ADD FF TTG

REGD. No. D. L.-33004/99 The Gazette of India CG-DL-E-13022025-260940 EXTRAORDINARY PART I—Section 1 PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY No. 43] NEW DELHI, MONDAY, FEBRUARY 10, 2025/MAGHA 21, 1946 1023 GI/2025 MINISTRY OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY (Department of Commerce) FINAL FINDINGS (Directoratr General of Trade Remedies) New Delhi, the 10th February, 2025 Case No. AD(OI) – 27/2023 Subject: Anti-dumping investigation concerning imports of "Textured Tempered Glass" originating in or exported from China PR and Vietnam – Final Findings. F. No. 6/29/2023-DGTR—Having regard to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, as amended from time to time (hereafter also referred to as "the Act") and the Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of Anti- Dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995 thereof, as amended from time to time (hereinafter referred to as "AD Rules")., A. BACKGROUND OF THE CASE 1. Borosil Renewable Limited (“hereinafter referred to as the 'applicant' or the 'domestic industry') had filed an application before the Designated Authority (hereinafter referred to as the 'Authority') in accordance with the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') as amended from time to time and the Anti- dumping Rules, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as the “Rules"), for the initiation of an anti-dumping investigation concerning imports of Textured Tempered Glass' (hereinafter also referred to as the 'product under consideration' or the 'subject goods' or the ‘PUC') from China PR and Vietnam (hereinafter also referred to as the 'subject countries'). 2. The Authority, on the basis of sufficient prima facie evidence submitted by the domestic industry, issued Initiation Notification vide Notification No. 6/29/2023-DGTR dated 13th February 2024, published in the Gazette of India, initiating an anti-dumping investigation into imports of PUC from the subject countries in accordance with Rule 5 of the antidumping rules to determine the existence, degree and effect of any alleged dumping of the subject goods and to recommend the amount of anti-dumping duty, which if levied, would be adequate to remove the alleged injury to the domestic industry. 3. Pursuant to initiation of the investigation, sufficient opportunity was given to the interested parties to provide relevant information and defend their interests, and on the basis of information and evidence on record and having regard to the act and the rules, the Authority issued preliminary findings on 5th November 2024, provisionally concluding that product under consideration has been exported from the subject countries at prices below respective normal values, thus resulting in dumping of the goods. The domestic industry has suffered material injury and the injury to the domestic industry has been caused by the dumped imports. The Authority recommended imposition of provisional anti-dumping duty on all imports of the product under consideration from the subject countries. 4. The Authority notified the interested parties about the following procedure that was to be followed subsequent to issuance of preliminary findings. I. Comments were invited by all interested parties on the preliminary findings within 30 days of issuance of such findings. II. It was notified that an oral hearing will be conducted in terms of Rule 6(6) of the Anti-Dumping Rules. III. Further verification deemed necessary will be conducted. IV. Essential facts would be disclosed prior to issuance of the final findings. 5. A copy of the preliminary findings was sent to Central Government for their consideration of the same for imposition of interim anti-dumping duty. 6. The preliminary recommendations were accepted by the Ministry of Finance and vide notification 26/2024 dated 4th December 2024 interim measures were imposed for a period of 6 months. B. PROCEDURE 7. The procedure described herein below has been followed by the Authority with regard to the subject investigation: a. The Authority received comments on the preliminary findings by various interested parties, which have been adequately considered in the present Final Findings. b. In accordance with Rule 6(6) of the Rules, the Authority provided opportunity to the interested parties to present their views orally in a public hearing held on 20th December 2024. All the interested parties who had attended the oral hearing were provided an opportunity to file written submissions, followed by rejoinders, if any. с. The submissions made by the interested parties, arguments raised, and information provided post issuance of the preliminary findings and during the course of investigation, to the extent the same are supported with evidence and considered relevant to the present investigation have been appropriately considered in this Final Findings. d. The preliminary findings form an integral part of this Final Findings. It is clarified that for the sake of brevity, procedural details, arguments presented by the interested parties, and the preliminary determinations arrived at whether directly or by necessary implication in the preliminary findings and which have not been contested by any party, are not reiterated in this Final Findings. These elements, being descriptive in nature and previously disclosed, are deemed incorporated into this Final Findings to the extent they are consistent with the present document. Accordingly, the preliminary findings should be regarded as a complementary component of this Final Findings, forming a cohesive part of the factual and procedural record and should be read in conjunction with the present Final Findings. e. f. g. The Authority satisfied itself with the accuracy of the information supplied