Full Text
REGD. No. D. L.-33004/99
CG-DL-E-09032026-270749
EXTRAORDINARY
PART I—Section 1
PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY
No. 47] NEW DELHI, TUESDAY, MARCH 3, 2026/PHALGUNA 12, 1947
1582 GI/2026 (1)
2 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
S. No. | Producer | Duty Amount as % of CIF value
1 | M/s Xinyi Solar Sdn. Bhd., Malaysia | 9.71%
2 | All Others | 10.14%
[PART I—SEC.1] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY 3
4 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
[PART I—SEC.1] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY 5
6 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
[PART I—SEC.1] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY 7
8 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
[PART I—SEC.1] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY 9
10 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
SECTION – II
[PART I—SEC.1] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY 11
12 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
[PART I—SEC.1] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY 13
14 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
[PART I—SEC.1] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY 15
16 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
[PART I—SEC.1] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY 17
18 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
[PART I—SEC.1] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY 19
20 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
[PART I—SEC.1] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY 21
22 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
[PART I—SEC.1] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY 23
24 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
[PART I—SEC.1] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY 25
26 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
[PART I—SEC.1] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY 27
28 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
[PART I—SEC.1] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY 29
30 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
[PART I—SEC.1] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY 31
32 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
[PART I—SEC.1] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY 33
Subsidy Margin: Xinyi Solar
Program No. | Name of Program | Brief Description | Subsidy Margin | Range % | Nature of Subsidy
Program No. 4 | Investment Tax allowance | Exemption of 100% on capital expenditures. The total investment cost on production facilities incurred within the period of ten (10) years from February 2015 can be used to offset the taxable profit incurred since year 2015 till the accumulated ITA is fully utilised. | *** | 0-10 | Tax Incentive/ Revenue Foregone
Program No. 17 | Sales tax Exemption | Exemption from payment of sales tax for specific person on acquisition of raw materials, components and packaging material to be used solely and directly in manufacture of taxable goods | *** | 0-10 | Tax Incentive/ Revenue Foregone
Program No. 26 | License Manufacturing Warehouse | Exemption from custom duties and sales tax to all raw materials/components used directly in the manufacturing process of approved products regardless of whether the finished products are meant for exports or local market from the initial stage of manufacture until the finished products | *** | 0-10 | Tax Incentive/ Revenue Foregone
Total | | | *** | 0-10 |
34 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
Subsidy Margin: SBH Kibing SDN BHD
Program No. | Name of Program | Brief Description | Subsidy Margin | Range % | Nature of Subsidy
Program No. 1 | Subsidies in Natural Gas | Availability of natural gas at government regulated prices | *** | 0-10 | LTAR
Program No. 4 | Investment Tax allowance | Exemption of 100% on capital expenditures. The total investment cost on production facilities incurred within the period of ten (10) years from February 2015 can be used to offset the taxable profit incurred since year 2015 till the accumulated ITA is fully utilised. | *** | 0-10 | Tax Incentive/ Revenue Foregone
Program No. 17 | Sales tax Exemption | Exemption from payment of sales tax for specific person on acquisition of raw materials, components and packaging material to be used solely and directly in manufacture of taxable goods | *** | 0-10 | Tax Incentive/ Revenue Foregone
Program No. 20 | Sales tax Exemption on Plant and Machinery | Import duty exemption to the qualified manufacturer on raw materials / component that are not locally available | *** | 0-10 | Tax Incentive/ Revenue Foregone
Total | | | *** | 0-10 |
[PART I—SEC.1] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY 35
36 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
[PART I—SEC.1] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY 37
Particulars | UOM | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | 2023-24 | POI
Imports from Malaysia | MT | 91,949 | 81,937 | - | 18,916
Imports from Other Countries | MT | 1,06,487 | 3,13,588 | 8,52,440 | 7,01,564
Total Imports | MT | 1,98,436 | 3,95,524 | 8,52,440 | 7,20,480
% Share of Imports in Total Imports
Imports from Malaysia | % | 46.34% | 20.72% | 0.00% | 2.63%
Imports from Other Countries | % | 53.66% | 79.28% | 100.00% | 97.37%
Domestic Sales | MT | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 99 | 240 | 404
Sales of the Other Producers | MT | - | - | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 386
Total Demand | MT | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 169 | 380 | 402
38 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
Year | UoM | 2020-21 | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | POI
Imports from Malaysia | MT | 91,949 | 81,937 | 0 | 18,916
Imports from Other countries | MT | 1,06,488 | 3,13,587 | 8,52,440 | 7,01,564
Total Imports | MT | 1,98,437 | 3,95,524 | 8,52,440 | 7,20,480
Total Demand (MT) | MT | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 169 | 380 | 617
% Share in Demand
Subject country | % | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 53 | - | 5
Other Countries | % | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 174 | 211 | 164
It is noted that the volume of imports from Malaysia has shown increasing trend in the POI as compared to the immediately preceding years i.e., 2022-23.
c. Imports in relation to Production
187. As stated above, the share of imports from the subject country related to the production has declined to zero in 2022-23 from 88.81% in the base year i.e., 2020-21.
Particulars | UoM | 2020-21 | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | POI
Imports from subject country | MT | 91,949 | 81,937 | - | 18,916
Domestic production | MT | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 109 | 225 | 360
% Share of subject country in production | % | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 82 | - | 6
[PART I—SEC.1] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY 39
i. Price undercutting
189. Price undercutting has been determined by comparing the net sales realization of the domestic industry with the landed price of the imports for the period of investigation. It is seen that the price undercutting is positive during the period of investigation.
