quantified and duties were continued. Accordingly, the Authority has also
compared the change in prices of raw jute and the prices of subject goods in the period
of investigation compared to period of investigation of the sunset review.
Comparison with prices in period of investigation of sunset review
Product | Unit | 2020-21 (SSR POI) | 2024-25 (MTR POI) | Change
Bangladesh
Hessian | ₹/MT | 1,12,435 | 1,04,334 | -7%
Yarn | ₹/MT | 88,506 | 77,643 | -12%
Sacking bags / cloth | ₹/MT | 78,237 | 82,753 | 6%
Price of Raw jute – | ₹/MT | 62,429 | 59,953 | -4%
Export to India | | | |
Nepal
Hessian | ₹/MT | 1,21,225 | 1,04,983 | -13%
Yarn | ₹/MT | 75,005 | 66,341 | -12%
Sacking bags | ₹/MT | 85,956 | 84,802 | -1%
Price of Raw jute – | ₹/MT | 62,516 | 59,242 | -5%
Import from India | | | |
Source: Prices of product under consideration as per DG Systems data for present
period of investigation, and prices in 2020-21 as per final findings of sunset review.
Prices of raw jute taken as per DGCI&S published data concerning imports of raw
jute from Bangladesh into India, and exports of raw jute from India to Nepal
55. It is noted that barring sacking, the prices of subject goods from subject countries have
declined at a far higher rate than the change in price of raw material. The Authority
31 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
considers that such disproportionate movement between input prices and import price is
significant. In a normal commercial scenario, movement in the price of a principal input
would be expected to have some proportionate relationship with the price movement of
the finished goods. However, where prices of the finished product decline materially
more than the change in the price of principal raw material, the same indicates that
pricing is not driven solely by changes in input cost. Thus, the Authority concludes that
there has been a change in circumstances, as compared to the sunset review, when the
duties were previously quantified.
56. Certain interested parties have claimed that the export price may decline due to
productivity, economies of scale, contractual obligations, and market competition, and
may not be linked to raw material cost. As regards economies of scale and productivity
reducing cost, the Authority notes that no information has been provided to show that
the major producers exporting to India have all undergone such changes, to warrant a
decline in average prices into India. In any case, any decline in cost due to
improvement in productivity or economies of scale are already considered in the
determination of normal value, which is based on the cost of production of the foreign
producers. As regards decline in prices due to contractual obligations and market
competition, the interested parties have failed to show why such decline in prices shall
nevertheless not constitute dumping.
57. The interested parties have claimed that the trends of raw material and prices of subject
goods should be based on their responses. However, the Authority notes that the
reliance on average prices and costs in the subject countries would be more objective in
this regard. Further, in any case, all foreign producers have not provided prices of
subject goods for the period of investigation of the previous sunset review. Further, the
foreign producers have not provided the subject goods in the raw jute prices over the
injury period and the period of investigation of the previous sunset review. Therefore,
the Authority has relied on official import and export data, to arrive at its conclusions in
this regard.
F.3.3 Exports beyond their installed capacity indicating routing of goods
58. The domestic industry has also contended that exports are being made from the subject
countries in volumes exceeding the installed capacity of the producers. The domestic
industry has stated that, based on market intelligence, certain Bangladeshi producers are
exporting products beyond their installed capacities and that producers attracting higher
duty are routing their goods through producers who attract lower duty. The domestic
industry has specifically referred to exporters such as Sidlaw Textiles and Nawhata Jute
Mills, whose installed capacities and export volumes to India, according to the
domestic industry, indicate exports beyond capacity. The Authority has compared the
data submitted by the domestic industry with regard to capacities installed, the
capacities claimed by the responding exporters and the volume of exports by such
exporters. It is noted as below.
32 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
S. | Producer | Capacity | Capacity | Exports to | Total sales
No. | | as per | as per | India – as | by exporter
| | domestic | response | per | – as per
| | industry | (MT) | Response | Response
| | (MT) | | (MT) | (MT)
1 | Wave Jute Textile Mills | 7,339 | NA | NA | NA
| Limited | | | |
2 | Sagar Jute Spinning Mills | 36,500- | *** | *** | ***
| Ltd. | 50,000 | | |
3 | Ahad Jute Spinners Limited | 5,550 | NA | NA | NA
4 | Nawhata Jute Mills Ltd. | 35,000 pcs | *** | *** | ***
5 | Mymensingh Jute Mills | 9,000 | NA | NA | NA
| Ltd. | | | |
6 | Hasan Jute Mills Ltd | 38,325 | *** | *** | ***
7 | Sidlaw Textiles BD Ltd | 22,000 | *** | *** | ***
8 | Janata Jute Mills Ltd | 1,40,000 | *** | *** | ***
Source: Capacity and exports by cooperating foreign producers as per their
responses. Capacity as per domestic industry, provided in application filed by
domestic industry.
59. The Authority, therefore, notes that based on the information collected during the
course of the investigation, the exports by individual producers does not exceed the
capacities of the producers. In view of the same, the Authority concludes that there is
insufficient evidence of routing of goods produced by other producers, to record a
finding on this basis.
G. MISCELLANEOUS SUBMISSIONS
G.1. Views of the other interested parties
60. The following miscellaneous submissions have been made by the other interested
parties.
i. The application did not contain the information with regard to injury, which makes it
deficient for the purpose of initiation of review.
ii. Since the domestic industry did not submit injury information in the application,
it should not be permitted to submit the same later.
iii. The domestic industry has provided information with regard to different export
price of Hessian cloth from Nepal at different places, which is highly misleading.
iv. The applicants claim to have obtained data from DGIC&S, which is unusual,
since DGCI&S does not give data to private parties.
v. The final determination may be made having regard to the age-old bilateral
relationships, responses filed by foreign producers from Nepal, the Anti-Dumping
Agreement, and the Indian Rules.
33 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
vi. The claims of the domestic industry with regard to production capacities in
Bangladesh, the export-oriented nature of operations of foreign producers, and
availability of alternative markets, cannot take precedence over an injury
examination under Rule 11.
vii. The importance of jute sector to the economy of Bangladesh has no relevance to
the investigation.
G.2. Views of the domestic industry
61. The domestic industry has made the following miscellaneous submissions:
i. Exports of subject goods are also important for the economy of Bangladesh, as
evident from the fact that exports of raw jute, conventional jute products and
versatile jute products account for 3.86% of export earnings.
ii. The importance of Indian market to the producers in Bangladesh is evident from
the history of circumvention, and multiple new shipper reviews conducted in the
case. The Government of Bangladesh is taking effective steps to neutralize the
anti-dumping duty imposed by the Government of India, such as allowing Cash
Subsidy and Export Incentives.
iii. The Customs notification issued pursuant to the sunset review inadvertently did
not include sacking cloth. Till the correction of the error through a corrigendum,
the imports of sacking cloth from Bangladesh increased by 211%.
iv. Since duty was imposed on a type-wise basis, it has resulted in a situation where
imports of product subject to lower or nil duties have increased, whereas imports
of products subject to higher duties have reduced. Therefore, a single quantum of
duty should be imposed for the product, as done in other investigations.
v. There is a need to revert to producer-exporter specific duty, as the present
producer-specific duty is being misused by the foreign producers.
vi. The domestic industry has relied on published DGIC&S data, which is available
to all parties, and not on any confidential data, as alleged by opposing parties.
vii. The prices of each product type have been assessed based on the data reported in
a particular HS Code, which can be examined by the Authority. The assertion that
the prices do not correlate with the expectation of the interested parties does not
render the official published data unreliable.
viii. Contrary to arguments of interested parties, the injury information has been
provided on record. The Authority may seek, verify, and consider additional
information as necessary to arrive at a proper determination.
G.3. Examination by the Authority
62. The domestic industry has claimed that duties should not be levied on a product-type
basis, rather one uniform duty should be applied to all product types. The domestic
industry has also requested that the Authority revert to producer and exporter-specific
duty, to avoid exploitation of present duty structure by exporters or traders. The
interested parties contend that the duty structure cannot be reviewed in a mid-term
review. The Authority finds that the form of duty may be changed in a mid-term review.
34 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
In fact, vide Office Memorandum dated 18th June 2019, the Authority has noted that the
form of duty may change in a mid-term review.
“6. Any interested party, including domestic industry, can seek a review under
rule 23 and 24 of AD and CVD Rules respectively to alter the quantum or form of
existing AD/ CVD duty. The changed circumstances which may warrant a review
may include changes in raw material prices, costs, duty structure, exchange rate
etc. The Authority would consider a fresh POI for such a review and evaluate all
key parameters viz dumping margin or subsidy margin, injury margin and landed
value for this chosen POI. The modified AD/ CVD, including the form, would be
based on this comprehensive re-computation.”
63. The Authority shall, however, examine the issue concerning need for modification in
the form of duty, after it arrives at a conclusion that there has been a change in
circumstances of lasting nature, warranting modification of duty.
64. The interested parties have argued that since the domestic industry did not provide
injury information in the application, it should be precluded from submitting the same
subsequently. The Authority notes that the applicants filed the application for initiation
of mid-term review in the form and manner prescribed. The application sought
enhancement of duty and contained information relevant for demonstrating the need for
review. Having duly satisfied itself on the basis of prima facie evidence substantiating
the need for a mid-term review, the Authority initiated the present review. Once a
review has been initiated, it is within the powers of the Authority to call for and take on
record such information, as may be relevant for arriving at the final findings. The
Authority further notes that the injury information was provided by the domestic
industry within the deadline notified, and therefore, the interested parties had ample
opportunity to defend their interests in this regard. Therefore, the Authority finds it
appropriate to rely on the injury information submitted by the domestic industry.
65. The domestic industry has claimed that the subject goods are critical to the economy of
Bangladesh, and the Government of Bangladesh provides subsidizes to neutralize the
duties provided. The domestic industry has also highlighted the steep increase in
imports of sacking cloth during the period when such cloth was exempt from duties.
The Authority, however, notes that subsidies given by Government of subject country
hold limited relevance in examining the merits of the present review. The Authority has,
therefore, not examined the same.
H. DETERMINATION OF NORMAL VALUE, EXPORT PRICE AND DUMPING
MARGIN
H.1 Submission by the other interested parties
66. The other interested parties have made the following submissions.
35 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
i. The Authority has not examined the submissions of the interested parties in
issuance of the final sampling notification, and has not provided reasons for
rejecting the submissions made by interested parties.
ii. Salim Limited has not consented to being considered as a part of the sample. As
per Rule 17(3), selection for sampling shall preferably be made in consultation
and consent of exporters/producers.
iii. If Salim is included in sampling despite bona fide reasons of closure of its
business, then its margins determined will tend to be comparatively higher. This
will affect the weighted average margin for other non-sampled producers.
iv. Despite complete cooperation and exports in significant quantities, Arnu Jute
Mills has been excluded from the sampled producers. No justification has been
provided for exclusion of Arnu Jute Mills.
v. Hasan Jute & Spinning Mills Limited and Hasan Jute Mills Limited, Janata Jute
Mills Limited, Sagar Spinning Mills Limited, Oriental Jute Mills Limited, Sonali
Aansh Industries Limited and Sidlaw Textiles (Bangladesh) Limited have
exported significant quantities, but have not been sampled.
vi. According to Rule 17(3) of the Rules, the DGTR Manual, and the Anti-Dumping
Agreement, sample selected must represent the largest percentage of export
volume. In the present case, even though exports by Arnu Jute Mills is higher
than that of Lovely Jute Mills, the former has been excluded from the sample,
while Lovely Jute Mills has been selected.
vii. In the sunset review, Arnu Jute was selected as a part of the sampled producers.
The same approach of selecting producers based on export volumes should be
considered in the present case as well, since the mid-term review is a continuation
of the same duty framework as the sunset review.
viii. Global investigating authorities such as those in USA and European Union
determine the sample based on largest volume of exports.
ix. In the ongoing countervailing duty investigation, the sample has been proposed
based on volume of exports.
x. In numerous previous investigations, the Authority has determined the sample
having regard to higher export volumes, representativeness in the data of the
exporting country, and availability of complete and reliable data. However, the
same has not been done in the present case.
xi. Exclusion of Arnu from sample would result in the application of the residual or
weighted average duty rate to its exports. This would not reflect the actual export
prices, costs, or dumping margin of Arnu, thereby causing material prejudice to
the producer.
xii. As per Article 6.10 and 6.10.2 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement, individual
margins must be granted to cooperating exporters unless their examination would
be unduly burdensome.
xiii. The allegations by the domestic industry regarding quality of responses are
general in nature, and should not affect the consideration of responses by
cooperating producers.
36 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
xiv. Unless a party refuses the relevant information, or significantly impedes the
investigation, the response filed cannot be rejected.
xv. Since the questionnaire responses do not require that information with regard to
2020-21 be provided, the responses cannot be considered deficient on grounds of
failure to provide such information.
xvi. The allegation of particular market situation cannot be accepted, in the absence of
a direct and demonstratable impact of government intervention of input costs
actually incurred by the producers. The same was also held by Panel in European
Union – Cost Adjustment Methodologies II.
xvii. The domestic industry has not demonstrated that the alleged distortion in prices of
raw jute precludes proper comparison between normal value and export price.
H.2 Submission by the domestic industry
67. The domestic industry has made the following submissions.
i. A particular market situation exists in Bangladesh, owing to Government
regulations, administered support, directed procurement, incentives and
controls affecting raw jute prices. The input prices are, therefore, influenced
by State action rather than independent market forces, which confers cost
advantages to foreign producers.
ii. The jute sector in Bangladesh is regulated through the Jute Act, 2017 and the
National Jute Policy, 2018, which provide for government oversight of
production, procurement, pricing, trade and supply of raw jute and jute goods.
iii. The Jute Act, inter alia, allows the Government of Bangladesh to regulate
trade in jute and jute products, undertake public procurement, adopt price
stabilization measures, fix minimum and maximum prices for different grades,
regulate or prohibit sale or export, direct sales to specific persons, and
determine sales prices between parties.
iv. Budgetary incentives, free high-yield seeds and agriculture benefits are also
provided to farmers for jute cultivation.
v. Producers located in Export Processing Zones and Economic Zones receive
additional concessions, including with regard to electricity tariff, stamp duty,
and VAT exemptions.
vi. The information provided on record reveals that domestic prices of raw jute
are materially lower than export prices.
vii. Under Section 9A(1)(c)(ii) of the Customs Tariff Act, where because of a
particular market situation, domestic sales do not permit proper comparison,
normal value may be determined on an alternative basis. Reliance in this
regard has also been placed on amendments made by European Commission
to its Basic Anti-Dumping Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 (notably via 2017/2321
and 2018/825) to address “significant distortions” and “particular market
situations”.
viii. Since the government control constitutes particular market situation, due to
which domestic prices and costs in Bangladesh do not permit a proper
37 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
comparison, the normal value cannot be determined on the basis of domestic
prices in Bangladesh. The normal value is required to be constructed by
considering undistorted benchmarks, including international prices of raw jute
ix. Market-intelligence and participation by exporter indicate instances where
reported exports exceed installed capacity. Strict verification of capacity and
reconciliation with export volumes for all producers (sampled and
non-sampled) is required in this regard.
x. The response filed by foreign producers should not be accepted, unless they
are found to be complete in all material aspects.
xi. The responses filed lack consistency with observed trade patterns in regard to
capacity, product mix, and pricing. Claims of the exporters are requested to be
verified against verified trade data and the overall market trend profile placed
on record.
xii. In line with global best practice, the Authority should conduct a completeness
test before accepting exporter responses to check whether responses cover all
company operations relevant to the product under consideration, to ensure
credibility of the record.
xiii. Mere Excel files do not constitute sufficient evidence and relevant information
should be called upon for the purpose of verifying the response. Non-
confidential version should also be filed of all such information and evidence
being filed by the exporters
xiv. Weighted-average margin shall be determined having regard to the margins for
the cooperative exporters, and rejection of response of a producer has no
relevance in this regard.
xv. Any request seeking exclusion from the sample or grant of an individual
dumping margin, beyond sample, is inconsistent with the Rules and should be
rejected.
xvi. Once Salim Agro has filed a response, it implies an intention to participate in
the investigation.
xvii. If Salim Agro has ceased operations, or did not intend to participate, the same
should have been brought on record, at appropriate stage, with necessary
evidence.
xviii. Contrary to arguments of the interested parties, there is no infirmity in the
sampling exercise.
xix. As opposed to the argument of interested parties, the sampling methodology
has remained consistent across investigations. The composition of the sample
necessarily varies based on the facts of the case.
xx. The past inclusion of Arnu Jute in the sample does not create any vested right
for the producer to be included in the present investigation.
H.3 Examination by the Authority
68. Under section 9A (1) (c), normal value in relation to an article means:
38 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
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 profit,
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 oi 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.
2. The Authority notes that 38 producers / exporters from Bangladesh and 5 producers
from Nepal have furnished response to the exporter’s questionnaire.
3. As per the provisions of Rule 17, while the Authority shall determine individual
dumping margin in respect of all those producers/exporters who have filed
questionnaire responses; in a situation where a large number of producers/ exporters
from Bangladesh have filed questionnaire responses, the Authority may resort to
sampling by limiting the response to a limited number of producers. The Rules provides
as follows in this regard.
“17(3) The designated authority shall determine an individual margin of dumping
for each known exporter or producer concerned of the article under
investigation:
Provided that in cases where the number of exporters, producers, importers or
types of articles involved are so large as to make such determination
impracticable, it may limit its findings either to a reasonable number of interested
parties or articles by using statistically valid samples based on information
available at the time of selection, or to the largest percentage of the volume of the
exports from the country in question which can reasonably be investigated, and
any selection, of exporters, producers, or types of articles, made under this
proviso shall preferably be made in consultation with and with the consent of the
exporters, producers or importers concerned :
39 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
Provided further that the designated authority shall, determine an individual
margin of dumping for any exporter or producer, though not selected initially,
who submit necessary information in time, except where the number of exporters
or producers are so large that individual examination would be unduly
burdensome and prevent the timely completion of the investigation.”