by the interested parties which form the basis of this Final Findings to the extent possible. The Authority has verified the data / documents submitted by the interested parties to the extent considered relevant and necessary. On site verification were carried out at the premises of the applicant, where various claims made by the applicant and other interested parties were verified and supporting information, to the extent considered relevant, was collected. Verification of the exporter from Vietnam was also conducted and claims made were verified and supporting information, to the extent considered relevant, was collected. h. In accordance with the Rules the Authority disclosed the essential facts of the case that would form the basis of its findings in the form of a disclosure statement on 28.01.2025 and the interested parties were allowed time up-to 4.2.2025 to comment on the same. The comments of the interested parties, to the extent relevant, have been considered by the Authority and have been addressed in this finding. i. j. The Authority has examined all post – disclosure comments made by the interested parties in these final findings to the extent deemed relevant. Any submission which was merely a reproduction of the previous submission and which had been adequately examined by the Authority have not been repeated for the sake of brevity. '***' in this Final Findings represents information furnished by an interested party on a confidential basis and so considered by the Authority under the Rules. k. The exchange rate for the period of investigation (January 2023 to December 2023) adopted by the Authority is 1 US$=Rs 83.52. C. PRODUCT UNDER CONSIDERATION AND LIKE ARTICLE 8. The Authority, in the initiation notification and in preliminary findings, defined the product under consideration as follows: "3. The product under consideration for the present investigation is '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'. C.1 Submissions made on behalf of the opposing interested parties. 9. None of the interested parties have provided any comments on the PUC. C.2 Submissions made on behalf of the domestic industry. 10. The domestic industry made the following submissions with regard to the scope of the product under consideration and the like article: a. The product under consideration is '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' originating in or exported from China PR and Vietnam b. The product in the market parlance is also known by various names such as Solar Glass, Solar Glass Low Iron, Solar PV Glass, High Transmission Photovoltaic Glass, Tempered Low Iron Patterned Solar Glass, heat strengthen glass etc. Textured Tempered Glass is used as a component in Solar Photovoltaic Panels and Solar Thermal applications. The level of transmission can be achieved by keeping the iron content low, typically less than 200 ppm. The transmission level goes up by about 2%-3% when coated with an anti-reflective coating liquid. с. The subject products are predominantly imported under tariff classification at the 8-digit level is 70071900 even though the same are being classified and imported under various subheadings of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, as can be seen from the import data. However, it is noted that subject goods are also being imported in the sub-headings 70031990, 70051010, 70051090, 70052190, 70052990, 70053090, 70071900, 70072190, 70072900, 70169000, 70200090 and 85414011 as evidenced by the import data. Moreover, it is also submitted that the custom classification is indicative only and in no way, it is binding upon the product scope and the product description prevails in circumstances of conflict. d. There is no known difference in the subject goods produced by the domestic industry and those imported from the subject countries. The subject goods produced by the domestic industry and the subject goods imported from the subject countries are comparable in terms of characteristics such as physical characteristics, manufacturing process and technology, functions and uses, product specifications, distribution and market & tariff classification of the goods. The applicants have claimed that the subject goods, which are coming into India, are identical to the goods produced by the domestic industry. There are no differences either in the technical specifications, quality, functions or end-uses of the subsidized imports and the domestically produced subject goods and the product under consideration manufactured by the applicants. The two are technically and commercially substitutable and hence should be treated as 'like article' under the Rules. C. 3 Examination by the Authority. 11. The product under consideration in the present investigation was, at the stage of initiation, defined as '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. 12. The PUC 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, heat strengthen glass etc. The PUC is used as a component in solar photovoltaic panels and solar thermal applications. The level of transmission can be achieved by keeping the iron content low, typically less than 200 ppm. The transmission level goes up by about 2%-3% when coated with an anti-reflective coating liquid. 13. The product under consideration is classified under the category 'Glass and Glassware' in Chapter 70 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 and further under 7003, 7005, 7007, 7016, 7020 and 8541 as per Customs Classification. However, Customs classification is indicative only and not binding on the scope of the investigation. 14. With regard to like article, Rule 2(d) of the Rules provides as under: 'Like article' means an article which is identical or alike in all respects to the article under investigation for being dumped in India or in the absence of such article, another article which although not alike in all respects, has characteristics closely resembling those of the articles under investigation.' 