Particulars | Unit | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | 2023-24 | POI
Landed value | Rs./MT | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 109 | - | 73
Domestic selling price | Rs./MT | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 97 | 78 | 77
Price Undercutting | Rs./MT | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 52 | - | 93
Price Undercutting % | % | *** | *** | *** | ***
Price Undercutting % | Range | 20-30 | 10-20 | - | 30-40
190. It is seen that the price undercutting from Malaysia has consistently remained positive, indicating that Malaysian imports have been priced below the Domestic Industry’s selling price throughout the injury period. The Domestic Industry has also claimed that post imposition of provisional duties on China and Vietnam, Malaysian exporters significantly reduced their landed price from Rs. ***/MT in 2021–22 to Rs***/MT in the POI, intensifying price pressure. This sharp decline led to a steep increase in undercutting margin to ***%, severely impacting the Domestic Industry’s pricing ability and market position.
ii. Price suppression/depression
191. In order to determine whether the subsidized imports are depressing the domestic prices and whether the effect of such imports is to suppress prices to a significant degree or prevent price increase which otherwise would have occurred in the normal course, the changes in the costs and prices over the injury period, were compared as below:
Particulars | Unit | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | 2023-24 | POI
Cost of sales Domestic | ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 108 | 96 | 86
Selling price | ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 97 | 78 | 77
Landed Price | ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 109 | - | 73
40 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
Particulars | UoM | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | 2023-24 | POI
Capacity (MT) | MT | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Index | 100 | 112 | 255 | 363
Total Production (MT) | MT | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Index | 100 | 109 | 241 | 348
Production of PUC only (MT) | MT | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Index | 100 | 109 | 225 | 360
Capacity utilization (%) | % | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Index | 100 | 97 | 95 | 96
Domestic Sales | MT | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 99 | 240 | 404
Export Sales | MT | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 137 | 145 | 166
[PART I—SEC.1] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY 101
192. The Authority notes from the above that the landed value of the imports was below the selling price of the domestic industry throughout the injury period. During the period of investigation, the landed value of the subject goods remained lower than the cost of sales of the domestic industry and its domestic selling price. This prevented the domestic industry from keeping its price in tandem with the cost of sales. It is, therefore, noted that the imports have prevented price increase, which otherwise, would have occurred. Thus, the imports have had suppressing effect on the prices of the domestic industry.
193. Domestic Industry has further submitted that the aggressive pricing by Malaysian exporters has significantly depressed their selling prices, undermining profitability and recovery. Moreover, the demonstrated ability of these exporters to rapidly scale up import volumes within a short span further heightens the threat of intensified injury. These factors clearly indicate a strong likelihood of continued and recurring injury in the absence of trade remedial measures.
iii. Economic parameters related to the domestic industry
194. Anti-Subsidy Rules requires that the determination of injury shall involve an objective examination of the consequent impact of subsidized imports on domestic producers of the subject goods. The Rules further provide that the examination of the impact of the subsidized imports on the domestic industry should include an objective evaluation of all relevant economic factors and indices having a bearing on the state of the industry, including actual and potential decline in sales, profits, output, market share productivity, return on investments or utilization of capacity; factors affecting domestic prices, the magnitude of the margin of subsidy; actual and potential negative effects on cash flow, inventories, employment, wages, growth, ability to raise capital investments. The various injury parameters relating to the domestic industry are discussed herein below:
iv. Production, capacity, capacity utilization and sales volumes
195. Capacity, production, sales and capacity utilization of the domestic industry over the injury period were as below:
Particulars | UoM | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | 2023-24 | POI
Capacity (MT) | MT | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Index | 100 | 112 | 255 | 363
Total Production (MT) | MT | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Index | 100 | 109 | 241 | 348
Production of PUC only (MT) | MT | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Index | 100 | 109 | 225 | 360
Capacity utilization (%) | % | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Index | 100 | 97 | 95 | 96
Domestic Sales | MT | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 99 | 240 | 404
Export Sales | MT | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 137 | 145 | 166
102 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
196. It has been submitted by the Domestic Industry that despite a sharp rise in demand more than sixfold from 2021–22 to the POI, they were unable to fully utilize their capacities, with capacity utilization falling from ***% in the base year i.e., 2021-22 to ***% in the POI. It is further submitted that this mismatch between surging demand and suboptimal production clearly indicates that the Domestic Industry could not capitalize on market opportunities due to continued injurious effects of unfair imports from sources subject to trade remedial investigations dominated by Chinese producers. It is further submitted by the Domestic Industry that new capacities have been set up and more are planned to meet this increased protection against Malaysia in terms of extension and enhancement of existing duties.
v. Market share
197. The Domestic Industry has claimed that their market share has declined during the POI as compared to the base year i.e., 2021-22. It is further submitted that since 2015, they are under the continued pressure from Chinese exporters, either directly from China6 or through strategic investments in Malaysia and Vietnam7. The information with respect to change in the market share held by the petitioner, imports from China and imports from other countries is as below.
Market share of | Unit | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | 2023-24 | POI
Demand | MT | *** | *** | *** | ***
Share in Demand
Imports from Malaysia | Indexed | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 53 | - | 5
Imports from Other Countries | *** | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 174 | 211 | 164
Total Imports | *** | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 118 | 113 | 90
Domestic Sales | *** | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 58 | 63 | 100
Sales of the Other Producers | *** | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 365
198. From the above, it is noted that despite a substantial increase in demand of the subject goods the Domestic Industry’s market share remained stagnant at ***% during the POI, reflecting its inability to benefit from rising consumption. Imports from countries attracting duties dominated the market, holding a ***% share in the POI, while Malaysian imports, which previously held a significant share, re-entered with ***%. Domestic Industry further submitted that since exporters in Malaysia are controlled by Chinese producers, in no time share of Malaysia will be significant and dominant.
1. Anti-dumping duties on Chinese imports were in effect from 18.08.2017 to 17.08.2022 and fresh duties will be effective from 4.12.2024 to 3.12.2029. during which imports from China declined significantly.
2. Anti-dumping duties against Vietnam effective from 4.12.2024 to 3.12.2029.
[PART I—SEC.1] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY 103
199. The Domestic Industry has further submitted that, for a meaningful assessment of import impact, the Authority should consider the combined share of imports from Malaysia, China, and Vietnam, as these are effectively controlled by the same set of Chinese producers. These exporters, often operating through entities in Hong Kong, strategically use multiple jurisdictions to channel their exports into India. This coordinated arrangement enables convenience of choosing supply source and continues to severely restrict the Domestic Industry’s ability to expand its market presence despite rising demand.
vi. Profitability, cash profits and return on investment.