69. In view of the large number of responses from Bangladesh, the Authority considered
sampling of producers from Bangladesh. The same was proposed vide notification
dated 2nd January 2026. After receiving comments from various parties, the sampled
producers were notified vide notification dated 10th February 2026. The Authority has
adopted a stratified sampling methodology, and selected responding producer exporters
for sample amongst the high, medium and low band of export volumes to India. The
following producers were considered as a part of the sample.
i. A. M. Jute Industries Limited, Bangladesh
ii. Asha Jute Industries Limited, Bangladesh
iii. Bonanza Jute Composite & Diverse Factory Ltd., Bangladesh
iv. Lovely Jute Mills Limited, Bangladesh
v. M/s Natore Jute Mills, Bangladesh
vi. Nawhata Jute Mills Ltd., Bangladesh
vii. M/s Poddar Agro Industries, Bangladesh
viii. Ranu Agro Industries Ltd., Bangladesh
ix. Salim Agro Industries Limited, Bangladesh
x. Super Jute Mills Limited, Bangladesh
70. Salim Agro Industries Limited (“Salim Agro”) initially submitted that it has not
consented to being a part of the sampled producers. The Authority notes that while the
Rules provide that the sample be selected preferably in consultation with and with the
consent of foreign producers, it does not mandate that explicit consent of a producer
must be again taken for selection of the producer within a sample, even if the producer
has already filed a complete response, with the intention of participating before the
Authority. Thereafter, vide letter dated 17th February 2026, Salim Agro withdrew its
response from the investigation. Therefore, the response filed has not been considered
for the purpose of determination.
71. Arnu Jute Mills Limited (“Arnu Jute”) has contended that it should have been
considered as a part of the sample, in line with the findings in the previous sunset
review. Further, Arnu Jute and certain other producers claimed that they should have
been considered as a part of the sample, based on volume of exports. Under Rule 17(3),
the sampled producers may be selected using statistically valid samples based on
information available at the time of selection, or having regard to the largest percentage
of the volume of the exports from the country in question which can reasonably be
investigated. The Authority notes that in the sunset review, the sample was determined
to select exporters with different quantum of exports to India. Arnu Jute formed part of
the sample, based on such criterion. The same criterion was also applied in the original
40 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
investigation. In the present mid-term review as well, the Authority has selected
responding producer exporters for sample amongst the high, medium and low band of
export volumes to India. Such method of sampling, that is, selection of a statistically
valid sample, is permissible under the Rules. Once the Authority has opted to determine
a statistically valid sample, it is not required to examine whether there is a responding
non-sampled producer with a larger export volume than certain producers forming part
of sample. Therefore, whether Arnu Jute has higher or lower export volumes than
individual producers forming part of the sampled producers is not relevant to the
present determination.
72. The Authority does not find merit in the contention of the interested parties that there is
a mandatory obligation to consider voluntary responses filed and allow an individual
dumping margin to all exporters. Rule 17(3) and its proviso make it amply clear that the
Authority may limit examination to certain exporters, where necessary in the interest of
timely completion of the investigation.
73. Certain interested parties have claimed that they shall be prejudiced in case the
response of certain sampled producers are rejected. However, the Authority notes that
the dumping margin and injury margin for the non-sampled cooperative producers has
been determined based on the weighted average margin for sampled producers,
excluding producers found to have de minimis margins, or for whom the margin has
been determined by applying facts available. Therefore, no prejudice shall be caused to
the non-sampled producers, due to rejection of response of sampled producers.
74. Further, the following producers from Nepal have submitted a response to the
exporter’s questionnaire. The response filed by such producers has been considered for
the purpose of determination of dumping margin and injury margin.
i. Arihant Multi-Fibres Ltd., Nepal
ii. Baba Jute Mills Private Limited, Nepal
iii. Shree Pashupatinath Jute Mills Private Limited, Nepal
iv. Shree Raghupati Jute Mills Limited, Nepal
v. Swastik Jute Mills (P) Ltd., Nepal
75. The domestic industry has claimed that a particular market situation exists in
Bangladesh, due to government influence and intervention in the raw jute sector. As a
result, raw jute, which is the principal input, is supplied to producers in the subject
country at prices that are not reflective of fair market conditions. The domestic industry
claims that the Government of Bangladesh, through statutory instruments, policy and
administrative measures, has influenced and artificially lowered the prices of raw jute.
The domestic industry has relied upon the Jute Act, 2017 and the National Jute Policy,
2018 in support of its arguments. However, the Authority notes that even if assuming
the raw jute prices are distorted resulting in a particular market situation, the arguments
of the domestic industry do not explain why such particular market situation prevents
proper comparison between normal value and export price. Further, a parallel anti-
41 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
subsidy investigation is ongoing with regard to the same product, wherein such factors
can be adequately addressed.
76. The Authority notes that as per the provisions of Section 9A(1)(c) of the Customs Tariff
Act, 1975, normal value is required to be determined based on the comparable price, in
the ordinary course of trade, of the like article, when destined for consumption in the
exporting country. However, when because of a particular market situation, such sales
do not permit a proper comparison, the normal value may be determined on alternative
basis. In this regard, the Panel in Australia – Anti-Dumping Measures on A4 Copy
Paper (WT/DS529/R) has also observed as under.
“7.73. Where a "particular market situation" is found to exist, the investigating
authority must examine whether "a proper comparison" of the domestic and the
export price is permitted or not. We consider that the "proper comparison"
language calls for an assessment in respect of the comparison of domestic and
export prices.
7.74. The ordinary meaning of the term "proper" is "suitable for a specified or
implicit purpose or requirement; appropriate to the circumstances or conditions;
… apt, fitting; correct, right". The term "comparison" can be understood as "the
action, or an act, of comparing, or noting the similarities and differences of two
or more things". The function of the "permit a proper comparison" test is to
determine whether the domestic price can or cannot be used as a basis for
comparison with the export price to identify the existence of dumping. It is
implied here in Article 2.2 that the words "a proper comparison" refer to the
comparison between the domestic price and the export price. Thus, the purpose of
an investigating authority's examination under the second clause of Article 2.2 of
the Anti-Dumping Agreement is to determine whether domestic sales of the like
product in the ordinary course of trade do not permit a proper comparison
between the export price and the domestic sales price because of the particular
market situation or the low volume.
7.75. While the proper comparison in Article 2.2 refers to the comparison
between the domestic and export prices, a purely numerical comparison between
the two prices may not reveal anything about whether the domestic price can be
properly compared with the export price. Rather, it is necessary to conduct a
qualitative comparison of the domestic and export prices. The phrase "because of
the particular market situation" makes clear that the qualitative assessment of
whether the domestic and export prices can be properly compared should focus
on how the particular market situation affects that comparison. We therefore
consider that the "proper comparison" language calls for an assessment of the
relative effect of the particular market situation on domestic and export prices.
We understand that, in certain circumstances, as a result of this assessment, the
42 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
investigating authority may conclude that the particular market situation has no
effect on the export prices.
7.76. Turning to the assessment of whether "a proper comparison" is not
permitted because of the particular market situation, we note that the focus of the
analysis is on whether the effect of the particular market situation is such that a
proper comparison between domestic sales prices and export prices under
examination is not permitted. In other words, the investigating authority must
examine the domestic sales in order to determine whether a proper comparison
between the two prices is permitted in spite of the effect of the particular market
situation. The point is to determine if there is a comparable domestic price (i.e. if
there is "the comparable price, in the ordinary course of trade, for the like
product when destined for consumption in the exporting country" in the sense of
GATT 1994 Article VI:1(b) and Article 2.1 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement). That
determination is fact-specific and should be made on a case-by-case basis by the
investigating authority assessing the effect of particular market situation on the
domestic price in relation to the effect on the export price, if any. This relative
assessment is necessary because, as we explain in the following subsection, while
a particular market situation may have an effect on both domestic and export
prices, it does not follow that the impact on domestic and export prices will be the
same. If the investigating authority finds that because of a particular market
situation a proper comparison of the domestic price and the export price is not
permitted, it is required to give a reasoned and adequate explanation of its
conclusion.”
77. The Authority notes that if raw material prices are lower, as claimed by the domestic
industry, it will result in lower selling price of the final product generally, irrespective
of whether such final product is meant for domestic market or export market, unless
proved otherwise. While it is not denied that there may be cases where the raw material
prices disproportionately affect the domestic and export prices, the same has not been
demonstrated to be the case in the present situation. In view of the same, the Authority
has not found it appropriate to conclude that a particular market situation prevented
proper comparison of normal value with export price in Bangladesh, warranting
construction of normal value.
78. The normal value and export prices for all the producers/exporters from the subject
countries have been determined as below:
Determination of Normal Value and Export Price
H.3.1. Normal value for Bangladesh
Normal value for M/s A. M. Jute Industries Limited
43 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
79. During the period of investigation, M/s A. M. Jute Industries Limited (“A. M. Jute”)
has sold ***MT of goods in domestic market directly to unrelated customers. A. M. Jute
has exported ***MT of product under consideration to India during the period of
investigation. The Authority notes that the domestic sales are in sufficient volumes
when compared with exports to India.
80. To determine the normal value, the Authority has conducted ordinary course of trade
test to determine profit by making domestic sales transactions with reference to the cost
of production of the subject goods, on a PCN wise basis. In case of PCNs, with where
more than 80% of sales were made at profits, the normal value has been determined
based on the ex-factory selling price. Where less than 80% sales were made at profits,
the normal value has been determined based on selling price of profitable sales. A. M.
Jute has not claimed any price adjustments from its domestic sales. For PCNs where
negligible volume of sales were made at profits, or where the PCN has not been sold in
the home market, the normal value has been determined based on cost of production,
plus a reasonable addition towards selling, general and administrative expenses and
profits.
81. The product type-wise and weighted average normal value at ex-factory level has been
calculated as mentioned in the dumping margin table below
Normal value for M/s Asha Jute Industries Limited
82. During the period of investigation, M/s Asha Jute Industries Limited (“Asha Jute”) has
not sold goods in domestic market. In the absence of domestic sales, the Authority has
considered the cost of production of the producer as the basis for the purpose of
determining the normal value.
83. The Authority determined the normal value based on cost of production with reasonable
additions towards selling, general and administration expenses and profits. The product
type-wise and weighted average normal value so determined has been mentioned in the
dumping margin table.
Normal value for M/s Bonanza Jute Composite & Diverse Factory Ltd.
84. During the period of investigation, M/s Bonanza Jute Composite & Diverse Factory
Ltd. (“Bonanza Jute”) has sold ***MT of goods in domestic market directly to unrelated
customers. Bonanza Jute has exported ***MT of product under consideration to India
during the period of investigation. The Authority notes that the domestic sales are in
sufficient volumes when compared with exports to India.
85. To determine the normal value, the Authority has conducted ordinary course of trade
test to determine profit by making domestic sales transactions with reference to the cost
of production of the subject goods, on a PCN wise basis. In case of PCNs, with where
44 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
more than 80% of sales were made at profits, the normal value has been determined
based on the ex-factory selling price. Where less than 80% sales were made at profits,
the normal value has been determined based on selling price of profitable sales.
Bonanza Jute has not claimed any price adjustments from its domestic sales. For PCNs
where negligible volume of sales were made at profits, or where the PCN has not been
sold in the home market, the normal value has been determined based on cost of
production, plus a reasonable addition towards selling, general and administrative
expenses and profits.
Normal value for M/s Lovely Jute Mills Limited
86. During the period of investigation, M/s Lovely Jute Mills Limited (“Lovely Jute”) has
sold ***MT of goods in domestic market directly to unrelated customers. Lovely Jute
has exported ***MT of product under consideration to India during the period of
investigation. The Authority notes that the domestic sales are in sufficient volumes
when compared with exports to India.
87. To determine the normal value, the Authority has conducted ordinary course of trade
test to determine profit by making domestic sales transactions with reference to the cost
of production of the subject goods, on a PCN wise basis. In case of PCNs, with where
more than 80% of sales were made at profits, the normal value has been determined
based on the ex-factory selling price. Where less than 80% sales were made at profits,
the normal value has been determined based on selling price of profitable sales. Lovely
Jute has not claimed any price adjustments from its domestic sales. For PCNs where
negligible volume of sales were made at profits, or where the PCN has not been sold in
the home market, the normal value has been determined based on cost of production,
plus a reasonable addition towards selling, general and administrative expenses and
profits.
88. The product type-wise and weighted average normal value at ex-factory level has been
calculated as mentioned in the dumping margin table below
Normal value for M/s Natore Jute Mills
89. During the period of investigation, M/s Natore Jute Mills (“Natore”) has sold ***MT of
goods in domestic market directly to unrelated customers. Natore has exported ***MT
of product under consideration to India during the period of investigation. The
Authority notes that the domestic sales are in sufficient volumes when compared with
exports to India.
90. To determine the normal value, the Authority has conducted ordinary course of trade
test to determine profit by making domestic sales transactions with reference to the cost
of production of the subject goods, on a PCN wise basis. In case of PCNs, with where
more than 80% of sales were made at profits, the normal value has been determined
45 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
based on the ex-factory selling price. Where less than 80% sales were made at profits,
the normal value has been determined based on selling price of profitable sales. Natore
has claimed price adjustments on account of inland transportation from its domestic
sales and the same have been allowed by the Authority after verification. For PCNs
where negligible volume of sales were made at profits, or where the PCN has not been
sold in the home market, the normal value has been determined based on cost of
production, plus a reasonable addition towards selling, general and administrative
expenses and profits.
91. The product type-wise and weighted average normal value at ex-factory level has been
calculated as mentioned in the dumping margin table below
Normal value for Nawhata Jute Mills Ltd.
92. During the period of investigation, Nawhata Jute Mills Ltd. (“Nawhata”) has sold
***MT of sacking cloth in domestic market directly to unrelated customers. Nawhata
has exported ***MT of product under consideration to India during the period of
investigation. The Authority notes that the domestic sales are in sufficient volumes
when compared with exports to India.
93. To determine the normal value, the Authority has conducted ordinary course of trade
test to determine profit by making domestic sales transactions with reference to the cost
of production of the subject goods, on a PCN wise basis. In case of PCNs, with where
more than 80% of sales were made at profits, the normal value has been determined
based on the ex-factory selling price. Where less than 80% sales were made at profits,
the normal value has been determined based on selling price of profitable sales.
Nawhata has not claimed any price adjustments from its domestic sales. For PCNs
where negligible volume of sales were made at profits, or where the PCN has not been
sold in the home market, the normal value has been determined based on cost of
production, plus a reasonable addition towards selling, general and administrative
expenses and profits.
94. The product type-wise and weighted average normal value at ex-factory level has been
calculated as mentioned in the dumping margin table below
Normal value for M/s Poddar Agro Industries
95. During the period of investigation, Poddar Agro Industires (“Poddar”) has sold ***MT
of goods in domestic market directly to unrelated customers. Poddar has exported
***MT of product under consideration to India during the period of investigation. The
Authority notes that the domestic sales are in sufficient volumes when compared with
exports to India.
46 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
96. To determine the normal value, the Authority has conducted ordinary course of trade
test to determine profit by making domestic sales transactions with reference to the cost
of production of the subject goods, on a PCN wise basis. In case of PCNs, with where
more than 80% of sales were made at profits, the normal value has been determined
based on the ex-factory selling price. Where less than 80% sales were made at profits,
the normal value has been determined based on selling price of profitable sales. Poddar
has not claimed any price adjustments from its domestic sales. For PCNs where
negligible volume of sales were made at profits, or where the PCN has not been sold in
the home market, the normal value has been determined based on cost of production,
plus a reasonable addition towards selling, general and administrative expenses and
profits.
97. The product type-wise and weighted average normal value at ex-factory level has been
calculated as mentioned in the dumping margin table below
Normal value for Ranu Agro Industries Ltd.
98. It is noted from the response that during the period of investigation, Ranu Agro
Industries Ltd. (“Ranu Agro”) has sold ***MT of goods in domestic market directly to
unrelated customers. Ranu Agro has exported *** MT of product under consideration to
India during the period of investigation. The Authority notes that the domestic sales are
in sufficient volumes when compared with exports to India.
99. To determine the normal value, the Authority has conducted ordinary course of trade
test to determine profit by making domestic sales transactions with reference to the cost
of production of the subject goods, on a PCN wise basis. In case of PCNs, with where
more than 80% of sales were made at profits, the normal value has been determined
based on the ex-factory selling price. Where less than 80% sales were made at profits,
the normal value has been determined based on selling price of profitable sales. Ranu
Agro has not claimed any price adjustments from its domestic sales. For PCNs where
negligible volume of sales were made at profits, or where the PCN has not been sold in
the home market, the normal value has been determined based on cost of production,
plus a reasonable addition towards selling, general and administrative expenses and
profits.
100. The product type-wise and weighted average normal value at ex-factory level has been
calculated as mentioned in the dumping margin table below
Normal value for Super Jute Mills Limited
101. It is noted from the response that during the period of investigation, Super Jute Mills
Limited (“Super Jute”) has sold ***MT of goods in domestic market directly to
unrelated customers. Super Jute has exported ***MT of product under consideration to
47 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
India during the period of investigation. The Authority notes that the domestic sales are
in sufficient volumes when compared with exports to India.
102. To determine the normal value, the Authority has conducted ordinary course of trade
test to determine profit by making domestic sales transactions with reference to the cost
of production of the subject goods, on a PCN wise basis. In case of PCNs, with where
more than 80% of sales were made at profits, the normal value has been determined
based on the ex-factory selling price. Where less than 80% sales were made at profits,
the normal value has been determined based on selling price of profitable sales. Super
Jute has claimed price adjustments on account of inland transportation and packing cost
from its domestic sales and the same have been allowed by the Authority after
verification. For PCNs where negligible volume of sales were made at profits, or where
the PCN has not been sold in the home market, the normal value has been determined
based on cost of production, plus a reasonable addition towards selling, general and
administrative expenses and profits.