15. The Authority notes that there is no known difference in product under consideration produced by the Indian industry and exported from the subject countries. Product under consideration produced by the Indian industry and imported from the subject countries are comparable in terms of characteristics such as physical characteristics, manufacturing process & technology, functions & uses, product specifications, pricing, distribution & marketing and tariff classification of the goods. The two are technically and commercially substitutable. The consumers have used and are using the two interchangeably. Thus, the Authority hold that the product manufactured by the domestic industry constitutes the like article to the subject goods being imported into India from the subject countries in the terms of Rule 2(d). D. SCOPE OF THE DOMESTIC INDUSTRY AND STANDING D. 1 Submissions made on behalf of the opposing interested parties. 16. The other interested parties have not made any submissions with regard to the scope of domestic industry and standing. D.2 Submissions made on behalf of the domestic industry. 17. The submissions of the domestic industry with regard to the scope of domestic industry and standing are as follows: a. The present application has been filed by Borosil Renewables Limited (BRL) and they are the major producers of the subject goods in India. D.3 b. There are five (5) other known producers of the subject goods in India. с. The domestic industry has not imported the subject goods from the subject countries and is not related to any exporter of the subject goods in the subject countries or importer of the subject goods in India. Examination by the Authority 18. 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'. 19. The Authority notes that the application has been filed by Borosil Renewables Limited (BRL). It is further noted that apart from applicant industry, there are 4 other producers namely Govind Glass & Industries Ltd, Triveni Renewables Private Ltd., Vishakha Glass Pvt. Ltd., and Gold Plus Float Glass Pvt. Ltd. who have commenced production in the POI. 20. The Authority further notes that the applicant has not imported the subject goods from the subject countries and that it is not related to any exporter of the subject goods in the subject countries or importer of the subject goods in India. Further, the production of the applicant accounts for a major proportion of the total domestic production. Therefore, the Authority proceeds with the same conclusion as drawn in the preliminary findings with regard to the domestic industry. The Authority holds that the applicant satisfies the requirement of standing under Rule 5 and constitutes domestic industry within the meaning of Rule 2(b). Ε. CONFIDENTIALITY AND MISCELLANEOUS ISSUES E.1 Submissions made on behalf of the opposing interested parties. 21. The other interested parties have made the following miscellaneous submissions: a. That the anti-dumping duties on imports of textured tempered glass have been in place for over a decade. This prolonged reliance undermines the incentive for the domestic industry to improve efficiency and adapt to market changes, fostering dependency instead of competitiveness. It is further submitted that even WTO principles discourage the indefinite extension of trade remedies. Such prolonged measures distort market dynamics and reduce innovation, while unfairly impacting downstream industries dependent on imports. b. It was also submitted that the Domestic industry in previous investigations conducted in 2017, 2021, and 2023 consistently failed to prove that imports caused material injury to the domestic industry. с. Stakeholders like NIMMA and SPDA argued that the Authority has failed to substantiate the necessity of provisional measures. Rule 12 and Article 7 of the WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement require that such measures only be imposed to prevent imminent harm, supported by clear evidence. However, in the instant investigation issuance of provisional measures nearly eight months after the investigation's initiation undermines their purpose, as the investigation was close to completion by then. Such delays render the measures unnecessary and inappropriate. d. It is further submitted that the significant delay in issuing preliminary findings reflects inefficiencies in the investigation process. Timely issuance would have provided more clarity and reduced market uncertainty and would have benefited all stakeholders. e. Interested parties contended that the Authority violated natural justice principles by not allowing parties to comment on preliminary findings before their issuance. Such comments could have clarified contentious points and ensured procedural fairness. f. One of the interested parties pointed that the errors in disseminating critical communications, such as Importer Questionnaires, prevented some stakeholders from submitting timely responses. This procedural oversight compromised their ability to fully present their case, undermining the investigation's fairness. g. Interested parties have requested imposing duties for 3 years instead of 5 as this would strike a balance between protecting the domestic industry and encouraging competitiveness. This will align with WTO principles discouraging prolonged protectionism. E. 2 Submissions made on behalf of the domestic industry. 