200. Information with respect to profitability, return on investment and cash profits was as follows:
Particulars | UOM | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | 2023-24 | POI
Net Selling price | ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Index | 100 | 97 | 78 | 77
Cost of Sales | ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Index | 100 | 108 | 96 | 86
Profit before Tax | ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Index | -100 | -342 | -499 | -300
Interest | ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Index | 100 | 237 | 670 | 290
PBIT | ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Index | -100 | -348 | -488 | -301
Depreciation | ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Index | 100 | 54 | 174 | 257
Cash Profit | ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Index | -100 | -523 | -703 | -327
ROCE | % | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Index | -100 | -166 | -106 | -99
201. The Domestic Industry has submitted that they have expected recovery following the imposition of anti-subsidy duties on imports from Malaysia in March 2021. However, the non-extension of duties against China despite DGTR’s positive recommendation alongside increasing imports from Vietnam, allowed Chinese exporters to exploit these alternate routes and flood the Indian market. Domestic Industry has further submitted that throughout this period, Chinese-origin exporters, operating through China, Malaysia, and Vietnam, continued to depress domestic prices, causing sustained injury. This influx of unfairly priced imports eroded the Domestic Industry’s profitability, restricted price increases to remunerative levels, and prevented recovery of cash profits and return on capital employed. The Domestic Industry, therefore, requested the Authority to recommend continuation of anti-subsidy duties to provide effective protection and enable long-overdue recovery.
vii. Productivity, employment, and wages
202. Information with respect to productivity, employment and wages over the injury period is as under:
104 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
Particulars | UOM | 2020-21 | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | POI
No of employees | Nos | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 138 | 224 | 215
Salary & Wages | ₹ Lacs | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 77 | 202 | 475
Productivity per day | MT/Day | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 109 | 225 | 360
203. It is seen that the number of employees increased over the injury period due to enhancement of the capacities. It is submitted that the productivity of the domestic industry has also increased indicating that increase in employment has not cause any productivity loss. The wages paid have also increased during such period.
viii. Inventories
204. The inventories of the domestic industry have increased in the period of investigation as compared to any of the previous years. The domestic industry has claimed that this shows the injurious effect of the dumped imports. Information with respect to the inventory with the domestic industry is as below:
Particulars | UOM | 2020-21 | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | POI
Average Inventory | MT | *** | *** | *** | ***
Trend | Indexed | 100 | 278 | 415 | 506
205. The level of inventory of the applicant is significant and highest during the POI as compared to any of the previous years.
ix. Growth
206. The growth also follows the same trend as followed by profitability, cash flow and ROCE. The growth parameters show a negative growth for most of the parameters. The details are provided in the table below.
Particulars | UoM | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | 2023-24 | POI
Production | % | - | 9% | 106% | 60%
Market share of Domestic Industry | % | - | -42% | 8% | 4%
Capacity utilization | % | - | -3% | -3% | 1%
Inventory | % | - | 178% | 1534% | 210%
Profit | % | - | 422% | -38% | 6%
Cash Profit | % | - | 477% | -10% | 1%
ROCE | % | - | 137% | -34% | 5%
x. Ability to Raise Capital Investments
207. The applicant has also claimed that presence of significantly low-priced imports in the market has impacted its ability to raise investments for any additional capacity expansions. It has been submitted that if the present scenario continues, its investment is likely to be highly unutilized and no new investment will come.
[PART I—SEC.1] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY 105
208. The Domestic Industry submitted that due to the emphasis of the Government of India on renewable sources of energy, the growth in the Solar energy is imminent. Since the subject goods are used in Solar Module, there is a huge scope of investment in this sector. Even applicants have also increased its capacity to cater to the increased demand. The fact that they got protection against dumped imports from China and also against subsidized imports from Malaysia, new investment had come. Further, duties against China and Vietnam the sector is positive for further investments. However, at this stage, if duties are not continued against Malaysia, Indian market will again be flooded by Chinese imports and protection given against China and Vietnam, will practically become ineffective. In the absence of anti-subsidy duties, there will be no new investment. In view thereof, it has been submitted by the Domestic Industry that seeing the positive demand and legitimate protection against unfair trade practices, the investment option remains open for the Domestic Industry. However, in the event duties are not extended, the ability of the domestic industry to raise capital investments for the sector will be seriously jeopardized.
Conclusion on material injury
209. An examination of the various parameters of injury along with the volume and price effects of imports reveals that imports of subject goods from the subject country during the POI remained constant due to existence of the anti-subsidized duties. However, there is an adverse price effect as evidenced from the table showing price undercutting and price suppression and depression. With regard to impact of adverse price effect on the domestic industry, it is noted that capacity utilization has declined despite increase in demand. Further, it is also noted that profitability, cash profit and ROCE of the domestic industry have been adversely affected on account of dumped imports of subject goods from the subject country.
Causal Link
xi. Non-Attribution Analysis
210. The Rules require the Authority to examine factors other than the subject imports that are causing or may cause injury to the domestic industry to avoid erroneous attribution of injury caused by such other factors to subsidized imports.
211. The Authority notes that the present proceedings are a sunset review and the causal link between subsidization and injury has already been established in the original investigation. The Authority has examined whether other known factors, as provided in the Rules, have caused or are likely to cause injury to the domestic industry.
(i) Volume and price of imports from third countries
212. The imports from the countries other than Malaysia and countries already attracting anti-dumping / anti-subsidy duties accounted for less than 3% in total imports. Thus, it cannot be said that imports from other countries are currently causing injury.
(ii) Export Performance
213. It is noted that the injury information examined by the Authority is for domestic operations and therefore possible changes in exports volume have not caused injury to the Domestic Industry.
(iii) Development of Technology
106 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
214. None of the interested parties have furnished any evidence to demonstrate significant changes in the technology that could have caused injury to the domestic industry. It is further noted that technology for production of the product concerned has not undergone any change. Thus, development in technology is not a factor causing injury to the domestic injury.
(iv) Performance of other products of the company
215. The Authority notes that the performance of other products being produced and sold by the Domestic Industry does not appear to be a possible cause of injury to the domestic industry.
(v) Trade Restrictive Practices and Competition between the Foreign and Domestic producers
216. The import of the subject goods is not restricted in any manner and the same are freely importable in the country. No evidence has been submitted by any interested party to suggest that the conditions of competition between the foreign and the domestic producers have undergone any change.
(vi) Productivity of the Domestic Industry
217. It is noted that the productivity of the domestic industry in terms of production per employee as well as production per day has increased over the period.