103. The product-type wise and weighted average normal value at ex-factory level has been
calculated as mentioned in the dumping margin table below
Normal value for all other producers / exporters from Bangladesh
104. The dumping margin for all other cooperative non-sampled producers has been
determined based on the weighted average margin for the cooperative sampled
producers. The normal value for all other producers and exporters, that have not
participated in the present investigation, has been determined as per facts available. The
same has been mentioned in the dumping margin table.
H.3.2. Export price for Bangladesh
Export price for A. M. Jute Industries Limited
105. During the period of investigation, A. M. Jute has sold ***MT of Jute Yarn and *** MT
of Hessian Cloth directly to unrelated customers in India.
106. The export price has been determined based on the price of sale charged by the exporter
for sales to unrelated customers in India. A. M. Jute has claimed adjustments on
account of ocean freight & port expenses and inland transportation and the same have
been allowed by the Authority after verification. The Authority has calculated PCN-
wise export price for exports of goods produced by A. M. Jute, and compared the same
with the normal value for the respective PCN. A weighted average dumping margin was
determined accordingly. The net export price and dumping margin so determined has
been mentioned in the table below.
Export price for Asha Jute Industries Limited
107. During the period of investigation, Asha Jute has exported *** MT of Jute Yarn and ***
MT of Sacking cloth directly to unrelated customers in India.
48 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
108. The export price has been determined based on the price of sale charged by the exporter
for sales to unrelated customers in India. Asha Jute has claimed adjustments on account
of inland transportation, port and other related expenses, packing cost and the same
have been allowed by the Authority after verification. The Authority has calculated
PCN-wise export price for exports of goods produced by Asha Jute and compared the
same with the normal value for the respective PCN. A weighted average dumping
margin was determined accordingly. The net export price and dumping margin so
determined has been mentioned in the table below.
Export price for Bonanza Jute Composite & Diverse Factory Ltd.
109. During the period of investigation, Bonanza Jute has sold *** MT of Jute Yarn through
unrelated trader and *** MT of Sacking bags directly to unrelated customers in India.
Bonanza Jute Unrelated customers in India
Bonanza Jute [Monem Jute Marketing] Unrelated customers in India
Bonanza Jute [Vertex International Limited] Unrelated customers in India
Bonanza Jute [Bangla Pat Diversified Limited] Unrelated customers in India
110. The unrelated traders who have exported goods to India sourced from Bonanza Jute
have not cooperated before the Authority. It is noted that the exports through traders
account for entirety of the exports of jute yarn. In the absence of cooperation by the
unrelated traders, the export price and landed price to India cannot be accurately
determined. Therefore, in the absence of response by traders forming part of the
channel of distribution, the Authority finds that an individual dumping margin and
injury margin cannot be allowed to the producer insofar as jute yarn is concerned.
111. As regards the exports of sacking bags, the export price has been determined based on
the price of sale charged by the producer for sales to unrelated customers in India.
Bonanza Jute has claimed adjustments on account of inland transportation and port and
other related expenses and the same have been allowed by the Authority after
verification. The Authority has calculated PCN-wise export price for exports of goods
produced by Bonanza Jute and compared the same with the normal value for the
respective PCN. A weighted average dumping margin was determined accordingly. The
net export price and dumping margin so determined has been mentioned in the table
below.
Export price for Lovely Jute Mills Limited
112. During the period of investigation, Lovely Jute has sold *** MT of Jute Sacking bags
directly to unrelated customers in India.
49 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
113. The export price has been determined based on the price of sale charged by the
producer for sales to unrelated customers in India. Lovely Jute has claimed adjustments
on account of freight, inland transportation, port expenses and packing expenses and
the same have been allowed by the Authority after verification. The Authority has
calculated PCN-wise export price for exports of goods produced by Lovely Jute and
compared the same with the normal value for the respective PCN. A weighted average
dumping margin was determined accordingly. The net export price and dumping margin
so determined has been mentioned in the table below.
Export price for M/s Natore Jute Mills
114. During the period of investigation, M/s Natore Jute Mills (herein after referred to as
‘Natore’)has sold *** MT of Sacking cloth and *** MT of Jute Yarn directly to unrelated
customers in India.
115. The export price has been determined based on the price of sale charged by the
producer for sales to unrelated customers in India. Natore has claimed adjustments on
account of freight, inland transportation, port expenses and C&F bill and commission
charges and the same have been allowed by the Authority after verification. The
Authority has calculated PCN-wise export price for exports of goods produced by
Natore and compared the same with the normal value for the respective PCN. A
weighted average dumping margin was determined accordingly. The net export price
and dumping margin so determined has been mentioned in the table below.
Export price for Nawhata Jute Mills Ltd.
116. During the period of investigation, Nawhata has sold *** MT of Sacking Cloth directly
to unrelated customers in India.
117. The export price has been determined based on the price of sale charged by the
producer for sales to unrelated customers in India. Nawhata has claimed adjustments on
account of swift charge/foreign bank charge, C&F expenses, and commission and the
same have been allowed by the Authority after verification. The Authority has
calculated PCN-wise export price for exports of goods produced by Nwahata and
compared the same with the normal value for the respective PCN. A weighted average
dumping margin was determined accordingly. The net export price and dumping margin
so determined has been mentioned in the table below.
Export price for M/s Poddar Agro Industries
118. During the period of investigation, Poddar has sold *** MT of Sacking bags, *** MT of
Sacking cloth and *** MT of Jute Yarn directly to unrelated customers in India.
50 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
119. The export price has been determined based on the price of sale charged by the
producer for sales to unrelated customers in India. Poddar has claimed adjustments on
account of swift bank/foreign charges, freight charges, inland transportation, port
expenses and C&F commission and the same have been allowed by the Authority after
verification. The Authority has calculated PCN-wise export price for exports of goods
produced by Poddar and compared the same with the normal value for the respective
PCN. A weighted average dumping margin was determined accordingly. The net export
price and dumping margin so determined has been mentioned in the table below.
Export price for M/s Ranu Agro Industries Ltd.
120. During the period of investigation, Ranu Agro has sold *** MT of Sacking Bags and ***
MT of Sacking Cloth directly to unrelated customers in India.
121. The export price has been determined based on the price of sale charged by the
producer for sales to unrelated customers in India. Ranu Agro has claimed adjustments
on account of swift charge/foreign bank charge, freight charges, inland transportation,
port charges and other expenses, C&F Bill, and commission and the same have been
allowed by the Authority after verification. The Authority has calculated PCN-wise
export price for exports of goods produced by Ranu Agro and compared the same with
the normal value for the respective PCN. A weighted average dumping margin was
determined accordingly. The net export price and dumping margin so determined has
been mentioned in the table below.
Export price for M/s Super Jute Mills Limited
122. During the period of investigation, Super Jute has sold ***MT of Jute Yarn, *** MT of
Sacking Cloth and *** MT of Sacking bags directly to unrelated customers in India.
123. The export price has been determined based on the price of sale charged by the
producer for sales to unrelated customers in India. Super Jute has claimed adjustments
on account of inland transportation, port and other related expenses, packing cost and
other deductions and the same have been allowed by the Authority after verification.
The Authority has calculated PCN-wise export price for exports of goods produced by
Super Jute and compared the same with the normal value for the respective PCN. A
weighted average dumping margin was determined accordingly. The net export price
and dumping margin so determined has been mentioned in the table below.
Export price for other producers / exporters in Bangladesh
124. The Authority has determined the net export price for non-sampled cooperating
producers/ exporters from Bangladesh on the basis of weighted average net export price
of the sampled producers from Bangladesh. The export price for all other non-
51 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
cooperating producers and exporters of Bangladesh has been determined based on facts
available and the same is mentioned in the dumping margin table below.
H.3.3. Normal value for Nepal
Normal value for Arihant Multi-Fibres Ltd. and Shree Raghupati Jute Mills Limited
125. During the period of investigation, Arihant Multi-Fibres Ltd. (“Arihant”) has sold ***
MT of goods in domestic market directly to unrelated customers. Arihant has exported
*** MT of product under consideration to India during the period of investigation. Its
related producer, Shree Raghupati Jute Mills Limited (“Shree Raghupati”) has sold ***
MT of goods in domestic market directly to unrelated customers. Shree Raghupati has
exported *** MT of product under consideration to India during the period of
investigation. The Authority notes that the domestic sales are in sufficient volumes
when compared with exports to India.
126. To determine the normal value, the Authority has conducted ordinary course of trade
test to determine profit by making domestic sales transactions with reference to the cost
of production of the subject goods, on a PCN wise basis. In case of PCNs, with where
more than 80% of sales were made at profits, the normal value has been determined
based on the ex-factory selling price. Where less than 80% sales were made at profits,
the normal value has been determined based on selling price of profitable sales. Arihant
and Shree Raghupati have claimed price adjustments on account of credit costs and the
same has been allowed by the Authority after verification. For PCNs where negligible
volume of sales were made at profits, or where the PCN has not been sold in the home
market, the normal value has been determined based on cost of production, plus a
reasonable addition towards selling, general and administrative expenses and profits.
127. The product type-wise and weighted average normal value at ex-factory level has been
calculated as mentioned in the dumping margin table below.
Normal value for Baba Jute Mills Private Limited
128. During the period of investigation, Baba Jute Mills Private Limited (“Baba Jute”) has
sold *** MT of goods in domestic market in the domestic market directly to unrelated
customers. Baba Jute has exported *** MT of product under consideration to India
during the period of investigation. The Authority notes that the domestic sales are in
sufficient volumes when compared with exports to India.
129. To determine the normal value, the Authority has conducted ordinary course of trade
test to determine profit by making domestic sales transactions with reference to the cost
of production of the subject goods, on a PCN wise basis. In case of PCNs, with where
more than 80% of sales were made at profits, the normal value has been determined
based on the ex-factory selling price. Where less than 80% sales were made at profits,
52 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
the normal value has been determined based on selling price of profitable sales. Baba
Jute has claimed price adjustments on account of credit costs from its domestic sales
and the same has been allowed by the Authority after verification. For PCNs where
negligible volume of sales were made at profits, or where the PCN has not been sold in
the home market, the normal value has been determined based on cost of production,
plus a reasonable addition towards selling, general and administrative expenses and
profits.
130. The product type-wise and weighted average normal value at ex-factory level has been
calculated as mentioned in the dumping margin table below
Normal value for M/s Shree Pashupatinath Jute Mills Private Limited
131. During the period of investigation, M/s Shree Pashupatinath Jute Mills Private Limited
(“SPJMPL”) has not sold goods in domestic market. In the absence of domestic sales,
the Authority has considered the cost of production of the producer as the basis for the
purpose of determining the normal value.
132. The Authority determined the normal value based on cost of production with reasonable
additions towards selling, general and administration expenses and profits. The PCN-
wise and weighted average normal value so determined has been mentioned in the
dumping margin table.
Normal value for M/s Swastik Jute Mills (P) Ltd.
133. During the period of investigation, Swastik has sold *** MT of goods in domestic
market in the domestic market directly to unrelated customers. Swastik Jute has
exported *** MT of product under consideration to India during the period of
investigation. Therefore, the producer does not have domestic sales in sufficient
quantities to permit the determination of normal value. In the absence of sufficient
volume of domestic sales, the Authority has considered the cost of production of the
producer as the basis for the purpose of determining the normal value.
134. The Authority determined the normal value based on cost of production with reasonable
additions towards selling, general and administration expenses and profits. The PCN-
wise and weighted average normal value so determined has been mentioned in the
dumping margin table.
Normal value for all other producers / exporters from Nepal
135. The normal value for all other producers and exporters, that have not participated in the
present investigation, has been determined as per facts available. The same has been
mentioned in the dumping margin table.
53 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
H.3.4. Export price for Nepal
Export price for M/s Arihant Multi-Fibres Ltd. and Shree Raghupati Jute Mills
Limited
136. During the period of investigation, Arihant has sold *** MT of Hessian, *** MT of
Sacking and *** MT of Jute Yarn directly to unrelated customers in India. During the
period of investigation, Shree Raghupati has sold *** MT of Hessian, *** MT of
Sacking and *** MT of Jute Yarn directly to unrelated customers in India.
The export price has been determined based on the price of sale charged by the
producer for sales to unrelated customers in India. Arihant has claimed adjustments on
account of Customs service fees, credit cost, certificate of origin expenses, and
brokerage/commission. Shree Raghupati has claimed adjustments on account of
Customs service fees, credit cost, Certificate of Origin expenses, and
brokerage/commission. The same have been allowed by the Authority after verification.
The Authority has calculated PCN-wise export price for exports of goods produced by
Arihant and Shree Raghupati and compared the same with the normal value for the
respective PCN by each producer. A weighted average dumping margin was determined
accordingly. The net export price and dumping margin so determined has been
mentioned in the table below.
Export price for M/s Baba Jute Mills Private Limited
137. During the period of investigation, Baba Jute has sold *** MT of Hessian, *** MT of
Sacking and *** MT of Jute Yarn directly to unrelated customers in India.
138. The export price has been determined based on the price of sale charged by the
producer for sales to unrelated customers in India. Baba Jute has claimed adjustments
on account of Customs service fees, credit cost, certificate of origin expenses, and
export commission and the same have been allowed by the Authority after verification.
The Authority has calculated PCN-wise export price for exports of goods produced by
Baba Jute and compared the same with the normal value for the respective PCN. A
weighted average dumping margin was determined accordingly. The net export price
and dumping margin so determined has been mentioned in the table below.
Export price for M/s Shree Pashupatinath Jute Mills Private Limited
139. During the period of investigation, SPJMPL has sold *** MT of Hessian, *** MT of
Sacking and *** MT of Jute Yarn directly to unrelated customers in India.
140. The export price has been determined based on the price of sale charged by the
producer for sales to unrelated customers in India. SPJMPL has claimed adjustments on
account of Customs service fees, credit cost, Certificate of Origin charges, and other
54 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
expenses and the same have been allowed by the Authority after verification. The
Authority has calculated PCN-wise export price for exports of goods produced by
SPJMPL and compared the same with the normal value for the respective PCN. A
weighted average dumping margin was determined accordingly. The net export price
and dumping margin so determined has been mentioned in the table below.
Export price for M/s Swastik Jute Mills (P) Ltd.
141. During the period of investigation, Swastik has sold *** MT of Hessian, *** MT of
Sacking and *** MT of Jute Yarn directly to unrelated customers in India.
142. The export price has been determined based on the price of sale charged by the
producer for sales to unrelated customers in India. Swastik has claimed adjustments on
account of Customs service fees, Certificate of origin charges, credit cost, commission
and other deduction and the same have been allowed by the Authority after verification.
The Authority has calculated PCN-wise export price for exports of goods produced by
Shree Raghupati compared the same with the normal value for the respective PCN. A
weighted average dumping margin was determined accordingly. The net export price
and dumping margin so determined has been mentioned in the table below.
Export price for other producers / exporters in Nepal
143. The export price for all other non-cooperating producers and exporters from Nepal has
been determined based on facts available and the same is mentioned in the dumping
margin table below.
H.3.5. Dumping margin
144. Based on normal value and export price as determined above, the dumping margin has
been determined below.