22. The submissions of the domestic industry with regard to the miscellaneous issues are as follows: a. In relation to submission / participation by user association, Domestic Industry submitted that as a matter of conscious and strategic decision, user associations never provide the requested information or files information required under the law / trade notice issued by the Authority. Since they are also being represented by legal professional, it would be injustice with the other interested parties including Domestic Industry to accept their response or even allow them to make further submissions in the investigation. Even post hearing also, none of the user associations have fulfilled their legal obligations. Therefore, the Authority should carefully consider their unsubstantiated submissions. b. In relation to the issue of history of cases, Domestic Industry submitted that the history of the previous cases, that too, against different sources altogether, is of no legal or factual relevance to the fact of this case. The Authority is required only to see whether a case for imposition of anti-dumping duties / extension of anti-dumping duties is made out in the facts and circumstances of the case. It is further submitted that the previous measures are of no consequence in the present case, if the exporters continue to indulge in dumping practice, then the domestic industry has no other option but to seek remedy under the laws of the land for appropriate relief. Since none of the exporters dispute dumping, Domestic Industry has all the rights to seek protection against such practices. с. In relation to submission of interested parties that in the previous investigations, the Authority has not found any injury, Domestic Industry submitted that at a mere glance of the previous investigations against China and Malaysia, it would be clear to interested parties that the Authority has found injury in all the cases. However, against Malaysia, the Authority did not find any dumping and therefore, no duties were imposed against it. d. In relation to issue of inviting comments on the provisional findings, Domestic Industry submitted that none of the interested parties have pointed the provision of law which obligates the Authority for inviting comments prior to the issuance of the provisional findings. It is further submitted that interested parties post receiving the intimation along with non-confidential version of the application were free to make submissions. Since the interested parties did not make any such submissions, they cannot shift this failure to the Authority, that too when there is no such procedure prescribed either in the laws or anti-dumping agreement. e. In relation to the submission of the interested parties that the Authority has not followed Rule 12 of Anti-Dumping Rules read with Article 7 of ADA and judgement in the matter of GM Exports in this regard, the Domestic Industry has contended that the ratio of GM Exports does not apply in the present scenario, as there is no ambiguity or vagueness between the municipal laws (Anti-dumping Rules) and WTO Agreement. In any case, there is no occasion to resort to the said case law as the Indian laws do incorporate the obligations under the Anti-dumping Agreement (Article 7.1) in letter and spirit. Therefore, reliance on GM Exports is completely misplaced. f. With regard to the claim of the interested parties that the provisional findings should not have been issued in view of the use of the word “expeditiously" in Rule 12, the Domestic Industry has submitted that the interested parties have completely misread / misunderstood Rule 12, which has used the expression "expeditiously" only with reference to “the conduct of the investigation". It is important to note that nowhere any timeframe is indicated, in which the Authority has to give its provisional findings post initiation of the investigation. Even the judgement of GM Exports also supports this interpretation. g. Regarding impairment of rights of interested parties to participate, the Domestic Industry has submitted that once the initiation notification is published in the Official Gazette, it is presumed that all the interested parties have been sufficiently informed. h. In relation to request of imposing duties for 3 years instead of 5, the Domestic Industry has submitted the interested parties failed to provide a single reason in support of their claim of recommending duties for 3 years and therefore, the Authority should disregard any such unsubstantiated and irrational submissions of the interested parties. E. 3 Examination by the Authority 23. With regard to confidentiality of information, Rule 7 of Anti-dumping Rules provides as follows: Confidential information: (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-rules (2), (3) and (7)of rule 6, sub-rule(2) of rule12,sub-rule(4) of rule 15 and sub-rule (4) of rule 17, the copies of applications received under sub-rule (1) of rule 5, or any other information provided to the designated authority on a confidential basis by any party in the course of investigation, shall, upon the designated authority being satisfied as to its confidentiality, be treated as such by it and no such information shall be disclosed to any other party without specific authorization of the party providing such information. (2) The designated authority may require the parties providing information on 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 authorise its disclosure in a generalized or summary form, it may disregard such information.' 