(vii) Contraction in Demand and Changes in pattern of consumption
218. It is noted that the demand of the subject goods has increased consistently over the entire injury period. Thus, it can be concluded that the injury to the Domestic industry was not due to contraction in demand.
Examination of injury and causal link:
219. It is thus noted that listed known other factors do not show that the domestic industry could have suffered injury due to these other factors. The Authority examined whether the dumping of the product has caused injury to the domestic industry.:
a) Imports are undercutting the prices of the domestic industry;
b) Positive and significant price undercutting caused by the subsidized imports is preventing the domestic industry from increasing its prices to remunerative levels;
c) Due to the decline in the import prices, the domestic industry is forced to incur losses in the POI;
d) The growth of the domestic industry has been declining in terms of number of price related economic parameters like profit, return on capital employed and cash profits etc., as a result of subsidized imports of the subject goods from the subject country;
e) Market share of the subsidized imports in demand increased and consequently, market share of the domestic industry declined.
f) The inventory level of the PUC of the Domestic Industry was highest during the POI.
g) There were no constraints such as raw material shortages, power shortage, tax, capacity/investment constraints, etc., on the operations of the Domestic Industry concerning the PUC
xii. Magnitude of Injury and Injury Margin
220. The Authority has determined Non-Injurious Price (NIP) for the domestic industry on the basis of principles laid down in the Rules read with Annexure-III to the Rules, as amended from time to time. The NIP of the domestic like product has been determined by adopting the verified information/data
[PART I—SEC.1] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY 107
relating to the cost to make and sell for the period of investigation. The NIP of the domestic industry has been worked out in accordance with Annexure III to the Rules. For determining NIP, the best utilization of the raw materials by the domestic industry over the injury period has been considered. The same treatment has been done with the utilities. The best utilization of production capacity over the injury period has been considered. The production in POI has been calculated considering the best capacity utilization and the same production has been considered for arriving per unit fixed costs. It is ensured that no extraordinary or non-recurring expenses were charged to the cost of production. A reasonable return (pre-tax @ 22%) on average capital employed (i.e. Average Net Fixed Assets plus Average Working Capital) for the product under consideration was allowed for recovery of interest, corporate tax and profit to arrive at the NIP as prescribed in Annexure-III and being consistently followed by the Authority. The non-injurious price so determined has been compared with the landed prices of imports from the subject country to determine the injury margin.
Producer | NIP | Landed value | Injury Margin | Injury Margin | Injury Margin
| USD/MT | USD/MT | USD/MT | % | Range
Kibing Group (M) Sdn. Bhd | *** | *** | *** | *** | 80-90
Xinyi Solar (Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd. | *** | *** | *** | *** | 40-50
Others | *** | *** | *** | *** | 80-90
H. Likelihood Of Continuation Or Recurrence Of Subsidization And Injury
221. In accordance with Rule 24(3), the Authority is required to examine the likelihood of continuation or recurrence of subsidization and injury in the event of expiry of duties. The Authority has examined all material placed on record relating to the likelihood of continuation or recurrence of injury, along with such other factors relevant to and having a bearing on the question of likelihood of continuation or recurrence of injury.
i. Continued subsidisation
222. The Authority notes that subsidization of the subject goods has continued in the period of investigation in the subject countries. Therefore, the Authority considers that subsidization is likely to continue.
ii. New Investment in Malaysia
223. The Domestic Industry based on the market reports and public information, submitted that new producer i.e., Kibing Solar Glass has set up their new plants to manufacturer subject goods. The details of new investment of subject goods are as follows:
a. Nippon Sheet Glass8 Co., Ltd.: Their capacities will be operational from fourth quarter of 2024 in Malaysia.
b. Xinyi Solar Malaysia, two9 lines having capacity of 1200 MT.
c. China-based Kibing Group10 is set to establish a large solar glass manufacturing plant in Kimanis, Sabah with installed capacity of 25 gigawatts (GW).
3. New Production Line of Solar Glass in Malaysia (nsg.com)
4. Page 11 of interim report 2022 i Xinyi Solar Holdings Limited
5. https://www.saurenergy.asia/kibing-group-to-build-usd-1-5-billion-solar-glass-plant-in-malaysia/
108 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
224. Based on the above data, Domestic Industry has submitted that with increased capacity and limited demand, in case duties are not extended, there is every likelihood that dumped imports from the subject countries will flood the Indian market to the detriment to the Indian producers.
iii. Attractiveness of the Indian market:
225. It is submitted by the Domestic Industry that the Indian market is very attractive to the producers / exporters from Malaysia or Chinese exporters either situated in China, Malaysia or Vietnam. It is further submitted that the demand for the subject goods increased during the injury investigation period. Furthermore, the industry's growth prospects remain strong. It is also submitted that India continues to be an attractive market for foreign producers and exporters, as evidenced by the sustained imports from despite the imposition of anti-dumping duties.
226. In addition to above, Domestic Industry has also submitted that based on the Trade map data India holds fourth position in the export destination for the producers// exporters from Malaysia.
iv. Increased imports from Malaysia post imposition of anti-dumping duties against China and Vietnam:
227. It is noted that post imposition of provisional duties against China and Vietnam in December 2024, imports have increased manifold from Malaysia. The month-wise imports during POI and post POI are provided below to show the aggressiveness of the exporters from Malaysia.
Qty-MT | Month | Total Imports
POI | Jan-24 | 0
POI | Feb-24 | 0
POI | Mar-24 | 0
POI | Apr-24 | 0
POI | May-24 | 0
POI | Jun-24 | 0
POI | Jul-24 | 0
POI | Aug-24 | 0
POI | Sep-24 | 474
POI | Oct-24 | 0
POI | Nov-24 | 2,870
POI / PF | Dec-24 | 14,832
Post PF | Jan-25 | 29,352
Post PF | Feb-25 | 67,908
Post PF | Mar-25 | 67,120
Grand Total
Imports during POI | | 18,916
Imports (Jan-March 25) Post imposition of PF | | 1,64,380
[PART I—SEC.1] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY 109
PF imposed on imports from China and Vietnam 5.12.2024
228. From the above graph, the Authority observes that the imports have increased substantially, post imposition of duties against China and Vietnam in December 2024, indicating clear likelihood of increased subsidized imports and injury to the Domestic Industry.