Sl. | Particulars | Volume | Normal | Export | Dumping | Dumping | Dumping
No. | | Exported | Value | Price | Margin | Margin | Margin
| | MT | USD/MT | USD/MT | USD/MT | % | Range
A | Bangladesh | | | | | |
1 | A. M. Jute Industries | | | | | |
| Limited | | | | | |
a | Jute Yarn | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | Negative
b | Hessian | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | Negative
c | Weighted average | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | Negative
2 | Asha Jute Industries | | | | | |
| Limited | | | | | |
a | Jute Yarn | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 5-15%
55 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
b | Sacking Bag / Cloth | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 5-15%
c | Weighted average | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 5-15%
3 | Bonanza Jute | | | | | |
| Composite & Diverse | | | | | |
| Factory Ltd. | | | | | |
a | Sacking Bag / cloth | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | Negative
b | Weighted average | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | Negative
4 | Lovely Jute Mills | | | | | |
| Limited | | | | | |
a | Sacking Bag / Cloth | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 5-15%
b | Weighted average | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 5-15%
5 | M/s Natore Jute | | | | | |
| Mills | | | | | |
a | Jute Yarn | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 5-15%
b | Sacking Cloth | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | Negative
c | Weighted average | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | Negative
6 | Nawhata Jute Mills | | | | | |
| Ltd. | | | | | |
a | Sacking Bag / Cloth | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | Negative
b | Weighted average | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | Negative
7 | M/s Poddar Agro | | | | | |
| Industries | | | | | |
a | Jute Yarn | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | Negative
b | Sacking Bag / Cloth | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | Negative
c | Weighted average | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | Negative
8 | Ranu Agro | | | | | |
| Industries Ltd. | | | | | |
a | Sacking Bag / Cloth | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | Negative
c | Weighted average | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | Negative
9 | Super Jute Mills | | | | | |
| Limited | | | | | |
a | Jute Yarn | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 10-20%
b | Sacking Bag / Cloth | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 10-20%
c | Weighted average | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 10-20%
10 | Non-Sampled | | | | | |
| Cooperative | | | | | |
| Producers | | | | | |
a | Jute Yarn | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 5-15%
b | Sacking Bag / Cloth | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 5-15%
c | Hessian | Not Determined | | | |
d | Weighted average | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 5-15%
56 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
11 | Any other producer | | | | | |
a | Jute Yarn | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 55-65%
b | Sacking Bag / Cloth | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 40-50%
c | Hessian | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 0-10%
d | Weighted average | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 45-55%
B | Nepal | | | | | |
1 | Arihant Multi-Fibres | | | | | |
| Ltd. | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** |
a | Jute Yarn | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | De Minimis
b | Sacking Bag | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | Negative
c | Hessian | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 0-10%
d | Weighted average | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | De Minimis
2 | Shree Raghupati | | | | | |
| Jute Mills Limited | | | | | |
a | Jute Yarn | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 0-10%
b | Sacking Bag | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | Negative
c | Hessian | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 0-10%
d | Weighted average | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 0-10%
3 | Arihant Multi-Fibres | | | | | |
| Ltd. and Shree | | | | | |
| Raghupati Jute Mills | | | | | |
| Limited | | | | | |
a | Jute Yarn | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | De Minimis
b | Sacking Bag | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | Negative
c | Hessian | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 0-10%
d | Weighted average | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 0-10%
4 | Baba Jute Mills | | | | | |
| Private Limited | | | | | |
a | Jute Yarn | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 0-10%
b | Sacking Bag | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 20-30%
c | Hessian | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 0-10%
d | Weighted average | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 10-20%
5 | Shree Pashupatinath | | | | | |
| Jute Mills Private | | | | | |
| Limited | | | | | |
a | Jute Yarn | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 0-10%
b | Sacking Bag | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 0-10%
c | Hessian | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 0-10%
d | Weighted average | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 0-10%
6 | Swastik Jute Mills | | | | | |
| (P) Ltd. | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** |
57 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
a | Jute Yarn | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 10-20%
b | Sacking Bag | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 5-15%
c | Hessian | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 0-10%
d | Weighted average | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 0-10%
7 | Any other producer | | | | | |
a | Jute Yarn | *** | *** | *** | *** | 10-20%
b | Sacking Bag | *** | *** | *** | *** | 20-30%
c | Hessian | *** | *** | *** | *** | 20-30%
d | Weighted average | *** | *** | *** | *** | 20-30%
I. ASSESSMENT OF INJURY AND CAUSAL LINK
I.1. Views of the other interested parties
145. The other interested parties have made the following submissions with regard to injury,
causal link, and injury margin:
a. The Authority has previously found absence of dumping by major producers from
Bangladesh, indicating that the cause of concern for the domestic industry is not
the imports from Bangladesh.
b. Indian Government procures Indian made jute sacking bags from the domestic
producers, and such domestic producers enjoy monopoly in the market.
c. The fact that the imports have increased demonstrates that the imports are
necessitated due to demand-supply gap in the country.
d. The sales of the domestic industry have increased, despite the decline in import
prices, indicating absence of correlation between the two.
e. Market share of imports from Bangladesh has declined in the period of
investigation.
I.2. Views of the domestic industry
146. The domestic industry has made the following submissions with regard to injury, causal
link, and injury margin:
a. The jute industry is divided into two segments – government procurement and
open market, which have been previously examined separately. The same
approach should be adopted in the present case as well.
b. Domestic industry is continuing to suffer the material injury on account of
continued dumped imports from the subject countries.
c. Contrary to arguments made, the imports from subject countries have continued
to increase despite imposition of duty, in absolute terms and in relation to
consumption.
d. The imports have increased, even though the domestic producers had sufficient
capacity to meet the domestic demand.
58 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
e. The imports of the product have increased by 88% since 2011-12 to the period of
investigation, despite a decline in demand during this period. Such increase has
been at the cost of the market share of the domestic industry.
f. The share of imports in open market has increased dramatically form 20% to
68%.
g. Since the duty quantum on yarn from Bangladesh was low, the imports of yarn
increased significantly. Further, during the period when there was no duty
applicable on sacking cloth, due to an error in Customs notification, the imports
of such product increased steeply.
h. Since the duty quantum on hessian and sacking bags from Nepal was low, the
imports of such products increased, despite duties.
i. The domestic market in the subject countries is insignificant compared to the
capacities installed. The focus of the governments of the subject countries, is to
increase the domestic production and exports. India is the single largest market
for the exports from Bangladesh.
j. The landed price of imports has declined over the period.
k. The subject imports are undercutting and suppressing the prices of the domestic
industry.
l. Production and capacity utilization of the domestic industry increased till 2022-
23 but have declined in the period of investigation.
m. With the increase in import volumes, the Indian industry has lost sales volume in
the open market.
n. The average inventories of the domestic industry have increased, indicating
weakened offtake of domestically produced goods.
o. While the market share of imports has increased, the domestic producers have
lost market.
p. The profits, cash profits and return on capital employed of the domestic industry
in the open market have declined significantly.
q. Production of subject jute products is highly capital, manpower, machineries, and
space intensive, considering that the raw jute is converted into finished yarn,
fabric, and bags.
r. The domestic industry employs 33,625 employees, with significant employment
created in the jute industry. If operations of the industry are not viable, it would
not be able to service their wages.
s. The growth of the domestic industry has been adverse in both volume and
profitability parameters.
t. The arguments of interested parties with regard to sales volume and prices of the
domestic industry, and market share of imports rely on the consolidated data,
without segregating for open market.
u. Contrary to argument of the interested parties, the exemption of certain exporters
from duty does not imply lack of injury, as it does not negate dumping by other
exporters.
v. The absence of competition in government procurement does not negate the
injury faced in the open market.
59 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
w. The injury to the domestic industry has not been caused by other factors. There is
causal link between dumping of the subject goods and the injury to the domestic
industry.
I.3. Examination by the Authority
147. As noted hereinabove, the scope of injury analysis in a mid-term review shall be limited
to examining whether the circumstances prevailing at the time of original imposition
have altered to such an extent as to justify withdrawal or modification of the duty. The
Authority is not required to come to a conclusion of existence of injury, but is required
to examine if the injury is not likely to continue or recur, if the duty is withdrawn.
Having regard to the same, the Authority has examined the arguments and counter-
arguments of the interested parties with regard to injury and causal link. The analysis
made by the Authority hereunder addresses the various submissions made by the
interested parties.
148. While the Authority is required to examine whether the withdrawal of duty is not likely
to continue or recur, it has applied the same parameters as that notified under Rule 11
read with Annexure – II of the Anti-Dumping Rules.
149. The domestic industry has contended that there are two market segments in the present
case – open market and government procurement. While the domestic industry is
insulated against imports in the government procurement, it has faced competition
against dumped imports in the open market. The domestic industry also submitted its
segregated injury data, and the other interested parties had an opportunity to make
submissions with regard to the same. The other interested parties have also
acknowledged that the domestic industry does not compete with imports in government
procurement. The Authority notes that in the previous investigations, the Authority has
conducted injury analysis for the domestic industry as a whole, as well as segregated
injury analysis for the two market segments. Since the present investigation is a mid-
term review, and the focus is on examining whether the domestic industry is not likely
to face injury if the anti-dumping duty is withdrawn, the Authority has examined injury
for the domestic market as a whole, with due regard given to its performance in the
open market.
I.3.1 Cumulative Assessment of Injury
150. Article 3.3 of 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 investigation, 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 percent expressed as percentage of export price and the volume of
the imports from each country is three percent (or more) of the import of like
60 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
article or where the export of individual countries is less than three percent, the
imports collectively account for more than seven percent of the import of like
article, and
b. A cumulative assessment of the effect of imports is appropriate in light of the
conditions of competition between the imported products and the conditions of
competition between the imported products and the like domestic articles.
151. In the instant case, volume of imports and dumping margin from each of the subject
countries are more than the de-minimis. Further, the imports from the subject countries
and the product manufactured by the domestic industry have inter-se comparable
properties and is being used for the same applications and by the same segment of
customers. Thus, the subject imports are competing in the Indian market inter-se as well
as with the subject goods manufactured by the domestic industry.
152. The Authority thus, concludes that it would be appropriate to undertake cumulative
assessment of injury in the present investigation for the following reasons.
a. The subject goods are being dumped into India from the subject countries.
b. The margin of dumping from each of the subject countries is more than the de
minimis limits prescribed under the Rules.
c. The volume of imports from each of the subject countries is individually more
than 3% of the total volume of imports.
d. Cumulative assessment of the effects of import is appropriate as the imports from
the subject countries not only directly compete with the imports from each of the
subject countries but also the like articles offered by the domestic industry in the
Indian market.
I.3.2 Volume effect of dumped imports
i. Assessment of Demand/ Apparent Consumption
153. The Authority, for the purpose of the present investigation, has defined demand or
apparent consumption of the product in India as the sum of domestic sales of the Indian
producers and imports from all sources. The demand so assessed is given in the table
below.
Particulars | Unit | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | 2023-24 | 2024-25 | 2024-25 (Dumped Imports)
Sales of domestic industry | MT | 2,79,482 | 3,12,409 | 2,98,242 | 2,51,791 |
Sales of other producers | MT | 7,65,564 | 9,04,009 | 9,28,357 | 7,13,093 |
Subject imports | MT | 1,12,734 | 1,39,520 | 1,90,272 | 1,66,416 | 1,39,696
Un-dumped imports from | MT | | | | | 26,720
subject countries | | | | | |
61 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
Other imports | MT | - | - | - | - | -
Demand/Consumption | MT | 11,57,780 | 13,55,939 | 14,16,870 | 11,31,299 |
Source: Imports as per DG Systems data, and sales of domestic industry and other
domestic producers as per injury information furnished by domestic industry
154. The Authority notes that the demand for the subject goods has increased till 2023-24
and declined in the period of investigation.
155. The Authority has also examined the demand in the open market. It is noted that the
demand in the open market has shown the same trend.
Particulars | Unit | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | 2023-24 | 2024-25 | 2024-25 (Dumped Imports)
Sales of domestic industry | MT | 97,753 | 73,035 | 82,242 | 95,747 |
Sales of other producers | MT | 1,22,227 | 98,505 | 73,078 | 14,673 |
Subject imports | MT | 1,12,734 | 1,39,520 | 1,90,272 | 1,66,416 | 1,39,696
Un-dumped imports from | MT | | | | | 26,720
subject countries | | | | | |
Other imports | MT | - | - | - | - | -
Demand (open market) | MT | 3,32,714 | 3,11,060 | 3,45,592 | 2,76,835 |
Source: Imports as per DG Systems data, and sales of domestic industry and other
domestic producers in open market as per segregated injury information furnished by
domestic industry in its post-hearing written submissions
ii. Imports in absolute and relative terms
156. With regard to the volume of dumped imports, it is required to be considered whether
there has been a significant increase in dumped imports either in absolute terms or
relative to production or consumption in India. The volume of imports over the injury
period was as follows:
Particulars | Unit | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | 2023-24 | 2024-25 | 2024-25 (Dumped Imports)
Bangladesh | MT | 69,693 | 94,652 | 1,43,815 | 1,17,523 | 99,668
Nepal | MT | 43,041 | 44,868 | 46,456 | 48,893 | 40,028
Subject imports | MT | 1,12,734 | 1,39,520 | 1,90,272 | 1,66,416 | 1,39,696
Un-dumped imports from | MT | | | | | 26,720
subject countries | | | | | |
Other imports | MT | - | - | - | - | -
Total imports | MT | 1,12,734 | 1,39,520 | 1,90,272 | 1,66,416 | 1,66,416
Consumption | MT | 11,57,780 | 13,55,939 | 14,16,870 | 11,31,299 | 11,31,299
62 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
Indian production | MT | 10,80,000 | 12,46,000 | 12,57,000 | 9,88,010 | 9,88,010
Imports from subject countries in relation to
Indian production | % | 10% | 11% | 15% | 17% | 14%
Indian consumption | % | 10% | 10% | 13% | 15% | 12%
Consumption in open | % | 34% | 45% | 55% | 60% | 50%
market | | | | | |
Total imports | % | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 84%
Source: Imports as per DG Systems data, Indian production as per statement of
Indian production provided as part of injury annexures
157. The Authority notes that:
i. The volume of subject imports has increased over the injury period. The subject
imports have increased by 69% in 2023-24 as compared to base year. In the
period of investigation, the subject imports declined compared to previous year.
However, the imports continue to remain higher than the base year. In this regard,
it is seen that while the un-dumped imports can be segregated during the period of
investigation, no such segregation can be made in previous years.
ii. The decline in imports in the period of investigation appears to be in response to
the decline in demand. During the period of investigation, the demand has
declined by 20% compared to the previous year. However, the imports from
subject countries (dumped and un-dumped) registered a decline by only 13%.
Over the injury period, while the demand has declined marginally, the subject
imports have increased significantly.
iii. The share of imports in the open market has also increased significantly, with the
subject imports accounting for 51% of the market. The total imports from subject
countries account for 60% of the market.
iv. The imports from subject countries have increased significantly in relation to
consumption, by 51% over the injury period. Compared to the previous year, the
total imports from subject countries have increased by 9% in relation to
consumption. Since the un-dumped imports have only been segregated for the
period of investigation, the dumped imports in relative terms do not show a
commensurate increase, due to the volumes in previous years including data of
such producers, that have found to be un-dumped.
v. The imports from subject countries have also increased in relation to Indian
production, from 10% in the base year, to 17% in the period of investigation,
registering an increase of 61%. The imports have also increased by 11% in
relation to production compared to previous year.
vi. The imports from subject countries account for entirety of the imports into India,
while the dumped imports account for 84% of the total imports.
I.3.3 Price effect of dumped imports on domestic industry
158. With regard to the price effect of the imports from the subject countries, it is required to
be analysed whether there has been a significant price undercutting by the alleged
63 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
imports as compared to price of the like article in India, or whether the effect of such
imports is otherwise to depress prices or prevent price increases, which otherwise
would have occurred in the normal course. The impact on the prices of the domestic
industry on account of the imports from the subject countries has been examined with
reference to price undercutting, price suppression and price depression, if any.
i. Price undercutting
159. For the purpose of price undercutting analysis, the net sales realisation of the domestic
industry has been compared with the landed price of imports from subject countries, as
below.
Particulars | Unit | Yarn | Hessian | Sacking* | Total | Open market # | Total (Dumped Imports)
Import Volume | MT | 59,046 | 34,752 | 72,618 | 1,66,416 | 1,66,416 | 140,243
Selling price | ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | ***
Landed price | ₹/MT | 77,122 | 104,957 | 83,114 | 85,549 | 85,549 | 85,296
Price undercutting | ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | ***
Price undercutting | % | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | ***
Price undercutting Range | 10-20% | 20-30% | 20-30% | 15-25% | 20-30% | 20-30%
Source: Imports and import prices as per DG Systems data, and prices of domestic
industry as per PCN-wise data and segregated data for open market submitted.
* Sacking bag and cloth in case of Bangladesh, sacking cloth in case of Nepal.
# Excluding Government Supplies.
160. It is noted that the subject imports are undercutting the prices of the domestic industry
in each of the product types – yarn, hessian and sacking. The weighted average price
undercutting is positive and significant. Further, the subject imports are also
undercutting the prices of the domestic industry in the open market.
ii. Price Suppression or Depression
161. The Authority has examined whether the subject imports have suppressed or depressed
the domestic prices. It is noted from the movement of cost of sales and selling price of
the domestic industry that both parameters declined over the injury period, with the
decline in selling price being more pronounced than the decline in cost of sales.
Particulars | Unit | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | 2023-24 | 2024-25 | 2024-25 (Dumped Imports)
Yarn
Landed price | ₹/MT | 98,487 | 86,227 | 72,692 | 77,122 | 77,305
64 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 88 | 74 | 78 | 78
Cost of sales | ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 92 | 86 | 88 | 88
Selling price | ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 87 | 80 | 88 | 88
Hessian
Landed price | ₹/MT | 1,24,561 | 1,18,496 | 1,06,688 | 1,04,957 | 104,941
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 95 | 86 | 84 | 84
Cost of sales | ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 101 | 89 | 85 | 85
Selling price | ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 96 | 88 | 82 | 82
Sacking*
Landed price | ₹/MT | 1,02,151 | 89,307 | 79,764 | 83,114 | 80,619
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 87 | 78 | 81 | 79
Cost of sales | ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 96 | 89 | 92 | 92
Selling price | ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 95 | 89 | 91 | 91
Total subject goods as a whole
Landed price | ₹/MT | 1,06,731 | 93,844 | 81,313 | 85,549 | 85,296
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 88 | 76 | 80 | 80
Cost of sales | ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 96 | 89 | 92 | 92
Selling price | ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 94 | 88 | 90 | 90
Open Market
Landed price | ₹/MT | 1,06,731 | 93,844 | 81,313 | 85,549 | 85,296
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 88 | 76 | 80 | 80
Cost of sales | ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 101 | 85 | 88 | 88
Selling price | ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 93 | 79 | 81 | 81
Source: Imports and import prices as per DG Systems data, and prices of domestic
industry as per PCN-wise data and segregated data for open market submitted.
* Sacking bag and cloth in case of Bangladesh, sacking cloth in case of Nepal
162. It is noted that the prices of the domestic industry have moved almost in tandem with
the changes in cost over the period, insofar as yarn and sacking are concerned.
Particularly, in case of yar, while the prices declined steeply in 2022-23, they have
relatively recovered during the period of investigation. However, in hessian, while the
65 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
cost declined by 15% over the injury period, the decline in selling price was much
higher.
163. On an overall basis, the selling price and cost of sales have declined in 2022-23 and
2023-24, before recovering in the period of investigation. Over the injury period, while
the cost of sales has declined by 8%, the selling price has declined by 10%. The decline
in landed price has been much steeper. However, the Authority has also segregated and
examined the trends in prices in the open market. It is noted that on a year-on-year
basis, while the cost remained the same in 2022-23, the selling price declined by 7%
compared to the previous year. Thereafter, in 2023-24, the cost and selling price
reduced in tandem, before increasing in the period of investigation. Over the injury
period, while the overall cost of goods sold in open market has reduced by 12%, the
selling price has declined by 19%. Therefore, the imports have depressed the prices of
the domestic industry.