24. Submissions made by the domestic industry and other opposing interested parties with regard to confidentiality to the extent considered relevant were examined by the Authority and addressed accordingly. Information provided by the interested parties on confidential basis was examined with regard to sufficiency of the confidentiality claim. On being satisfied, the Authority has accepted the confidentiality claims, wherever warranted and such information has been considered confidential and not disclosed to other interested parties. Wherever possible, parties providing information on confidential basis were directed to provide sufficient non-confidential version of the information filed on confidential basis. The Authority made available the non-confidential version of the evidences submitted by various interested parties in the form of public file. The Authority also notes that all interested parties have claimed their business-related sensitive information as confidential. 25. It has been contended that the anti-dumping duty has been in force for more than a decade. In this regard, the Authority notes subject investigation is a fresh proceeding and does not involve a continuation of previously imposed duties. The Authority has conducted this investigation in strict compliance with the provisions of the Anti-Dumping Rules. The Authority further notes that the Domestic Industry is fully entitled to legal recourse and protection, if it is established that exporters from any source are engaged in dumping practices that is causing injury to the Domestic Industry. 26. The Authority notes that Rule 12 does not prescribe a fixed timeline for issuing preliminary findings. The phrase "shall proceed expeditiously" relates to the overall conduct of the investigation and does not impose any deadline for preliminary findings. Investigations involve examination / analysis of complex data, which must be done thoroughly to ensure compliance with both domestic rules and WTO obligations. The authority's adherence to these principles, rather than rigid timelines, ensures the sustainability of its determinations. 27. As regards the issuance of preliminary findings by the Authority after approximately eight months from the initiation of the investigation, it is noted that the findings are based on the factual matrix of the case, as it reflects a careful and evidence-based assessment of the injury suffered by the domestic industry during the course of the investigation. The necessity to issue preliminary findings arose from the factual determination, supported by post-initiation circumstances / facts, that the domestic industry was suffering material injury that could lead to irreparable harm without timely intervention. The Authority's decision thus demonstrates compliance with both the statutory framework and the principles of procedural fairness and due diligence. 28. The Authority notes that it initiated the captioned investigation on 13th February 2024 and fulfilled its obligation to notify all known interested parties, including exporters, governments of exporting countries, importers/users and their associations as identified by the domestic industry in the application by circulating the notification via email to these parties. Furthermore, the initiation notification was made widely accessible by publishing the same in the Extraordinary Gazette of India as well as on the DGTR website (www.dgtr.gov.in). 29. The publication in the Gazette serves as a notice in rem, ensuring that any parties not individually informed via email have an opportunity to become aware of the investigation through this public notice. Thus, there was sufficient dissemination regarding the initiation of the investigation through email notifications to all known interested parties, publication on the DGTR's website, and the gazette notification. Thus, the contention of the interested parties regarding non receipt of the questionnaires is unsustainable. It is further noted that since the Authority has taken due cognizance of their submissions in the present Final Findings, no prejudice can be claimed by them. F. NORMAL VALUE, EXPORT PRICE & DUMPING MARGIN F.1 Submissions made on behalf of the opposing interested parties. 30. The other interested parties have made the following submissions with regard to normal value, export price and dumping margin. a. Since the Authority has not made any PCNs for the purpose of fair comparison for dumping margin and injury margin, it is submitted that the Authority should compute one dumping margin for the entire product under consideration. b. The exporters who have fully cooperated with the investigation should be granted specific duty rates reflecting their individual pricing practices. Further, the Authority should accept the responses filed by the exporters and confirm the adjustments claimed and export price in the final findings. с. The cooperating producer in Vietnam is purchasing the inputs from related as well as unrelated parties on arms-length basis. The quantum of related party purchase is miniscule as compared to the total purchase made by them. It is further submitted that their assets are also bought at fair price. Accordingly, they have requested that the Authority should compute the dumping margin based on the information provided by the cooperating exporters from Vietnam. F. 2 Submissions made on behalf of the domestic industry. 