229. The Authority also notes the submissions of the Domestic Industry that, in view of the significant surplus capacities in Malaysia and the rising trend of imports post-POI there is a high probability that exports from Malaysia will once again flood the Indian market. This reinforces the critical need for extension and enhancement of anti-subsidy duties. The Domestic Industry has claimed that they will provide further substantiation of this likelihood during the course of the investigation, and its claims. The Authority during the course of the investigation will verify the projections through actual data submitted by Malaysian producers/exporters / government during the investigation process.
v. Likely Quantities below the Non-injurious Price of the domestic industry
230. It is noted from the responses of the cooperative exporters that Malaysian exporters have exported ***MT of the subject goods to countries other than India. Out of this quantity, ***MT is priced below the NIP computed by the Authority. The details are provided in the Table below:
Particulars | UOM | Xinyi | Kibing | Total
Quantity exported to third countries | MT | *** | *** | ***
Quantity exported below NIP | MT | *** | *** | ***
% of quantity below NIP (injurious quantity) | % | *** | *** | ***
Range | % | 70-80 | 70-80 | 70-80
vi.Likely Quantities below the Domestic Sales price of the domestic industry
231. It is also noted from the responses of the cooperative exporters that Malaysian exporters have exported ***MT of the subject goods to countries other than India. Out of this quantity, ***MT is priced below the domestic sales prices of the domestic industry. The details are provided in the Table below:
Particulars | UOM | Xinyi | Kibing | Total
Quantity exported to third countries | MT | *** | *** | ***
Quantity exported below Domestic Sales Price | MT | *** | *** | ***
110 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
% of quantity below Domestic Sales Price | % | *** | *** | ***
Range | % | 30-40 | 60-70 | 40-50
I. ISSUES OF THE INDIAN INDUSTRY
I.1 Submissions made by other interested parties
232. The other interested parties, including users and downstream solar module manufacturers, have inter alia submitted that:
i. Imposition or continuation of countervailing duties may increase procurement costs of textured tempered glass (“TTG”), which constitutes an important input for solar photovoltaic modules.
ii. Any increase in input cost may adversely impact competitiveness of downstream manufacturers operating in a globally competitive renewable energy market.
iii. The solar manufacturing sector is capital intensive and price sensitive; therefore, higher glass prices could affect module pricing, exports, and project viability.
iv. It has been argued that domestic availability of specialized variants of TTG, including advanced or application-specific glass used in newer module technologies, remains limited and downstream users may continue to depend on imports to ensure uninterrupted production.
v. Concerns were also raised that restrictions on imports may affect product quality, technological flexibility, and supply reliability for module manufacturers.
I.2 Submissions made by the Domestic Industry
233. The domestic industry has submitted that:
i. The objective of countervailing duty is to neutralize unfair subsidization and restore fair competition rather than restrict imports.
ii. The domestic industry has made substantial investments in TTG manufacturing and possesses the technical capability to supply the Indian market, while ongoing and planned capacity expansions are expected to improve supply availability.
iii. The presence of a viable domestic industry ensures supply security for a strategically important product used in solar energy generation.
iv. The impact of duties on downstream products is minimal because TTG constitutes only a small proportion of the total cost of solar modules.
v. Continuation of unfairly subsidized imports would undermine domestic manufacturing, discourage investments, and increase long-term import dependence, which would be contrary to national objectives of supply chain resilience and “Atmanirbhar Bharat”.
vi. A healthy domestic industry historically contributed to price stability and market development and therefore supports, rather than harms, downstream industries.
A.1 I.3Examination by the Authority
234. The Authority notes that the purpose of countervailing duties under the Customs Tariff Act and Anti-Subsidy Rules is to offset the injurious effect of subsidized imports and to restore conditions of fair competition in the domestic market. Such measures are not intended to restrict availability of goods or create artificial price escalation but to neutralize distortions caused by actionable subsidies.
[PART I—SEC.1] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY 111
235. The Authority invited views from all stakeholders, including producers, importers, users, and downstream industries, and circulated Economic Interest Questionnaires seeking information regarding:
• interchangeability of supplies,
• availability of domestic production,
• impact of duties on downstream industries,
• adjustment capability of users, and
• effect on consumers and national industrial interest.
236. While downstream users expressed concerns regarding possible cost implications, the Authority notes that no verifiable financial analysis or quantified evidence was submitted demonstrating material adverse impact on profitability, exports, or employment of downstream manufacturers.
I.4 Demand, Supply and Strategic Considerations
237. The Authority observes that TTG is a critical input used in solar photovoltaic modules, a sector witnessing rapid expansion in India owing to renewable energy targets. Evidence on record indicates that demand growth is driven by technological transition towards glass-to-glass modules and higher efficiency solar panels, resulting in increased glass consumption.
238. The Authority further notes that while demand has expanded rapidly, continuation of subsidized imports at unfair prices would undermine domestic manufacturing viability and discourage further investments necessary to bridge the demand–supply gap in the medium term.
I.5 Availability of Product
239. The Authority notes that imposition or continuation of countervailing duty does not prohibit imports. Imports may continue to enter the Indian market, albeit at fair and unsubsidized prices. Therefore, availability of TTG to downstream users is unlikely to be adversely affected.
240. The Authority further observes that multiple sources of supply remain available, including domestic producers, imports from subject country at fair prices, and imports from other countries.
I.6 Impact on Downstream Industry
241. The Authority has examined the likely impact of duties on downstream solar products. Based on information placed on record, the share of TTG in the total cost of downstream products remains limited. The estimated impact is illustrated below.
112 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
I.7 Estimated Impact of Duty on Downstream Products
The Authority, however, notes that the possible impact of the anti-subsidy duties on the end consumers in the following table:
Particulars | Reference | UoM | Amount
Price of 540 Wp solar module based on M10 solar cells | A | Rs. / Module | 9,000
Subject goods used in 540 Wp solar module based on M10 solar cells | B | Kgs./Module | 20.05
Price of Subject goods – Coated | C | Rs./Kg. | 42.01
Costs of subject goods build in 540 Wp solar module based on M10 solar cells | D=C*B | Rs/MT | 842
% cost of subject goods in Module | E=D/A | % | 9.36%
Additional cost on Module due to 10% anti subsidy duties on subject goods | F=D*10% | Rs/MT | 84
Total cost of subject goods in module adding anti-dumping duties | G=D+F | Rs/MT | 927
% cost of subject goods in Module | H=G/A | % | 10.30%
Additional impact per Solar Module due to anti-dumping duties | I=F/A | % | 0.94%
Source: Authority’s analysis based on submissions on record.