I.3.4 Economic Parameters of the Domestic Industry
164. Annexure II to the Anti-Dumping Rules require that the determination of the injury
shall involve an objective examination of the consequent impact of dumped imports on
the domestic producers of the subject goods. With regards to the consequent impact of
these imports on the domestic producers of subject goods, the Rules further provide that
the examination of the impact of the dumped imports on the domestic industry would
include an objective 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, actual and potential negative effects on cash
flow, inventories, employment, wages, growth, ability to raise capital investments.
Accordingly, performance of the domestic industry has been examined over the injury
period.
i. Capacity, production, capacity utilization and sales
165. The performance of the domestic industry with regard to capacity, production, sales and
capacity utilization over the injury period was as below:
Particulars | Unit | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | 2023-24 | 2024-25
Capacity | MT | 4,28,072 | 4,34,072 | 4,34,072 | 4,34,072
Total production in plant | MT | 3,14,436 | 3,41,991 | 3,28,643 | 2,71,602
Capacity utilization | % | 73% | 79% | 76% | 63%
Production of subject goods | MT | 3,14,143 | 3,41,647 | 3,28,301 | 2,71,229
Domestic sales | MT | 2,79,482 | 3,12,409 | 2,98,242 | 2,51,791
Export sales | MT | 33,183 | 28,400 | 26,416 | 29,431
Sales in open market | MT | 1,96,318 | 2,48,798 | 2,16,055 | 1,56,917
66 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
Sales for government | MT | 74,909 | 60,481 | 79,382 | 90,729
procurement | | | | |
Source: As per injury information submitted by domestic industry, including
segregated data for open market submitted in post hearing written submissions.
166. The Authority has examined the trends in capacity, production, capacity utilisation and
sales of the domestic industry. The Authority notes that:
i. It is noted that installed capacity increased only marginally over the injury
period.
ii. Production and capacity utilisation increased up to 2022-23 and thereafter
declined during the period of investigation. The capacity utilization of the
domestic industry is underutilized, despite significant demand in the market.
iii. The domestic sales volume has increased in 2022-23, and declined thereafter. The
sales volume of the domestic industry has reduced by 10% over the period. By
contrast, the demand has declined by only 2%.
iv. As highlighted by other interested parties and the domestic industry, the domestic
industry is insulated from competition in government procurement. The Authority
notes that the sales for government procurement have increased by 21% over the
period.
v. By contrast, the sales in open market have declined by 20% over the injury
period, and by 27% compared to the previous year. Therefore, the domestic
industry has lost sales volume in the open market.
ii. Market share in demand
167. The market share of subject imports, domestic industry and other producers over the
period was as under.
Particulars | Unit | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | 2023-24 | 2024-25 | 2024-25 (Dumped Imports)
Share in total demand
Domestic industry | % | 24% | 23% | 21% | 22% | 22%
Other producers | % | 66% | 67% | 66% | 63% | 63%
Subject imports | % | 10% | 10% | 13% | 15% | 12%
Un-dumped imports | % | | | | | 3%
Other imports | % | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0%
Share in open market
Domestic industry | % | 29% | 23% | 24% | 35% | 35%
Other producers | % | 37% | 32% | 21% | 5% | 5%
Subject imports | % | 34% | 45% | 55% | 60% | 50%
Un-dumped imports | % | | | | | 10%
Other imports | % | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0% | 0%
67 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
Source: Imports as per DG Systems data. Domestic industry, and other
producers, as per injury information submitted by domestic industry, including
segregated data for open market submitted in post hearing written submissions.
168. It is noted that the market share of the domestic industry, as well as that of the Indian
industry as a whole, has declined over the injury period. In contrast, the market share of
imports from subject countries has increased. If the comparison is made with reference
to share in demand in the open market, while the domestic industry has gained market
share, the Indian industry as a whole has lost market. In the meanwhile, the share of
imports from subject countries has increased. Thus, over the injury period, the subject
imports have gained market share at the expense of the domestic producers.
iii. Inventory
169. Inventories of the domestic industry over the injury period were as follows.
Particulars | Unit | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | 2023-24 | 2024-25
Opening inventory | MT | 8,763 | 9,538 | 14,061 | 18,275
Closing inventory | MT | 9,504 | 14,061 | 18,275 | 11,554
Average inventory | MT | 9,133 | 11,800 | 16,168 | 14,914
Source: As per injury information submitted by domestic industry
170. It is noted that the average inventories of the domestic industry have increased over the
injury period. This is despite the fact that the domestic industry had actually reduced its
significantly production during the period of investigation. Even then, it has continued
to face accumulation of inventories.
iv. Employment, productivity and wages
171. The Authority has examined the information relating to employment, wages and
productivity, as given below:
Particulars | Unit | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | 2023-24 | 2024-25
No. of employees | No. | 33,851 | 33,908 | 35,424 | 33,625
Productivity per day | MT/Day | 898 | 976 | 938 | 775
Productivity per employee | MT/No | 9.28 | 10.08 | 9.27 | 8.07
Salaries & Wages | ₹ lakhs | 67,673 | 74,094 | 74,939 | 62,791
Source: As per injury information submitted by domestic industry
172. The domestic industry has submitted that the production of the subject goods is highly
capital-intensive and labour-intensive, involving significant manpower, machinery and
infrastructure. The domestic industry employs a substantial workforce and incurs
significant wage costs. The Authority notes that the number of employees increased till
68 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
2023-24 and thereafter declined during the period of investigation, with the same trend
observed in salaries and wages. The productivity of the domestic industry has also
declined in response to the decline in production.
v. Profitability, cash profits, and return on capital employed
Particulars | Unit | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | 2023-24 | 2024-25
Cost of sales | ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 96 | 89 | 92
Selling price | ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 94 | 88 | 90
Profit / loss | ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 46 | 72 | 66
Profit / loss | ₹ lakhs | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 52 | 77 | 59
Cash profits | ₹ lakhs | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 66 | 90 | 77
Return on capital employed | % | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 53 | 68 | 54
Source: As per injury information submitted by domestic industry
173. The Authority notes that:
i. It is noted that the profits of the domestic industry declined in 2022-23, and improved
slightly thereafter. However, the profits have declined again during the period of
investigation.
ii. Over the injury period, the profits of the domestic industry have declined by 41%.
iii. The cash profits and return on capital employed of the domestic industry have
followed the same trend. The cash profits of the domestic industry have declined
by 23% over the period, and return on capital employed have declined by 46%.
iv. The domestic industry has not been able to earn a sufficient return on its capital
employed.
174. The Authority has also examined the profitability of the domestic industry in the open
market.
Particulars | Unit | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | 2023-24 | 2024-25
Cost of sales | ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 101 | 85 | 88
Selling price | ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 93 | 79 | 81
Profit / loss | ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | -19 | 2 | -8
69 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
Cash profits | ₹ lakhs | *** | (***) | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 10 | 29 | 28
Return on capital employed | % | *** | (***) | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | -8 | 8 | 4
Source: As per segregated injury information for open market submitted in post
hearing written submissions.
175. The Authority notes that the trends of profitability are the same in the open market as
well, that is, declining in 2022-23, before improving in 2024-25, and declining again in
the period of investigation. However, the performance of the domestic industry is much
more adverse in the open market, with the domestic industry having faced losses in
2022-23 and the period of investigation. The cash profits of the domestic industry have
witnessed a decline by 72%, while the domestic industry has been able to earn an
insignificant return in its operations.
vi. Growth
176. The growth of the domestic industry in terms of volume and profitability parameters is
as under.
Particulars | Unit | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | 2023-24 | 2024-25
Capacity | % | - | 1% | 0% | 0%
Production | % | - | 9% | -4% | -17%
Domestic sales | % | - | 14% | -4% | -16%
Profit / loss | % | - | -48% | 49% | -23%
Cash profits | % | - | -34% | 36% | -14%
Return on capital employed | % | - | -47% | 28% | -21%
Source: As per injury information submitted by domestic industry, including
segregated data for open market submitted in post hearing written submissions.
177. It is noted that growth in terms of both volume parameters and price parameters has
remained negative in the period of investigation. while the volume parameters in 2022-
23, the parameters have deteriorated in 2023-24 and period of investigation. The
profitability parameters showed decline in 2022-23, improvement in 2023-24, and
thereafter, showed negative growth in the period of investigation.
vii. Ability to raise capital investment
178. The Authority notes that the profitability of the domestic industry has declined
significantly and the return on capital employed of the domestic industry has also
suffered. Despite duties, the domestic industry has witnessed a deterioration in
70 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
performance. Thus, the imports have adversely impacted the ability of the domestic
industry to raise capital investment.
viii. Factors affecting domestic prices
179. The import price has declined steeply over the injury period. The declining trend in
import prices, coupled with increasing volumes, has exerted continuous pressure on
domestic prices. The landed price of subject imports is below the selling price as well
as cost of sales of the domestic industry. Such low landed price has created a strain on
the prices of the domestic industry. This has adversely impacted the profitability of the
domestic industry. Thus, price of imports from the subject countries has impacted the
prices of the domestic industry.
ix. Magnitude of Dumping and Dumping Margin
180. The Authority has examined the magnitude of dumping and dumping margin. It is
noted that dumping margin for most producers continues to remain positive and
significant, despite the duties in force.
I.4 Conclusion on Injury
181. In view of the foregoing, the Authority concludes as follows
i. Despite the anti-dumping duty in force, imports have increased over the injury
period.
ii. The imports have also shown a significant increase in relative to domestic
production and consumption.
iii. The imports are undercutting the prices of the domestic industry, both in open
market and on an overall basis.
iv. The domestic industry has been forced to reduce its prices to a larger degree than
the decline in cost, indicating price depression.
v. The production, sales and capacity utilization of the domestic industry have
declined in the period of investigation. The decline in sales outpaces the decline
in demand in the market.
vi. The domestic industry and domestic producers as a whole have lost market share
to the subject imports.
vii. The domestic industry has witnessed accumulation of inventories over the period.
viii. The profits, cash profits and return on capital employed of the domestic industry
have declined.
ix. In the open market, the domestic industry has suffered losses during the period of
investigation, and has experienced a negligible return on its capital employed.
x. The subject imports have adversely impacted the ability of the domestic industry
to raise capital investment.
xi. The imports are priced below the prices and cost of the domestic industry, and are
creating a pressure on the prices of the domestic industry.
71 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
182. The Authority, therefore, concludes that the domestic industry has continued to suffer
injury, despite the anti-dumping duty in force. In view of the present injury faced, the
Authority also concludes that injury to the domestic industry is likely, if the anti-
dumping duty is withdrawn.
I.5 Likelihood analysis
183. The Customs Tariff Act and the Anti-Dumping Rules require the Designated Authority
to review, from time to time, the need for continued imposition of anti-dumping duty
where warranted, on its own initiative or upon request by any interested party who
submits positive information substantiating the need for such a review, and a reasonable
period of time has elapsed since the imposition of the definitive anti-dumping duty. The
review inter alia requires an examination whether the injury to the domestic industry is
not likely to continue or recur if the duties are revoked or varied. The Authority has
examined whether the injury to the domestic industry is not likely to continue or recur
if the duties are revoked or varied as provided herein below.
a. Volume and rate of increase in imports
184. As noted above, the imports have increased, inspite of the duties in force. While the
imports have declined in period of investigation, due to a decline in demand; such
decline is nevertheless less than the decline in demand. On an overall basis, the imports
have registered a significant increase, even though the demand has declined. The rate of
increase in imports, despite the present duties in imports, indicates that the imports are
likely to continue increasing, in the absence of duty.
Particulars | Unit | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | 2023-24 | 2024-25
Subject imports | MT | 1,12,734 | 1,39,520 | 1,90,272 | 1,66,416
Change versus previous year | % | 24% | 36% | -13%
Change versus base year | % | | | | 48%
Demand/Consumption | MT | 11,57,780 | 13,55,939 | 14,16,870 | 11,31,299
Change versus previous year | % | 17% | 4% | -20%
Change versus base year | % | | | | -2%
Demand (open market) | MT | 3,32,714 | 3,11,060 | 3,45,592 | 2,76,835
Change versus previous year | % | -7% | 11% | -20%
Change versus base year | % | | | | -17%
b. Existence of excess production capacities in the subject countries
185. The Authority has also examined whether excess production capacities exist in the
subject countries, based on the information provided by the responding producers in the
response. The information provided by the foreign producers in the response for the
period of investigation is summarized below.
72 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
Particulars | Unit | Bangladesh | Nepal
Capacities | MT | 6,35,996 | 1,03,355
Production | MT | 3,69,137 | 50,322
Capacity utilization | % | 58% | 49%
Excess capacities | MT | 2,66,859 | 53,033
186. Based on the above, the Authority notes that the foreign producers have reported
significantly under-utilized capacities. While the producers in Bangladesh have
operated at less than 60% capacity utilization, the capacities in Nepal are utilized only
to the extent of 50%. Further, the idle capacities in the subject countries are significant,
in relation to the demand in the open market in the country.
c. Increase in capacities in the subject countries over the period
187. The Authority also notes that the capacities in the subject countries have increased over
the period. As per the responses filed, the capacities available with producers such as
Ahyan Jute Mills Ltd., Alijan Jute Mills Limited, Arnu Jute Mills Limited, Chuadanga
Jute Mills, Hasan Jute Mills Limited, Hasan Jute & Spinning Mills Limited, Janata Jute
Mills Limited, Mouna Jute Mills Ltd., Nawhata Jute Mills Ltd, Oriental Jute Mills Ltd,
Poddar Agro Industries, Rajbari Jute Mills Limited, Ranu Agro Industries Limited,
Sagar Jute Spinning Mills Ltd, and Sonali Aansh Industries Limited, from Bangladesh
have increased over the period. In case of Nepal, the producer, Shree Pashupatinath Jute
Mills Private Limited, has come up with new capacities. Therefore, the capacities
available in the subject countries have increased over the period.
d. Likely suppressing or depressing effect
188. The Authority further notes that the imports are undercutting the prices of the domestic
industry. If the anti-dumping duty is removed, the imports shall be priced lower than the
selling price and cost of sales of the domestic industry. In such a situation, the imports
are likely to have a suppressing or depressing effect on the prices of the domestic
industry, and would force the domestic industry to reduce the prices of the subject
goods.
e. Existing injury faced by the domestic industry
189. As noted hereinabove, the domestic industry has witnessed a decline in its performance
in all material aspects – in both volume and profitability parameters. The domestic
producers have lost a market to the imported goods. The profits and cash profits of the
domestic industry have declined materially over the injury period. The domestic
industry has also faced losses in the open market. Considering the existing deterioration
in performance faced by the domestic industry, while the duties are in force, it can be
concluded that the injury is likely to continue, in the absence of duties.
I.6 Non-attribution analysis (Other factors)
190. The Authority examined whether other factors listed under the Anti-Dumping Rules
have caused injury to the domestic industry, or are likely to cause injury to the domestic
73 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
industry. Factors which are relevant in this respect include, inter alia, the volume of
subject goods not sold at dumped prices, contraction in demand or changes in the
pattern of consumption, trade restrictive practices, changes in technology, the export
performance of the domestic industry and the productivity of the domestic industry.
i. Volume and prices of imports from third countries
191. The imports from the subject countries have accounted for the entirety of imports,
across the injury period. In view of the absence of imports from other countries, such
imports have not caused injury faced by the domestic industry, and are not likely to
cause injury to the domestic industry.
b. Contraction in demand
192. Demand for the product under consideration has registered a decline over the injury
period. Despite such decline, the demand in the country is far higher than the
production and capacity of the domestic industry. Further, even though the demand
declined, the subject imports did not decline commensurately. The domestic industry
has lost market to the imports in the face of declining demand. Moreover, no
information has been provided to indicate that the demand is expected to continue
declining. The demand had increased till 2023-24, and has only declined during the
period of investigation, which may be a temporary fluctuation. Therefore, the Authority
notes that the contraction in demand is not the cause of the present or likely injury to
the domestic industry. However, it is noted that demand continues to remain significant.
c. Changes in pattern of consumption
193. The pattern of consumption with regard to the product under consideration has also not
undergone any change. Therefore, the domestic industry has not suffered and is not
likely to suffer injury on this account.
d. Conditions of competition and trade restrictive practices
194. There are no trade restrictive practices or conditions of competition, which may have
caused or are likely to cause injury to the domestic industry.
e. Developments in technology
195. Technology for production of the product has not undergone any change and no likely
change in foreseeable future has been identified by interested parties.
f. Productivity
196. The productivity per day and per employee of the domestic industry has declined over
the injury period. However, the same is a result of a decline in production over the
period.
g. Export performance of the domestic industry
197. The injury information examined hereinabove relates only to the performance of the
domestic industry in terms of its domestic market. Thus, the injury suffered or the likely
injury cannot be attributed to the export performance of the domestic industry.
74 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
h. Performance of other products
198. The injury cannot be attributed to the performance of other products of the applicant
domestic producers, as the segregated information with regard to the like article only
has been provided on record.
I.7 Causal link between dumping and injury to the domestic industry
199. 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 has been caused by the dumped imports:
i. The dumping of the subject goods and the decline in export price has resulted in
an increase in imports in absolute terms and in relation production and
consumption.
ii. The increase in dumped imports prevented the domestic industry to sell its goods
in the market at remunerative prices.
iii. As a result, the market share of the domestic industry and domestic producers as a
whole declined while that of the imports has increased over the period.
iv. The domestic industry faced significant accumulation of inventories as it was
unable to sell its product in the market.
v. The production, sales and capacity utilization of the domestic industry have
declined.
vi. The imports are undercutting the prices of the domestic industry, and are priced
below the cost of sales of the domestic industry.
vii. The lower priced imports have caused a strain on the prices of the domestic
industry, leading to price depression.
viii. This has impacted the profitability of the domestic industry, resulting in a decline
in profits, cash profits and return on capital employed.