242. The Authority notes that even assuming full pass-through of duties, the impact on final downstream products remains well below 1%, which is economically insignificant in comparison to overall module pricing fluctuations driven by global polysilicon, wafer, and logistics costs.
J. POST-DISCLOSURE SUBMISSIONS
243. The post disclosure submissions have been received from the interested parties, and it is noted that most of the issues raised are reiterations and have already been raised earlier and also addressed appropriately. Additional submissions have been analyzed as under:
J.1 Submission made by the Domestic Industry
244. The submissions made by the Domestic Industry are as under
i. That the responses filed by the so-called participating producers/exporters, Xinyi and Kibing, ought to be disregarded as they have withheld critical information and misled the Authority by submitting incomplete and inaccurate data. These deficiencies have a direct and significant impact on the determination of subsidy margins and undermine the integrity of the investigation.
ii. The exporters have, also failed to disclose the involvement of related companies in export sales, while Kibing has not reported regional subsidies despite publicly available evidence. It is further submitted by the Domestic Industry that there are indications that Xinyi may be benefitting from gas-related subsidies which require verification.
[PART I—SEC.1] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY 113
iii. That any leniency extended to such exporters would amount to rewarding non-compliance and misrepresentation. Domestic Industry has further also submitted that the Authority has previously taken a strict view in similar situations and the same approach is warranted here in order to ensure that only complete, accurate, and verifiable information is relied upon in the determination and reject the exporter questionnaire responses of Xinyi and Kibing and subject them to residual anti-subsidiary duty based on facts available on record.
iv. The Authority is also requested to confirm in the final findings that the subject goods are also known as heat-strengthened glass. It is further requested to confirm that the Government of Malaysia continues to provide subsidies, and that subsidized imports are causing material injury to the Domestic Industry.
J.2 Submissions made by the other interested parties
245. The submissions made by the other interested parties are as under:
i. The Domestic Industry violated confidentiality provisions by not adequately disclosing documents relied upon for subsidy allegations and by treating publicly available financial statements as confidential
ii. The Domestic Industry has already enjoyed prolonged protection through ADD and CVD measures and that further continuation would amount to undue and perpetual protection, contrary to the temporary and remedial nature of trade remedies.
iii. Kibing claims it cooperated fully and disclosed participation in programs such as natural gas, investment tax policies, sales tax exemptions, and import duty exemptions. It argues that benefits under the Investment Tax scheme not received by the respondent itself and that exemptions on machinery imports arose from FTA concessions (Form-E), which allegedly cannot constitute a financial contribution or specific subsidy.
iv. The Domestic Industry has expanded capacity, production, investment, employment, and exports, showing positive performance trends. It argues that any decline in profitability is due to expansion costs, internal inefficiencies, and business decisions rather than Malaysian imports, and that injury claims are exaggerated or artificial. It is further submitted that imports from Malaysia have declined overall and that any surge in total imports is attributable to China and Vietnam. It is further submitted that imports from Malaysia were necessary to bridge demand–supply gaps and that cumulative assessment with other countries lacks evidentiary basis.
v. The Disclosure Statement does not establish likelihood of continuation or recurrence of injury, contending that the Domestic Industry has expanded capacity and sales, imports from Malaysia have declined, and no causal link has been demonstrated. It further argues that the Authority’s likelihood conclusions are speculative and unsupported by evidence of surplus capacity, export orientation toward India, or any basis to assume a potential surge of imports.
vi. Kibing disputes the finding that its exports undercut or suppress domestic prices and claims its landed value reflects fair market pricing and requested termination of the investigation on the grounds that subsidy, injury, and causal link are not established.
vii. Continuation of duties would adversely affect downstream solar and renewable sectors by restricting access to competitively priced glass, increasing module costs, and burdening consumers. It further contends that the Domestic Industry has strengthened its position and that continuation of the measure would undermine fair competition and public interest.
viii. Xinyi Solar has requested the Authority to reexamine and recompute landed value by adding freight and insurance to FOB transactions. They have also requested the Authority to consider average
114 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
useful life of assets as 16.72 years instead of 10 years, as the same is inconsistent with the Company’s audited financial statements prepared under GAAP.
ix. That Sales and Services Tax on raw materials used for export production is either exempt or refunded, so no residual tax burden remains. Therefore, SST cannot constitute a financial contribution or confer a benefit and should not be treated as a countervailable subsidy. Xinyi compares this mechanism to India’s GST zero-rating of exports.
x. Xinyi argues that the findings of the original investigation are under challenge before CESTAT and therefore cannot be presumed final. Since the legality and quantification of alleged subsidies are under judicial examination, continuation of duty based on those findings would be premature and legally vulnerable.
J.3 Examination by the Authority
246. The Authority notes that most of the submissions made by interested parties are repetitive in nature and were already addressed earlier in the disclosure statement. The findings above ipso facto deal with these arguments of interested parties. Further, the Authority has examined submissions of interested parties herein below to the extent relevant and not addressed elsewhere.
247. As regards the contention of the Domestic Industry that the responses filed by the participating exporters are incomplete and misleading, the Authority notes that the information submitted by the exporters has been examined in accordance with the applicable Rules and, where necessary, verified to the extent feasible. The determination of subsidy margins has been based on verified information on record, supplemented where appropriate by facts available in instances of gaps or inconsistencies. Accordingly, the Authority does not find sufficient grounds to disregard the exporter responses in their entirety and has relied on the information considered appropriate for the purpose of the determination.
248. As regards submission made by the Domestic Industry related to involvement of related entities in the exports to India, non-reporting of alleged regional subsidies, and possible gas-related benefits by participating exporter, the Authority clarifies that the assessment of subsidization in the present investigation is based on information placed on record by the exporters, responses to verification queries, and other evidence examined during the course of the investigation. Wherever additional clarification was required, the Authority sought and evaluated relevant information and has reflected its conclusions in the subsidy determination accordingly. Allegations based solely on indicative or publicly available material, without supporting verifiable evidence demonstrating actual receipt of benefits, do not by themselves justify modification of the findings beyond what has already been established on record.
249. The Authority does not agree with the Domestic Industry’s contention that reliance on exporter responses would amount to rewarding non-compliance. The Authority’s determination is not based on any presumption of cooperation but on an objective examination of the information placed on record, verified data, and, where warranted, facts available in accordance with the Rules. The Authority has exercised due diligence in assessing the completeness and reliability of the information furnished and has drawn appropriate conclusions based on verified data. Accordingly, the allegation that the Authority has shown leniency or departed from its established practice is not correct.
250. The Authority has examined the Domestic Industry’s submissions regarding the description of the product under consideration and the existence of subsidization and injury. The findings on these
[PART I—SEC.1] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY 115
aspects have been addressed in the relevant sections of the Final Findings on the basis of the evidence on record.
251. As regards the claim of confidentiality by Domestic Industry, the Authority observes that confidentiality claims are examined in accordance with the applicable Rules, and information is treated as confidential only where good cause is shown. The Authority further ensures that adequate non-confidential summaries are placed on record to enable interested parties to reasonably understand the substance of the information relied upon. Interested parties have not demonstrated that they are prevented from effectively defending its interests in the investigation and therefore, this contention is without merit.
252. In relation to submission that continuation of duties would amount to prolonged protection for the Domestic Industry, the Authority, notes that trade remedial measures are continued only where, upon an objective examination in a sunset review, cessation of the measure is likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of subsidization and injury. The continuation of a duty is thus not automatic nor protective in nature, but is strictly contingent upon the existence of unfair trade practices and their injurious effects. The exporter has not placed any evidence on record to demonstrate that subsidization has ceased or that the Domestic Industry would remain insulated from injury in the absence of the measure. Accordingly, the Authority finds that continuation of the duty, where warranted by the facts, does not constitute undue protection but remains a legitimate remedial response, and thus contention of the exporters is not correct.
253. As regards the contention that Kibing has fully cooperated and that certain program either did not confer benefits or arose merely from FTA concessions, the Authority, notes that during the course of verification, it identified the existence of certain subsidy elements which were not initially claimed or adequately substantiated by the exporter. The determination of subsidization in the present investigation is therefore based on verified information obtained during verification, supplemented where necessary by facts available in instances where complete or reliable information was not furnished. The Authority emphasizes that the use of verified data and, where warranted, best information available, is consistent with the Rules and ensures an objective assessment of subsidization. Even post disclosure comments also, exporter has not substantiated their claims and therefore, the contention that Kibing has suffered prejudice in the determination of subsidy margins is unfounded.
254. As regards contention that the Domestic Industry is not suffering any injury or injury is not on account of Malaysia, it is noted that that improvement in certain parameters does not preclude the existence of injury where the evidence on record demonstrates price suppression, adverse profitability trends, and vulnerability of the Domestic Industry in the event of cessation of duties. The exporter has not placed substantiated evidence to demonstrate that imports from Malaysia were at non-injurious prices or they are not getting any subsidy from the Government of Malaysia, or that they did not exert adverse price effects on the Domestic Industry. Further, the assertion that imports merely bridged demand–supply gaps or that cumulative assessment is unwarranted remains unsupported by verifiable data. The Authority therefore finds that submissions are based on selective interpretation of indicators and do not rebut the injury and likelihood analysis on record, and accordingly rejects the same
255. The Authority has re-examined the landed value calculation and used the corrected landed value for the purpose of present final findings. in relation to submission of average useful life, the Authority notes that the data on record shows that the Authority has correctly considered the average useful life of assets as 10 years based on verified information submitted by the exporter.
116 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
256. The contention of the exporter that Sales and Services Tax (SST) on inputs used for export production is either exempt or refunded and therefore cannot constitute a countervailable subsidy is misplaced. Under the subsidy framework, remission or exemption of indirect taxes on inputs can be treated as a financial contribution where such remission exceeds the amount actually levied on inputs consumed in the production of exported goods or where the scheme is not strictly limited to neutralization of prior-stage taxes. The exporter has not demonstrated, with verifiable evidence, that the SST exemption/refund mechanism operates as a permissible duty drawback system strictly limited to inputs consumed in the exported product. In the absence of a transparent and product-specific verification mechanism ensuring that remission does not exceed taxes actually incurred, such tax foregone constitutes revenue otherwise due to the government and therefore represents a financial contribution conferring a benefit. The comparison with India’s GST zero-rating framework is inapposite, as the countervailability of a measure must be examined on the basis of its design, operation, and verification in the exporting country. Accordingly, the Authority considers that the SST treatment extended to the exporter is countervailable in nature.
257. As regards, the contention of the Xinyi that the findings of the original investigation are under challenge before the Hon’ble CESTAT and therefore, cannot be presumed final. In this regard, the Authority observes that the mere pendency of an appeal does not render the findings of the original investigation inoperative or devoid of legal effect. Unless and until the findings are set aside or modified by a competent appellate forum, they continue to remain valid and enforceable.
258. As regards submission that likelihood findings are unsupported by any positive evidence and amounts to mere assertion, it is noted that likelihood analysis in a sunset review is necessarily prospective and is based on objective evaluation of subsidization, market conditions, and exporters’ ability and incentive to increase shipments in the absence of measures, and the Authority in the sunset review has examined if subsidization and injury would cease or not recur upon expiry of the duty.
259. With regard to the submission related to extension of duties would not be public interest, it is noted that the said claims are unsubstantiated and unsupported by any evidence on record. Countervailing duties are imposed to neutralize the injurious effects of subsidized imports and restore fair competition, and cannot be construed as a restriction on legitimate supply. In the absence of substantiated evidence demonstrating any disproportionate adverse impact on downstream industries or consumers, the Authority finds no merit in the contention and rejects the same.