200. The Authority, thus, concludes that there exists a causal relation between the dumping
of the subject goods and the material injury to the domestic industry.
J. MAGNITUDE OF INJURY MARGIN
201. The Authority has determined the non-injurious price for the domestic industry on the
basis of the principles laid down in the Rules read with Annexure III, as amended. The
non-injurious price of the subject goods 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 countries for calculating the injury margin. For determining the non-injurious
price, the best utilisation of the raw materials, the utilities and the production capacity
by the domestic industry over the injury period have been considered. It is ensured that
no extraordinary or non-recurring expenses were charged to the cost of production. A
reasonable return (pre-tax @ 22%) on the average capital employed (i.e., average net
fixed assets plus average working capital) for the product under consideration was
75 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
allowed as pre-tax profit to arrive at the non-injurious price as prescribed in Annexure
III of the Rules and is being followed.
202. The landed price for the cooperative exporters has been determined on the basis of the
data furnished by the exporters. For non-sampled cooperative exporters, landed value
has been taken as the weighted average landed value of the co-operative
producers/exporters.
203. For all the non-cooperative producers/exporters from the subject countries, the
Authority has determined the landed price based on facts available.
204. 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:
Sl. No. | Particulars | Volume | Non- | Landed | Injury | Injury | Injury
| | Exported | Injurious | Price | Margin | Margin | Margin
| | MT | Price | | | |
| | | USD/MT | USD/MT | USD/MT | % | Range
A | Bangladesh | | | | | |
1 | A. M. Jute Industries | | | | | |
| Limited | | | | | |
a | Jute Yarn | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 65-75%
b | Hessian | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 25-35%
c | Weighted average | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 60-70%
2 | Asha Jute Industries | | | | | |
| Limited | | | | | |
a | Jute Yarn | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 90-100%
b | Sacking Bag / Cloth | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 20-30%
c | Weighted average | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 85-95%
3 | Bonanza Jute | | | | | |
| Composite & Diverse | | | | | |
| Factory Ltd. | | | | | |
a | Sacking Bag / cloth | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 10-20%
b | Weighted average | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 10-20%
4 | Lovely Jute Mills | | | | | |
| Limited | | | | | |
a | Sacking Bag / Cloth | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | Negative
b | Weighted average | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | Negative
5 | M/s Natore Jute Mills | | | | | |
a | Jute Yarn | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 60-70%
b | Sacking Cloth | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 20-30%
76 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
c | Weighted average | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 30-40%
6 | Nawhata Jute Mills | | | | | |
| Ltd. | | | | | |
a | Sacking Bag / Cloth | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 25-35%
b | Weighted average | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 25-35%
7 | M/s Poddar Agro | | | | | |
| Industries | | | | | |
a | Jute Yarn | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 85-95%
b | Sacking Bag / Cloth | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 10-20%
c | Weighted average | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 15-25%
8 | Ranu Agro Industries | | | | | |
| Ltd. | | | | | |
a | Sacking Bag / Cloth | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 0-10%
c | Weighted average | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 0-10%
9 | Super Jute Mills | | | | | |
| Limited | | | | | |
a | Jute Yarn | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 35-45%
b | Sacking Bag / Cloth | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 10-20%
c | Weighted average | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 30-40%
10 | Non-Sampled | | | | | |
| Cooperative Producers | | | | | |
a | Jute Yarn | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 80-90%
b | Sacking Bag / Cloth | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 20-30%
c | Hessian | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 25-35%
d | Weighted average | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 70-80%
11 | Any other producer | | | | | |
a | Jute Yarn | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 90-100%
b | Sacking Bag / Cloth | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 25-35%
c | Hessian | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 35-45%
d | Weighted average | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 55-65%
B | Nepal | | | | | |
1 | Arihant Multi-Fibres | | | | | |
| Ltd. | | | | | |
a | Jute Yarn | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 70-80%
b | Sacking Bag | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 10-20%
c | Hessian | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 15-25%
d | Weighted average | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 15-25%
2 | Shree Raghupati Jute | | | | | |
| Mills Limited | | | | | |
a | Jute Yarn | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 65-75%
b | Sacking Bag` | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 10-20%
77 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
c | Hessian | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 20-30%
d | Weighted average | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 15-25%
3 | Arihant Multi-Fibres | | | | | |
| Ltd. and Shree | | | | | |
| Raghupati Jute Mills | | | | | |
| Limited | | | | | |
a | Jute Yarn | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 70-80%
b | Sacking Bag | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 10-20%
c | Hessian | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 15-25%
d | Weighted average | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 15-25%
4 | Baba Jute Mills | | | | | |
| Private Limited | | | | | |
a | Jute Yarn | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 75-85%
b | Sacking Bag | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 10-20%
c | Hessian | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 10-20%
d | Weighted average | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 20-30%
5 | Shree Pashupatinath | | | | | |
| Jute Mills Private | | | | | |
| Limited | | | | | |
a | Jute Yarn | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 80-90%
b | Sacking Bag | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 25-35%
c | Hessian | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 30-40%
d | Weighted average | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 35-45%
6 | Swastik Jute Mills (P) | | | | | |
| Ltd. | | | | | |
a | Jute Yarn | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 70-80%
b | Sacking Bag | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 10-20%
c | Hessian | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 10-20%
d | Weighted average | *** | *** | *** | *** | *** | 15-25%
7 | Any other producer | | | | | |
a | Jute Yarn | *** | *** | *** | *** | 90-100%
b | Sacking Bag | *** | *** | *** | *** | 25-35%
c | Hessian | *** | *** | *** | *** | 30-40%
d | Weighted average | *** | *** | *** | *** | 30-40%
K. INDIAN INDUSTRY'S INTEREST & OTHER ISSUES
k.1 Views of other interested parties
205. The other interested parties have made the following submissions with regard to the
Indian industry’s interest:
78 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
i. If anti-dumping duty is increased, prices for downstream users and final
consumers of the product will be costlier and the ultimate users in India will
suffer.
ii. The concerned Ministry should oppose the levy of duty since it will have huge
impact on large number of exporter/trader/importer & users.
iii. The claim that duties are in public interest cannot override legal requirements
necessary for enhancement of duties.
iv. The domestic industry has equated its own commercial interest with the interests
of public at large.
v. There is no evidence to show that the continuation of duties is determinative to
job preservation.
vi. The domestic industry seeks continued insulation from competition in the open
market, which is contrary to the objective of trade liberalization.
vii. Non-participation by users cannot be considered as an evidence of absence of
adverse impact, since such non-participation may be due to a number of reasons
such as lack of awareness, resource constraints or limited organization among
users.
viii. Present of imports ensures price discipline and benefits customers.
k.2 Views of the domestic industry
206. The domestic industry has made the following submissions with regard to the Indian
industry’s interest:
i. The effect of the anti-dumping measure must be examined from the perspectives
of domestic producers, domestic consumers, the public, upstream and
downstream industries.
ii. If dumping is duly addressed, it shall ensure a level playing field to the domestic
producers.
iii. The continued influx of imports shall affect the investment of ₹ 12,000 crores,
and more than 4 lakh workers. The 150 year-old industry is an integral part of the
Indian economy, history and social fabric.
iv. The jute mills in the state of West Bengal are largely placed in one district, North
24 Paragnas, and the people in such district are largely employed by the jute mills
surrounding the district. The entire livelihood and sustenance of families are
dependent on the jute mills.
v. Raw jute farming supports the livelihood of at least 40 lakh farming families.
While raw jute was originally considered as a source of raw material for
packaging industries only, it has now emerged as a versatile raw material for
diverse applications, such as, textile industries, paper industries, building and
automotive industries, use as soil saver, use as decorative and furnishing
materials, etc.
vi. Raw jute is an environment friendly crop, and helps in the maintenance of the
ecological balance.
79 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
vii. Higher grade of raw jute grown in India (TDN 1 and TDN 2) can be used for
production of fine yarn and hessian fabric, which have higher prices, and are
utilized in in packaging products such as bags for tea, coffee and as shopping
bags, furnishing material, decorative fabrics, in the open market. If such market is
left open to imports, the Indian jute mills will become unviable and would have to
shut down the production facilities for this product, destroying the immense
potential for growth in this market.
viii. Both sacking bags and yarn/hessian production facilities must necessarily co-exist
and it is impossible for the industry to continue viable operations either based
solely on sacking bags or solely on open market.
ix. Any action that leaves the open market to dumped imports, would lead to a
situation where the Indian Industry to cater only to Government procurement.
Such a situation would be opposed to long-term objectives of the government,
and would also lead to significant losses to the industry.
x. Should the industry be forced to exit from the open market, significant capacities,
investments, plant & equipment, employment and huge infrastructure would
become completely redundant.
xi. On the contrary, if the Indian industry is able to thrive in open market, the
Government can save the additional cost that it currently incurs to support the jute
farmers.
xii. There is no evidence of any adverse impact of the duties previously imposed.
xiii. In the previous investigation as well, the Authority noted that the anti-dumping
duty on the product under consideration shall be in public interest.
xiv. The absence of participation by users in present review and the previous sunset
review demonstrates that there is no adverse effect of the duties.
xv. If the user industry is forced to rely fully on imported goods, they would be at the
mercy of the foreign producers, who shall have the objective of revenue
maximization. Further, the user industry would be forced to maintain higher
inventories, if the country becomes reliant on imports.
xvi. The measures will ensure a competitive domestic industry against fairly priced
imports, which otherwise would be dominated by imports from the subject
countries.
xvii. The Supreme Court, in Reliance Industries Ltd. v. Designated Authority, has
noted the importance of imposition of anti-dumping duty, in making India a
modern, powerful, highly industrialized nation.
k.3. Examination by the Authority
207. The Authority notes that the purpose of trade remedial measures, in general, is to
eliminate injury caused to the domestic industry by unfair trade practices and re-
establish open and fair competition in the Indian market, which is in the general interest
of the country. The anti-dumping measures do not aim to restrict imports from the
subject country in any way. The Authority recognizes that the existence of duties might
affect the price levels of the product in India. However, fair competition in the Indian
80 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
market will not be reduced by the anti-dumping duty in force. On the contrary,
modification of the measures to the present level of dumping and injury margin would
ensure that no unfair advantages are gained, prevent a decline in the performance of the
domestic industry and help maintain the availability of wider choice to the consumers
of the subject goods. Thus, the Authority notes that the anti-dumping measures would
not restrict imports from the subject countries in any way, and therefore, would not
affect the availability of the product to the consumers.
208. The Authority considered whether enhancement of anti-dumping shall have any adverse
impact on the interest of the public. In order to determine such impact, the Authority
weighed the impact of the enhancement of duties on the availability of the goods in the
Indian market, the impact on the users of the product as well as the domestic industry
and the impact on the general public at large. This determination is based on the
submissions and evidence submitted over the course of the present investigation.
209. The Authority issued initiation notification inviting views from all interested parties,
including importers, consumers and others. The Authority also prescribed a
questionnaire for the users/ user association to provide relevant information with
regards to the present investigation including any possible effects of the anti-dumping
duty on their operations.
210. The Authority notes that none of the users or importers of the product under
consideration have participated in the present investigation and opposed continuation of
anti-dumping duty. The non-participation of users demonstrates that the users are not
adversely affected by the imposition of the duties. The Authority does not find merit in
the contention that the non-participation should be attributed to other reasons. The
Authority had notified the initiation of investigation to the users itself. Therefore, the
Authority does not find that the user industry can be considered to be un-aware of the
investigation. Regarding resource constraint, the Authority finds that, in a number of
cases, even where the user industry belongs to the MSME sector, they make
submissions before the Authority. The Authority has considered the submissions of
such users, even when they have not been able to provide entirety of information in the
format prescribed by the Authority. Finally, with regard to absence of organization, the
Authority notes that participation by individual users is also considered by the
Authority. Therefore, even if the users were not able to organize to represent
collectively, they may participate individually. The Authority notes that the arguments
raised by foreign producers in this regard, cannot be accepted.
211. Further, the present investigation is a mid-term review of anti-dumping duty imposed
on imports of subject goods from the subject countries. There is no information on
record which shows adverse impact of imposition of anti-dumping duty on the
downstream industry. In a situation where the anti-dumping duty has been in place for
more than nine years, the increase in the price of the product (after due adjustments for
raw material price movements) and the impact of the same is the best indicator of the
81 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
likely impact of proposed duty on the consumers. It is seen that there is no material
increase in the price of the product either by domestic industry or by the producers in
Bangladesh or Nepal. On the contrary, the prices in the market have reduced
significantly over the period.
212. The Authority notes that the Indian jute Industry is both culturally and historically
important for the country. As noted by the Ministry of Commerce and Industry in its
press release, there are 116 jute mills in India, with 86 of the mills being concentrated
in West Bengal. The jute industry provides direct employment to 4 lakh workers in
organized mills and diversified units, including the tertiary sector and allied activities.
The domestic industry has emphasized that the jute mills in the state of West Bengal are
largely placed in one district, that is, North 24 Parganas. The people of this district are
largely employed by the jute mills surrounding the district. The entire livelihood and
sustenance of families are dependent on the jute mills. Therefore, any adverse impact
on the performance of the jute mills immediately affects the livelihood of the workers
and their families.
213. In addition, the jute industry supports the livelihood of 40 lakh farmers. It is
indisputable that raw jute plays an important role in the country’s economy, farmer’s
livelihood and rural economy, and is originally considered as a source of raw material
for packaging industries. As noted in the sunset review, the Jute Packaging Materials
(Compulsory Use in Packing Commodities) Act, 1987 was promulgated to provide the
jute farmers an assured market, and thus, requiring the jute mills to dedicate production
facilities for sale in that market by mandating procurement of only domestic raw jute.
However, the Authority found that practically all jute mills have developed production
facilities in parallel for goods meant for consumption in the open market as well.
214. The previous review also revealed that approximately 25% of raw jute grown in India is
of higher grade which are only used for production of fine yarn and hessian fabric,
which are sold in the open market. The Authority has previously concluded that should
the open market be left unprotected and open to dumped imports at unfair prices, the
Indian jute mills will become unviable. This would result in loss of market for raw jute
farmers and would adversely impact their livelihood. The Authority had also noted the
immense potential for growth in the market, in light of global efforts to move from
plastic to natural/biodegradable products. No new information has been brought to light
to displace the conclusions arrived at in the sunset review.
215. The Authority also notes that the imports have continued to increase, in relation to
production and consumption in India, despite imposition of duties. The dumping of the
subject product has also continued. The information provided shows that the domestic
industry has incurred steep losses in the open market. If such a situation were to be
allowed to persist, it would erode the viability of the industry in the open market. This
will result in a significant setback to the dedicated capacities, investments, plant and
equipment, employment and infrastructure.
82 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
216. The Authority notes that in the sunset review, the Authority had also taken cognizance
of the observations of the Commission for Agricultural Costs and Prices, Ministry of
Agriculture and Farmers Welfare, made with regard to the jute segment. The
Commission, inter alia, had highlighted that the imposition of anti-dumping duty had
resulted in the resumption of operations in 13 twine mills in Andhra Pradesh,
benefitting about 20 thousand workers and created additional demand for 2 lakh tons of
jute in the domestic market. The Authority also noted the observations of the
Commission that during 2019-20, Bangladesh provided cash subsidy of 12 percent on
hessian, sacking and carpet backing clothing (CBC), 7 percent on yarn and twine and
20 percent subsidy on jute diversified jute products. As a result of such policy
initiatives, the imports of the product from Bangladesh have continued to adversely
affect the Indian jute industry.
217. The Authority, therefore, concludes that the continued imposition and modification of
the anti-dumping duties on the imports of the subject goods would be in public interest.
L. POST DISCLOSURE COMMENTS
L.1. Submissions by other interested parties
218. The interested parties have reiterated their submissions regarding absence of change in
circumstances of lasting nature, significant exports by Arnu Jute warranting individual
examination, and price of subject goods being impacted by other factors such as
productivity, economies of scale, technological advancements, etc. and not merely
prices of raw jute. In addition, the other interested parties have made the following
submissions post issuance of the disclosure statement:
i. There is a need for disclosure of essential facts considered for calculation of
dumping margin. Failure to disclose essential facts violates Article 6.9 of the
Anti-Dumping Agreement and Rules 7 and 16 of the Anti-Dumping Rules. This
is also consistent with the observations of the WTO Panel in Russia –
Commercial Vehicles and the WTO Appellate Body Report in China – HP-SSST
(EU). Mere reference to information forming the basis of calculation is not
sufficient and there is an obligation to disclose the calculations, adjustments and
methodologies.
ii. The source and basis for considering selling, general and administrative expense
and profits have not been disclosed. As per information disclosed, the approach
for arriving at profit margins is not consistent with Appendix 7 reported by
producers.
iii. There is no concern for confidentiality as the information requested pertains to
the parties themselves.
iv. Normal value for Asha Jutes Industries Limited and Super Jute Mills Limited is
determined using overall profit at the company level instead of the profit
attributable to domestic sales. In absence of domestic sales, normal value should
83 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
be determined as Annexure -I. Alternatively, a profit rate of 5% can be
considered.
v. Where normal value is determined based on cost of production plus profits,
different profit margins have been taken for different producers from Nepal.