K. CONCLUSION
260. The Authority, upon examination of the issues raised in the course of the proceedings, arguments advanced by all interested parties and the facts and evidence on record, concludes as follows:
a. The application for the present sunset review has been filed by M/s Borosil Renewables Limited (BRL) and Vishakha Glass Pvt. Ltd. (VGPL). The costing and injury data, as per the prescribed formats, is based on their data. The applicants satisfy the requirement of standing and constitute ‘domestic industry’ within the meaning of Rules 6(3) and 2(b) of the CVD Rules, 1995.
b. The scope of the product under consideration determined at the time of the original investigation does not warrant revision. Therefore, the product under consideration is ‘Textured Toughened (Tempered) Glass with a minimum of 90.5% transmission having thickness not exceeding 4.2 mm (including tolerance of 0.2 mm) and where at least one dimension exceeds
[PART I—SEC.1] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY 117
1500 mm, whether coated or uncoated. However, for the same of clarity, the Authority has added Heat Strengthened Glass as one of the other names of the product under consideration.
c. The goods manufactured by the domestic industry are like article to the subject goods imported from Malaysia.
d. The Government of Malaysia has not filed response for the ‘new subsidies’ investigated in the sunset review. Therefore, determinations in respect of these schemes have been made based on facts available
e. The interested parties have not produced any evidence of termination of previously countervailed schemes. Further, the previously countervailed schemes have been countervailed in subsequent investigations. Therefore, the Authority considers that the schemes countervailed in the original investigation have continued in the present period of investigation.
f. Producers of the subject goods in Malaysia have continued to benefit from countervailable subsidies.
g. The position of the domestic industry is vulnerable during the present period of investigation. Further, based on the evidence on record, there is clear indication of likelihood of continuation or recurrence of subsidisation and injury from Malaysia in the event of cessation of duties.
h. Based on the information on record, it is seen that the producers from Malaysia are export oriented. The producers have set up capacities which far exceed the demand in the country.
i. The exports from Malaysia to other countries are at injurious prices and there is a likelihood of injury to the domestic industry in event of expiry of measures.
L. RECOMMENDATIONS
261. The Authority notes that the present proceedings were conducted in accordance with the applicable law. All interested parties were duly notified and were afforded adequate opportunity to provide information and present their views on the matters under investigation, including subsidisation, injury, causal link, likelihood of continuation or recurrence of subsidisation and injury and impact of the measures on the Indian industry.
262. Having concluded that there is positive evidence of likelihood of subsidisation and injury if the existing countervailing duties are allowed to cease, the Authority is of the view that the anti-subsidy/countervailing duties in force on the imports of the product under consideration from the subject country is required to be continued further. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as established hereinabove, the Designated Authority considers it appropriate to recommend continuation of the existing anti-subsidy/countervailing duties on the imports of the subject goods from the subject country. Accordingly, the anti-subsidy/countervailing duties for producers from Malaysia are recommended as per duty table below.
263. Having determined that there is likelihood of continuation/recurrence of subsidy and injury to the domestic industry in the present matter if the existing countervailing duties is withdrawn, it is considered appropriate to continue the existing countervailing duties on import of subject goods from Malaysia without any modification in the current quantum of duties keeping in view the factual matrix of the present investigation.
118 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
264. However, the Authority also notes that an exporter namely Kibing Group (M) Sdn. Bhd (Kibing) has participated in the present sunset review investigation who did not participate at the time of original investigation. The exporter has cooperated during the present sunset review and the data submitted by the exporter was also verified by the Authority through desk verification. In the factual matrix of the present investigation, the Authority deems it appropriate to determine individual countervailing duty rate for Kibing. However, keeping in view the fact that there is a likelihood of continuation/recurrence of subsidy and injury in the event of expiry of existing countervailing duty in the present investigation, quantum of countervailing duty for the said producer/exporter cannot be determined solely based on the principle of countervailing duty equal to the margin of subsidy or less like in a fresh investigation as provided under Rule 4 (d). The current countervailing duty applicable on imports of subject goods from Malaysia covers countervailing duty that was determined by the Authority for the cooperating producer/exporter who participated in the original investigations and also the duties applicable for the non-cooperative producers/exporters. Since the existing countervailing duties is being recommended to be continued on the imports of subject goods from subject country in the present sunset review, the Authority deems it appropriate to recommend the existing countervailing duty rate applicable for the cooperating exporter for Kibing also.
265. Thus, in terms of the provision contained in Rule l9(1)(b) read with Rule 24 (3) of the Anti-Subsidy Rules, the Authority, considers it appropriate and necessary to recommend continuation of existing countervailing duties equal to the figure indicated in Column 7 of the duty table below for a period of five (5) years on all imports of the subject goods from Malaysia. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as established hereinabove, countervailing duty equal to the amount indicated in Column 7 of the duty table given below is recommended to be imposed from the date of notification to be issued in this regard by the Central Government, on all imports of the subject goods, originating in or exported from Malaysia.
Duty Table
S. No. | Tariff Heading/ Subheading | Description of Goods | Country of Origin | Country of Export | Producer | Duty as % of CIF
1 | 7003, 7005, 7007, 7016, 17020 and 8541* | Textured Toughened (Tempered) Coated and Uncoated Glass** | Malaysia | Malaysia | Xinyi Solar (Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd. | 9.71%
2 | -do- | -do- | Malaysia | Malaysia | SBH Kibing Solar New Materials (M) SDN. BHD | 9.71%
3 | -do- | -do- | Malaysia | All country including Malaysia | Any Producer other than producer mentioned in S. No. 1 & 2 | 10.14%
4 | -do- | -do- | Any Country other than Malaysia | Malaysia | Any | 10.14%
[PART I—SEC.1] THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY 119
* The application of the individual duty rates specified for the companies 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 the India covered by this invoice was manufactured by (company name and address) in Malaysia. 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 companies shall apply. This requirement is without prejudice to the verification procedures independently undertaken by the Customs authorities under the applicable customs law and regulations.”
** The customs classification is only indicative and not binding on the scope of the product under consideration.
***Textured Toughened (Tempered) Glass with a minimum of 90.5% transmission of thickness not exceeding 4.2 mm (including tolerance of 0.2 mm) and where at least one dimension exceeds 1500 mm, whether coated or uncoated. The product is also known by various other names such as solar glass, solar glass low iron, solar PV glass, high transmission photovoltaic glass, tempered low iron patterned solar glass and heat strengthened glass.
266. Landed value of imports for the purpose of this Notification shall be the assessable value as determined under the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962) and includes all duties of customs except duties under sections 3, 3A, 88, 9 and 9A of the said Act
M. FURTHER PROCEDURE
267. An appeal against the order of the Central Government arising out of these findings shall lie before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal in accordance with the Customs Tariff Act
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