Further, the profit margin taken for different PCNs of the same producer are also
different in some cases. The Authority should consistently consider a profit
margin of 5%, in line with past practice.
vi. The selling, general and administrative expenses and profit margin must be based
on actual information, and other information may be relied upon only if actual
information is not available.
vii. Export-related subsidies included in the overall profitability should be excluded
as they are not related to domestic sales.
viii. Since the Government of Nepal revoked the export incentives with retrospective
effect, and no amount has been disbursed by the Government, the same must be
disregarded for calculation of profit margin.
ix. The actual general and administrative expenses and profit margin considered for
normal value of Sacking for Baba Jute and Swastik has been disregarded.
x. The normal value for Hessian of Arihant must be on the basis of its domestic
sales, and its domestic sales are more than 5% of its total exports to India and
more than 80% of its profitable domestic sales.
xi. The normal value for Twine of Raghupati must be based on profitable domestic
sales. However, it appears that the normal value has been incorrectly calculated
based on cost of production, sales, general and administrative expenses and profit
margin. Further, the sales, general and administrative expenses and profit margin
considered is higher that actually incurred by Raghupati.
xii. In the present case, the Authority has noted that the dumping margin for AM Jute
is negative and injury to domestic industry cannot be on account of imports by
AM Jute. Thus, there is no need for enhancement of duties for AM Jute.
xiii. In view of the negative injury margin determined for Lovely Jute Mills Limited,
NIL anti-dumping duty should be recommended for Lovely Jute Mills Limited
by applying the lesser duty rule.
xiv. For Shree Raghupati, the adjustment for change in inventory made to PCN wise
cost has been done on production value. Such approach must not be applied as is
to change in inventory for finished goods. The change in inventory value for each
PCN must be based on per unit production cost of each PCN (arrived after
production value-based allocation) to the opening and closing stock quantity of
each PCN.
xv. Arnu Jute Mills Limited has significant exports, is fully cooperating, and was
selected as a sampled producer in the previous sunset review. Therefore,
individual examination should be granted to Arnu Jute.
xvi. Although Rule 17(3) permits statistically valid sampling, the objective of
sampling is to ensure representativeness of exports from the subject country.
xvii. The cost of production of sacking bags appears inflated as there is minimal value
addition in conversion of sacking cloth to sacking bags.
84 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
xviii. The disclosure statement does not address the specific request made for exclusion
of sacking bag and sacking cloth from Bangladesh from scope of review, despite
admission by the domestic industry that export prices of these product categories
had not declined. Accordingly, the requirements of Rule 23 for establishing a
significant and lasting change in circumstances have not been satisfied.
xix. The prices trends reflect normal market fluctuations and do not demonstrate a
sustained or irreversible decline. An increase in import volumes does not, by
itself, establish a lasting change in circumstances.
xx. Mere reliance on fluctuation in average import prices is not accurate as there has
been no continuous or sustained decline in price of imports from Bangladesh.
Increase in import price during the period of investigation shows that the prices
have responded to market conditions. Fluctuations in import prices are a normal
aspect of international trade, which are impacted by various factors and such
decline is temporary or cyclical.
xxi. The Authority should confirm its observation that there is insufficient evidence to
show that certain exporters are routing goods produced by other producers.
xxii. Recommendations in the present review should be based upon exporter-specific
evidence rather than generalized allegations concerning the industry as a whole.
xxiii. The Authority has disregarded all submissions by the exporters even when the
burden of proof lies upon the applicants to establish changed circumstances and
not on the exporters to disprove speculative assumptions of the applicants.
xxiv. No analysis has been undertaken to show that existing prices are likely to persist
in the future, and the examination is based solely on historical observations.
xxv. The Authority should consider the data of the sampled exporters, which has been
duly verified, to determine the existence of changed circumstances.
xxvi. The present mid-term review is limited to re-evaluation of the existing duties and
does not permit modification of the established duty structure. Different product
categories are distinct in terms of manufacturing process, cost structure and end
use, and there does not exist any evidence of alleged switching of dumping
between products.
xxvii. India has consistently remained dependent on imports to meet domestic demand
and that imports are inevitable due to insufficient domestic availability.
L.2. Submissions by the domestic industry
219. The domestic industry has reiterated its submissions regarding steep decline in export
price without commensurate change in raw jute prices, existence of change in
circumstances of lasting nature, adverse impact of imports on the performance of the
domestic industry, and importance of jute industry to the Indian economy. In addition,
the domestic industry has made the following new submissions post issuance of the
disclosure statement:
i. Imports from the subject countries have increased materially despite sufficient
installed capacity with the domestic industry.
85 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
ii. The likelihood examination by the Authority shows existence of continued
dumping, and that the conditions justifying continued duties remain unchanged.
iii. The existence of a negative dumping margin for certain exporters during the
period of investigation does not eliminate the likelihood of dumping. The
assessment must consider overall production conditions, export orientation, and
market behaviour rather than relying solely on margins during a single period. Nil
duty should not be allowed unless it is affirmatively established that such
producers do not pose a likelihood of dumping and injury in the event of removal
or variation of duty.
iv. The positive injury margin shows that even at current export price, the imports
are priced below the non-injurious price of the domestic industry.
v. The injury suffered by the domestic industry directly coincides with dumped
imports from the subject countries.
vi. Jute yarn, hessian fabric, and sacking bags constitute a single like article. As per
consistent practice of the Authority in similar multi-type product cases, a unified
duty is appropriate where products share common raw material, manufacturing
technology, and functional characteristics. Reliance has been placed in this regard
on the findings in the case of glass fibre, and stainless steel flat products.
L.3. Examination by the Authority
220. The Authority has examined the post-disclosure submissions made by the interested
parties. It is observed that the majority of these submissions are reiterations of
arguments and contentions that have already been examined and addressed to the extent
deemed necessary in the relevant paragraphs of these final findings. For the sake of
brevity, the Authority has refrained from repeating responses to such submissions in
this post-disclosure examination. However, new submissions raised for the first time in
post-disclosure comments, as well as those previously addressed but deemed necessary
to examine further, are addressed hereunder.
221. With regard to the contention that the Authority did not disclose essential facts, it is
noted that the cost of production considered, the domestic selling price, the results of
the ordinary course of trade test, profit margin considered, normal value so determined,
export price determined, and landed price determined by the Authority were duly
disclosed to the interested parties. Therefore, there was sufficient disclosure of essential
facts to the interested parties. Further, since the profit margin has already been
disclosed to the interested parties, the contention that it cannot be treated as confidential
from the parties themselves, does not hold merit.
222. The interested parties have contended that in the absence of domestic sales, the normal
value should be determined in accordance with para (4) of Annexure – I. For producers
having domestic sales during the period of investigation, Authority has considered the
profit margin actually earned by the producers, on sales made in the ordinary course of
trade, that is, profitable sales. The interested parties have sought consideration of a flat
86 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
profit margin of 5%. However, no justification has been submitted in support of such
profit margin. It is noted that as per the provisions of para (4) of Annexure – I of the
Anti-Dumping Rules, the profit shall be determined based on actual data pertaining to
production and sales in the ordinary course of trade, of the like article. The same has
been correctly adopted in the present review. The Authority further notes that the
exporter has not explained any reason why the profit margin earned on the profitable
sales should be considered unreasonable.
223. For producers with no sales in the domestic market, the profit margin has been arrived
at based on overall operations of the producer, as per Appendix 7. The same has been
done for Asha Jute Industries Limited and Shree Pashupatinath Jute Mills Private
Limited, which are engaged solely in the production and sale of the subject goods.
Certain interested parties have contended that the profit margin should not be
determined in such manner, or that export incentives should be excluded from such
margin determination. It is noted that the Authority shall rely on books of accounts of
the foreign producers for the determination of profit margin. In doing so, the total
expenses and incomes pertaining to the subject goods shall be considered. Further, the
Authority has considered the incentives reported by the foreign producers themselves,
as having been recorded during the period of investigation. The Authority does not find
merit in consideration of subsequent developments, the effects of which may have been
provided in different periods. It is further observed that under paragraph (4) of
Annexure – I, the profit margin shall be determined based on (a) amounts realized by
producer in respect of production or sale in domestic market, of the same general
category of article, (b) weighted average profit earned by producers in respect of
production and sales of the like article in the domestic market of the country of origin,
or (c) any other reasonable basis. The Authority has presently considered the profit as
per Appendix 7, as a reasonable basis. Certain exporters have also admitted that
consideration of profit as per Appendix 7 would be a reasonable basis for the
determination of profit margin. Therefore, the profit margin considered by the Authority
is appropriate.
224. It is further noted that the interested parties have not shown that the profit margin is
higher than that normally realized by the exporters or producers on sales of products of
the same general category in the domestic market of the country of origin. In particular,
it is noted that the profit margin considered for Shree Pashupatinath Jute Mills Private
Limited and Asha Jute Industries Limited is comparable to the profit margins being
earned by other producers in the country of origin. This is despite the fact that the profit
of the aforesaid producers does not include any export incentives. Therefore, such
profit margin does not exceed that normally realized by the exporters or producers on
sales of products of the same general category in the domestic market of the country of
origin. Likewise, the profit margin considered for Asha Jute Industries Limited is
comparable to or lower than that considered for other producers in the country, such as
Natore Jute Mills, Poddar Agro Industries, Ranu Agro Industries Ltd and Lovely Jute
87 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
Mills Limited. In view of the same, the Authority does not find merit in the request for
re-consideration of profit margins.
225. As regards the contention that different profit margins have been taken for different
PCNs, the issue has been re-examined. It is confirmed that a single profit margin has
been determined for all sales by a producer in the country of origin.
226. As regards the calculation of dumping margin for Arihant, it has been re-examined, and
the contention of the producer that more than 80% of the domestic sales of Hessian are
profitable is incorrect. The normal value has, therefore, been determined based on price
of profitable sales. As regards twine for Raghupati, it is noted that amongst the PCNs of
twine exported, one of them had less 80% profitable sales, but sufficient to determine
the normal value based on price of profitable sales. The normal value and consequently
dumping margin has, therefore, been revised in the present determination.
227. Shree Raghupati has concerns regarding the cost of production determined for each
PCN. Further, certain exporters have claimed that the cost of production of sacking
bags appears to be higher. The Authority notes that the cost of production has been
determined by applying the principles laid down under Annexure – I of the Anti-
Dumping Rules. The cost of production determined has been disclosed to the interested
parties. However, the interested parties have not highlighted any infirmity in the
determination of cost of production for sacking bags.
228. The interested parties have contended that for producers with negative dumping
margin, there is no warrant for enhancement of duty. The Authority concurs that the
margins cannot be enhanced for the producers, where the producer was not found to be
engaged in dumping in the present review. Accordingly, the existing duty has been
recommended for such producers.
229. The request by Arnu Jute Mills Ltd. for individual examination has been examined
previously. The exporter has reiterated that since it was considered as a part of the
sample during the previous sunset review, it should be considered as a part of sample in
the present review as well. The Authority has examined the issue, and notes that Arnu
Jute Mills Ltd. was sampled in the previous review, but was found to have not exported
the product under consideration. Therefore, no individual duty has been allowed to the
producer, and the reliance on the previous sunset review is misplaced. Further, the
methodology adopted for sampling in the present review is in consonance with that in
the original investigation and sunset review. The interested parties have failed to show
any change in facts or reason for deviation from the previously adopted methodology.
230. Certain interested parties have disputed that there is a change in circumstances of a
lasting nature. The interested parties contend that the decline in prices may be cyclical
or temporary, and does not necessarily indicate a sustained decline, warranting a mid-
term review. The Authority notes that no information or evidence has been provided by
88 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
the interested parties in support of their contention. The parties have failed to provide
information to indicate that the prices of the subject goods are cyclical or temporary in
nature, through historical price movements. While the interested parties contend that
the increase in prices during the period of investigation demonstrates that the decline in
prices was temporary, they have not provided their own price trends, demonstrating the
same. Moreover, while prices showed a marginal uptick during the period of
investigation compared to 2023-24, prices during the period of investigation remain
materially lower than levels obtaining in 2021-22 and 2022-23. The fact of some price
recovery in a single year does not negate the overall downward trajectory observed
across the injury investigation period. The Authority has also noted that the decline in
export prices is disproportionate to the movement in raw jute prices, indicating that the
pricing behaviour is not merely a function of input cost pass-through. The contention is,
accordingly, not accepted.
231. Post issuance of disclosure statement, the Authority observed certain inadvertent errors
in the import volumes and prices noted as per the final findings in the sunset review.
The same have also been corrected in the present findings. However, the corrections
made did not lead to any change in the conclusions arrived at by the Authority.
232. As regards the burden of proof, the Authority notes that the domestic industry had
contended a decline in prices, supported by changes in raw material cost. The domestic
industry provided positive evidence substantiating the need for review in this regard.
The findings of the Authority during the course of this investigation also supports the
contention of the domestic industry in this regard. In case the interested parties intend
to dispute such decline, or adduce other factors impacting cost; the burden of proof for
such contention does not shift to the domestic industry. The parties also have the onus
to establish the contentions being raised by them. However, while the parties have
disputed that other factors affect prices, no information or evidence in this regard has
been provided. In any case, the arguments of the interested parties in this regard have
already been examined by the Authority hereinabove.
233. With regard to the submission that sacking bag and sacking cloth from Bangladesh
should be excluded from any modification or enhancement of duties, the Authority
notes that the present mid-term review has been initiated under Rule 23 of the Anti-
Dumping Rules on the basis of a duly filed application alleging, inter alia, a decline in
export prices. The scope of the review encompasses all product categories falling
within the product under consideration. The Authority has examined the export price
trends for each product category on the basis of verified data available on record. The
Authority notes that while the magnitude of price decline may vary across product
categories, the overall assessment of changed circumstances and the modification of
duties is made holistically for the product under consideration and not on a product-
category-specific basis for the purpose of selective exclusion. The contention is,
accordingly, not accepted.
89 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
234. The interested parties have also contended that the Authority has not undertaken an
examination of whether the existing prices are likely to persist in future. The Authority
notes that it has already examined and concluded a change in circumstances of lasting
nature. There is no information on record to indicate that the circumstances are likely to
change in foreseeable future, so as to warrant a different conclusion.
235. As regards the contention that the existence of changed circumstances should be
determined as per sampled exporters, the Authority already examined such submission.
As noted previously, in the absence of relevant information over the injury period and
period of investigation of the sunset review, the comparison of trends based on
responses of foreign producers is not possible. While the interested parties have
reiterated their claim that the Authority should rely on their information, they have not
provided the relevant information, to allow the Authority to examine the contention.
236. With regard to the submissions that there is demand-supply gap in India, the domestic
industry has disputed the same, claiming that the domestic industry holds sufficient
capacity to cater to the demand in India. In any case, the Authority notes that demand-
supply gap is not a justification for dumping in India. The imposition of appropriate
quantum of duty shall only ensure a level playing field to the domestic producers.
237. The Authority has also examined the submissions of the domestic industry, regarding
the need for a single quantum of duty across all forms of the product. However, the
domestic industry has not shown any change in circumstances warranting such change.
The other interested parties have disputed the request of the domestic industry. It is
noted that the scope of product remains the same, as that in the previous review, and
there has been no change in facts warranting a change in the manner of imposition of
duty. In view of the same, the Authority has not accepted the contention of the domestic
industry.
M. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
238. Having initiated and conducted the review as requested by IJMA and AJMA, and
having regard to the contentions raised, information provided and submissions made by
the interested parties and facts available before the Authority through the submissions
made by the interested parties or otherwise as recorded in this finding and on the basis
of the analysis of the state of current dumping and injury and likelihood of continuation
or recurrence of dumping and injury, the Authority concludes that:
i. The scope of product under consideration is the same as that defined in the
previous sunset review.
ii. In view of final findings Notification No. 7/3/2018-DGAD, dated 19th March
2019 by the Authority, concluding that the anti-dumping duty on sacking bag was
being circumvented through export of sacking cloth from Bangladesh; the duties
on sacking cloth imported from Bangladesh is co-terminus with the duty on
90 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
sacking bag. The same was also observed in the final findings in the previous
sunset review.
iii. The PCN methodology notified vide notification dated 1st September 2025, is
appropriate. No separate PCN is required to be notified in respect of twine from
Nepal.
iv. The applicant domestic producers produce like article to the imported product
under consideration.
v. The applicant domestic producers constitute a major proportion of the total
domestic production, and constitute domestic industry.
vi. The Authority has the jurisdiction and power to vary the quantum of duty, under a
review initiated under Rule 23(1A).
vii. The export price of the subject goods has declined over the period; without a
commensurate change in the raw material cost. As a result, the imports of the
product have increased. Therefore, there is a change in circumstances of a lasting
nature, warranting a review.
viii. The Authority has examined the injury information for the domestic industry, to
examine whether the withdrawal of duty is not likely to lead to continuation or
recurrence of injury.
ix. Despite the duties in force, the subject imports have increased over the injury
period, and are undercutting and depressing the prices of the domestic industry.
As a result, the performance of the domestic industry has been affected in terms
of its production, capacity utilization, sales, market share, inventories, profits,
cash profits, return on capital employed, and ability to raise capital investment.
The imports have affected prices of the domestic industry. Thus, the domestic
industry has continued to suffer injury, despite the duties in force.
x. There is likelihood of further injury, having regard to volume and rate of increase
in imports, excess production capacities in the subject countries, increase in
capacities in the subject countries, likely suppressing or depressing effect of
imports, and the present injury faced by the domestic industry.
xi. There is a need for re-quantification of duty, having regard to the current
dumping margin and injury margin; and the likely dumping and injury, in the
absence of current dumping margin and injury margin.
xii. The injury faced by the domestic industry is attributable to subject imports, and
there are no other factors causing injury to the domestic industry.
xiii. The continued imposition and modification in quantum of duty shall be in public
interest, as evident from following parameters.
a. The users of the subject goods have not participated in the present review, to
oppose the continuation of duties. This shows that the users do not
anticipate an adverse impact of the duties on their operations.
b. The jute industry provides employment to 4 lakh workers in organized mills
and diversified units, including the tertiary sector and allied activities.
c. Further, the jute industry supports the livelihood of 40 lakh farmers.
d. The Commission for Agricultural Costs and Prices, Ministry of Agriculture
and Farmers Welfare has noted that the imposition of anti-dumping duty
91 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
had resulted in the resumption of operations in 13 twine mills in Andhra
Pradesh, benefitting about 20 thousand workers and created additional
demand for 2 lakh tons of jute in the domestic market.
e. The jute mills in the state of West Bengal are largely placed in one district, that
is, North 24 Parganas, and the people of this district are largely employed by
the jute mills surrounding the district
f. 25% of the raw jute grown in India is of higher grade, which is used in fine
yarn and hessian fabric, that is sold in the open market. If such market is
left vulnerable to imports, the domestic production for such products would
be rendered unviable.
g. The Indian industry has the capacity to cater to the entirety of the demand in
India, and the country is self-sufficient in the product.
239. 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
scope of review, change in circumstances and need for re-quantification of margins.
Having initiated and conducted the investigation in terms of the provisions laid down
under the Anti-Dumping Rules, the Authority is of the view that there is need for re-
quantification of anti-dumping duty applicable on imports of the product under
consideration.
240. The anti-dumping duty is in force for five years from the date of issuance of
Notification No. 33/2022 – Customs (ADD) dated 30th December 2022. Accordingly,
the definitive anti-dumping duties on the import of the subject goods, originating in or
exported from Bangladesh and Nepal, is recommended for the remaining period of
imposition of duty, as indicated in the duty table appended below.
Duty Table
Sl. | Heading | Description | Specifications | Country of | Country of | Producer | Amount | Unit | Currency
No. | | of Goods* | | Origin | export | | | |
(1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | (6) | (7) | (8) | (9) | (10)
1 | 5307, | Jute Yarn/ | In all forms | Bangladesh | Any country | A. M. Jute | Nil | MT | USD
| 5310, | Twine | and | | including | Industries | | |
| 6305 and | | specifications | | Bangladesh | Limited | | |
| 5607 | | | | | | | |
2 | -do- | Hessian | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | A. M. Jute | Nil | MT | USD
| | Fabric | | | including | Industries | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | Limited | | |
3 | -do- | Jute Yarn/ | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Asha Jute | 59 | MT | USD
| | Twine | | | including | Industries | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | Limited | | |
4 | -do- | Sacking | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Asha Jute | 94 | MT | USD
| | Bags | | | including | Industries | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | Limited | | |
5 | -do- | Sacking | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Bonanza Jute | Nil | MT | USD
| | Bags | | | including | Composite & | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | Diverse | | |
| | | | | | Factory Ltd. | | |
6 | -do- | Sacking | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Lovely Jute | Nil | MT | USD
92 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
| | | | | including | Mills Limited | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | | | |
7 | -do- | Jute Yarn/ | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Natore Jute | 107 | MT | USD
| | Twine | | | including | Mills | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | Limited | | |
8 | -do- | Sacking | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Natore Jute | Nil | MT | USD
| | Bags | | | including | Mills | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | Limited | | |
9 | -do- | Sacking | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Nawhata Jute | Nil | MT | USD
| | Bags | | | including | Mills Ltd. | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | | | |
10 | -do- | Jute Yarn/ | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Poddar Agro | Nil | MT | USD
| | Twine | | | including | Industries | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | | | |
11 | -do- | Sacking | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Poddar Agro | Nil | MT | USD
| | Bags | | | including | Industries | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | | | |
12 | -do- | Sacking | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Ranu Agro | Nil | MT | USD
| | Bags | | | including | Industries Ltd. | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | | | |
13 | -do- | Jute Yarn/ | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Super Jute | 139 | MT | USD
| | Twine | | | including | Mills Limited | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | | | |
14 | -do- | Sacking | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Super Jute | 155 | MT | USD
| | Bags | | | including | Mills Limited | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | | | |
15 | -do- | Jute Yarn/ | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Hasan Jute | 69 | MT | USD
| | Twine | | | including | Mills Ltd | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | | | |
16 | -do- | Sacking | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Hasan Jute | 120 | MT | USD
| | Bags | | | including | Mills Ltd | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | | | |
17 | -do- | Jute Yarn/ | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Hasan Jute & | 69 | MT | USD
| | Twine | | | including | Spinning Mills | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | Limited | | |
18 | -do- | Sacking | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Hasan Jute & | 120 | MT | USD
| | Bags | | | including | Spinning Mills | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | Limited | | |
19 | -do- | Jute Yarn/ | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Janata Jute | 69 | MT | USD
| | Twine | | | including | Mills Limited | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | | | |
20 | -do- | Sacking | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Janata Jute | 120 | MT | USD
| | Bags | | | including | Mills Limited | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | | | |
21 | -do- | Hessian | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Janata Jute | Nil | MT | USD
| | Fabric | | | including | Mills Limited | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | | | |
22 | -do- | Jute Yarn/ | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Sadat Jute | 69 | MT | USD
| | Twine | | | including | Industries | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | Limited | | |
23 | -do- | Sacking | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Sadat Jute | 120 | MT | USD
| | Bags | | | including | Industries | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | Limited | | |
24 | -do- | Hessian | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Afil Jute | 88 | MT | USD
| | Fabric | | | including | Weaving Mills | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | Ltd. | | |
25 | -do- | Hessian | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Alina Jute | 88 | MT | USD
| | Fabric | | | including | Mills Limited | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | | | |
26 | -do- | Jute Yarn/ | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Afzal Fiber | 69 | MT | USD
93 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
| | Twine | | | including | Processing | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | Industries | | |
27 | -do- | Sacking | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Afzal Fiber | 120 | MT | USD
| | Bags | | | including | Processing | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | Industries | | |
28 | -do- | Jute Yarn/ | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Ahyan Jute | 69 | MT | USD
| | Twine | | | including | Mills Limited | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | | | |
29 | -do- | Sacking | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Ahyan Jute | 120 | MT | USD
| | Bags | | | including | Mills Limited | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | | | |
30 | -do- | Jute Yarn/ | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Alijan Jute | 69 | MT | USD
| | Twine | | | including | Mills Limited | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | | | |
31 | -do- | Jute Yarn/ | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Sonali Aansh | 69 | MT | USD
| | Twine | | | including | Industries | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | Limited | | |
32 | -do- | Sacking | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Arnu Jute | 120 | MT | USD
| | Bags | | | including | Mills Limited | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | | | |
33 | -do- | Jute Yarn/ | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Bogra Jute | 69 | MT | USD
| | Twine | | | including | Mills Limited | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | | | |
34 | -do- | Sacking | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Bogra Jute | 120 | MT | USD
| | Bags | | | including | Mills Limited | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | | | |
35 | -do- | Sacking | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Chuadanga | 120 | MT | USD
| | Bags | | | including | Jute Mill | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | | | |
36 | -do- | Jute Yarn/ | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Golden Jute | 69 | MT | USD
| | Twine | | | including | Industries | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | Limited | | |
37 | -do- | Jute Yarn/ | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Hasem Jute | 69 | MT | USD
| | Twine | | | including | Industries Ltd. | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | | | |
38 | -do- | Jute Yarn/ | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Hazrat Shah | 69 | MT | USD
| | Twine | | | including | Chandrapuri | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | Jute Mills Ltd. | | |
39 | -do- | Sacking | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Hazrat Shah | 120 | MT | USD
| | Bags | | | including | Chandrapuri | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | Jute Mills Ltd. | | |
40 | -do- | Sacking | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Jamuna Jute | 120 | MT | USD
| | Bags | | | including | Industries Ltd. | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | | | |
41 | -do- | Sacking | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Rahman Jute | 120 | MT | USD
| | Bags | | | including | Mills (Pvt.) | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | Ltd. | | |
42 | -do- | Sacking | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Mirza Jute | 120 | MT | USD
| | Bags | | | including | Mills Ltd. | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | | | |
43 | -do- | Jute Yarn/ | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Mouna Jute | 69 | MT | USD
| | Twine | | | including | Mills Ltd. | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | | | |
44 | -do- | Sacking | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Mouna Jute | 120 | MT | USD
| | Bags | | | including | Mills Ltd. | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | | | |
45 | -do- | Jute Yarn/ | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Oriental Jute | 69 | MT | USD
| | Twine | | | including | Mills Ltd. | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | | | |
46 | -do- | Sacking | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Oriental Jute | 120 | MT | USD
94 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
| | | | | including | Mills Ltd. | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | | | |
47 | -do- | Jute Yarn/ | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Rahman Jute | 69 | MT | USD
| | Twine | | | including | Spinners (Pvt.) | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | Ltd. | | |
48 | -do- | Jute Yarn/ | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Rajbari Jute | 69 | MT | USD
| | Twine | | | including | Mills Ltd. | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | | | |
49 | -do- | Hessian | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Rajbari Jute | 88 | MT | USD
| | Fabric | | | including | Mills Ltd. | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | | | |
50 | -do- | Jute Yarn/ | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Roman Jute | 69 | MT | USD
| | Twine | | | including | Mills Limited | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | | | |
51 | -do- | Jute Yarn/ | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Sagar Jute | 69 | MT | USD
| | Twine | | | including | Spinning Mills | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | Ltd. | | |
52 | -do- | Sacking | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Sagar Jute | 120 | MT | USD
| | Bags | | | including | Spinning Mills | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | Ltd. | | |
53 | -do- | Jute Yarn/ | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Sidlaw | 69 | MT | USD
| | Twine | | | including | Textiles | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | (Bangladesh) | | |
| | | | | | Ltd. | | |
54 | -do- | Sacking | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Sidlaw | 120 | MT | USD
| | Bags | | | including | Textiles | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | (Bangladesh) | | |
| | | | | | Ltd. | | |
55 | -do- | Jute Yarn/ | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Wahab Jute | 69 | MT | USD
| | Twine | | | including | Mills Ltd. | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | | | |
56 | -do- | Jute Yarn/ | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Any Producer | 445 | MT | USD
| | Twine | | | including | other than | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | mentioned in | | |
| | | | | | SN 1 to 55 | | |
| | | | | | above | | |
57 | -do- | Hessian | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Any Producer | 88 | MT | USD
| | Fabric | | | including | other than | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | mentioned in | | |
| | | | | | SN 1 to 55 | | |
| | | | | | above | | |
58 | -do- | Sacking | -do- | Bangladesh | Any country | Any Producer | 283 | MT | USD
| | Bags | | | including | other than | | |
| | | | | Bangladesh | mentioned in | | |
| | | | | | SN 1 to 55 | | |
| | | | | | above | | |
59 | -do- | Jute Yarn/ | -do- | Any country | Bangladesh | Any | 445 | MT | USD
| | Twine | | other than | | | | |
| | | | Bangladesh | | | | |
| | | | and Nepal | | | | |
60 | -do- | Hessian | -do- | Any country | Bangladesh | Any | 88 | MT | USD
| | Fabric | | other than | | | | |
| | | | Bangladesh | | | | |
| | | | and Nepal | | | | |
61 | -do- | Sacking | -do- | Any country | Bangladesh | Any | 283 | MT | USD
| | Bags | | other than | | | | |
| | | | Bangladesh | | | | |
| | | | and Nepal | | | | |
62 | -do- | Jute Yarn/ | -do- | Nepal | Any country | Arihant Multi- | Nil | MT | USD
| | Twine | | | including | Fibres Ltd. | | |
95 THE GAZTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
| | | | | Nepal | | | |
63 | -do- | Hessian | -do- | Nepal | Any country | Arihant Multi- | 56 | MT | USD
| | Fabric | | | including | Fibres Ltd. | | |
| | | | | Nepal | | | |
64 | -do- | Sacking | -do- | Nepal | Any country | Arihant Multi- | Nil | MT | USD
| | Bags | | | including | Fibres Ltd. | | |
| | | | | Nepal | | | |
65 | -do- | Jute Yarn/ | -do- | Nepal | Any country | Shree | Nil | MT | USD
| | Twine | | | including | Raghupati Jute | | |
| | | | | Nepal | Mills Limited | | |
66 | -do- | Hessian | -do- | Nepal | Any country | Shree | 56 | MT | USD
| | Fabric | | | including | Raghupati Jute | | |
| | | | | Nepal | Mills Limited | | |
67 | -do- | Sacking | -do- | Nepal | Any country | Shree | Nil | MT | USD
| | Bags | | | including | Raghupati Jute | | |
| | | | | Nepal | Mills Limited | | |
68 | -do- | Jute Yarn/ | -do- | Nepal | Any country | Baba Jute | 59 | MT | USD
| | Twine | | | including | Mills Private | | |
| | | | | Nepal | Limited | | |
69 | -do- | Hessian | -do- | Nepal | Any country | Baba Jute | 64 | MT | USD
| | Fabric | | | including | Mills Private | | |
| | | | | Nepal | Limited | | |
70 | -do- | Sacking | -do- | Nepal | Any country | Baba Jute | 153 | MT | USD
| | Bags | | | including | Mills Private | | |
| | | | | Nepal | Limited | | |
71 | -do- | Jute Yarn/ | -do- | Nepal | Any country | Shree | 32 | MT | USD
| | Twine | | | including | Pashupatinath | | |
| | | | | Nepal | Jute Mills | | |
| | | | | | Private | | |
| | | | | | Limited | | |
72 | -do- | Hessian | -do- | Nepal | Any country | Shree | 60 | MT | USD
| | Fabric | | | including | Pashupatinath | | |
| | | | | Nepal | Jute Mills | | |
| | | | | | Private | | |
| | | | | | Limited | | |
73 | -do- | Sacking | -do- | Nepal | Any country | Shree | 45 | MT | USD
| | Bags | | | including | Pashupatinath | | |
| | | | | Nepal | Jute Mills | | |
| | | | | | Private | | |
| | | | | | Limited | | |
74 | -do- | Jute Yarn/ | -do-- | Nepal | Any country | Swastik Jute | 94 | MT | USD
| | Twine | | | including | Mills (P) Ltd. | | |
| | | | | Nepal | | | |
75 | -do- | Hessian | -do- | Nepal | Any country | Swastik Jute | 132 | MT | USD
| | Fabric | | | including | Mills (P) Ltd. | | |
| | | | | Nepal | | | |
76 | -do- | Sacking | -do- | Nepal | Any country | Swastik Jute | 97 | MT | USD
| | Bags | | | including | Mills (P) Ltd. | | |
| | | | | Nepal | | | |
77 | -do- | Jute Yarn/ | -do- | Nepal | Any country | Any Producer | 119 | MT | USD
| | Twine | | | including | other than | | |
| | | | | Nepal | mentioned in | | |
| | | | | | SN 62 to 76 | | |
| | | | | | above | | |
78 | -do- | Hessian | -do- | Nepal | Any country | Any Producer | 292 | MT | USD
| | Fabric | | | including | other than | | |
| | | | | Nepal | mentioned in | | |
| | | | | | SN 62 to 76 | | |
| | | | | | above | | |
79 | -do- | Sacking | -do- | Nepal | Any country | Any Producer | 247 | MT | USD
96 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
| | | | | including | other than | | |
| | | | | Nepal | mentioned in | | |
| | | | | | SN 62 to 76 | | |
| | | | | | above | | |
80 | -do- | Jute Yarn/ | -do- | Any country | Nepal | Any | 119 | MT | USD
| | Twine | | other than | | | | |
| | | | Bangladesh | | | | |
| | | | and Nepal | | | | |
81 | -do- | Hessian | -do- | Any country | Nepal | Any | 292 | MT | USD
| | Fabric | | other than | | | | |
| | | | Bangladesh | | | | |
| | | | and Nepal | | | | |
82 | -do- | Sacking | -do- | Any country | Nepal | Any | 247 | MT | USD
| | Bags | | other than | | | | |
| | | | Bangladesh | | | | |
| | | | and Nepal | | | | |
* “Jute Products” comprising of Jute Yarn/twine (multiple folded/cabled and single),
Hessian Fabrics and Jute Sacking bags.
Further having regard to the Final findings notified by the Authority vide Notification No.
7/3/2018-DGAD, dated 19th March 2019 recommending extension of existing anti-dumping
duty on ‘jute sacking cloth’ originating in or exported from Bangladesh, and further
imposition of the same by the Ministry of Finance vide Notification No. 24/2019-Customs
(ADD) dated 18th June, 2019, the Authority is of the view that the anti-dumping duty
applicable to imports of jute sacking bag from Bangladesh is also required to be extended to
imports of ‘jute sacking cloth’ from Bangladesh for all exporters of jute sacking cloth from
Bangladesh. except for the following producers for which exemption had been granted from
the extension of duties in the above notification.
1. M/s Mouna Jute Mills Ltd.
2. M/s Arnu Jute Mills Limited
3. M/s Rahman Jute Mills (Pvt.) Ltd.
4. M/s Jamuna Jute Industries Limited
5. M/s Sagar Jute Spinning Mills Limited
6. M/s Sidlaw Textiles (Bangladesh) Limited
7. M/s Partex Jute Mills Limited Bangladesh
8. M/s Asha Jute Industries Limited
9. M/s Nawhata Jute Mills Ltd.
10.M/s Mymensingh Jute Mills Ltd.
Note - The application of the individual duty rates specified for the producers mentioned in
the above shall be conditional upon presentation to customs authorities of a valid commercial
invoice, on which shall appear a declaration dated and signed by an official of the entity
issuing such invoice, identified by his/her name and function, drafted as follows:
“I, the undersigned, certify that the (volume) of (product concerned) sold for export to
India covered by this invoice was manufactured by (producer name and address) in the
97 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
(name of country). I declare that the information provided in this invoice is complete
and correct.” If no such invoice is presented, the duty applicable to all other producers
shall apply. This requirement is without prejudice to the verification procedures
independently undertaken by the Customs authorities under the applicable customs law
and regulations.
N. Further Procedure
241. An appeal against the determination of the Designated Authority in these final findings
shall lie before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal in accordance
with the relevant provisions of the Act / Rules.
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.
Login to read full text