31. The domestic industry has submitted as follows with regard to normal value and export price: a. b. с. d. e. China PR should be treated as a non-market economy in accordance with Article 15(a)(i) of China's Accession Protocol and the normal value should be determined in terms of Annexure I, Rule 7 of the Rules. The domestic industry has not been able to determine the normal value based on the price in a market economy third country due to non-availability of verifiable information/data. The domestic industry has, therefore, determined the normal value on the basis of cost of production of the applicant with addition for administrative, selling and general expenses and reasonable profits. While computing normal value for Vietnam, the Authority should consider international prices for the raw material, which the exporters are procuring from China. The Authority in many cases had taken such approach in earlier investigations. The Authority should also consider the fair prices of the machinery imported from China to determine the actual and fair depreciation value. In relation to PCN-wise analysis, the Domestic Industry has submitted that in its application, it has clearly defined the product under consideration as “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" and have accordingly submitted the information and made the analysis based on both types of the product under consideration i.e., Coated and Uncoated and, therefore, the approach adopted by the Authority in the provisional findings is correct in law as well as on facts. f. The export price must be determined considering the volume and value of imports for the period of investigation adopted from the published DGCIS data after due adjustments are made to determine the ex- factory price. g. F. 3 The dumping margins for the subject countries are not only above the de minimis levels, but also significant. Examination by the Authority. 32. Under section 9A(1)(c), the normal value in relation to an article means: i) The comparable price, in the ordinary course of trade, for the like article, when meant for consumption in the exporting country or territory as determined in accordance with the rules made under sub-section (6), or ii) when there are no sales of the like article in the ordinary course of trade in the domestic market of the exporting country or territory, or when because of the particular market situation or low volume of the sales in the domestic market of the exporting country or territory, such sales do not permit a proper comparison, the normal value shall be either: (a)comparable representative price of the like article when exported from the exporting country or territory or an appropriate third country as determined in accordance with the rules made under sub- section (6); or the cost of production of the said article in the country of origin along with reasonable addition for administrative, selling, and general costs, and for profits, as determined in accordance with the rules made under sub-section (6); (b)Provided that in the case of import of the article from a country other than the country of origin and where the article has been merely transshipped through the country of export or such article is not produced in the country of export or there is no comparable price in the country of export, the normal value shall be determined with reference to its price in the country of origin. 33. The Authority has examined the issues raised during the proceedings in the following paragraphs: a. As regards the contention that the dumping margin ought to have been computed based on the entire product under consideration and not product types, the Authority notes that a fair comparison is required to be carried out in terms of the provisions of Annexure I of the Anti-dumping Rules read with Article 2.4 of the Anti-dumping Agreement. Accordingly, product type-wise analysis has been correctly carried out to ensure fair comparison. b. Post issuance of provisional findings, the Authority has called for the documents / data for the verification and the present Final Findings is based on such verified data. с. As regards the issue raised by the Domestic Industry relating to the correct valuation of the inputs as well as the plant and machinery by cooperating producer from Vietnam from their related parties situated in China, the Authority has carefully examined this issue from the records maintained by the company during onsite verification and found the same in order. The Authority has also checked the purchase prices of the major raw materials procured from the related party in China with the procurement made from the unrelated parties and also compared their purchase prices with the prevailing international prices wherever available and found the same in similar price band and reflective of their true market prices. d. In relation to purchase of machinery, the Authority has checked the relevant records maintained in the SAP and the financial statements. The Authority has also checked the records maintained by the company during onsite verification and found no discrepancy between them. It is also noted that since there are no published prices available for subject goods, it would be difficult to ascertain correct prices of the machinery other than records maintained by the exporters in their books of account. 34. The Authority notes that the following exporters of the subject goods have filed exporter's questionnaire responses: a. Xinyi Group, China PR. b. Kibing Group, China PR c. Flat Group, China PR. d. Anhui CSG New Energy Material Technology Co., Ltd. e. Dongguan CSG Solar Glass Co., Ltd. f. Wujiang CSG Glass Co., Ltd. g. Anhui Flat Solar. h. Flat Group Vietnam. F. 3.1 Normal value and export price for China PR. Normal Value for China 35. The Authority notes the following relevant provisions with regard to the determination of normal value for China PR. Provisions under Para 7 and Para 8 of Annexure Ito the Anti-Dumping Rules are as under: '7. In case of imports from non-market economy countries, normal value Shall be determined on the basis of the price or constructed value in a market economy third country, or the price from such a third country to other countries, including India, or where it is not possible, on any other reasonable basis, including the price actually paid or payable in India for the Like product, duly adjusted, if necessary, to include a reasonable profit margin. An appropriate market economy third country shall be selected by the designated authority in a reasonable manner [keeping in view the Level of development of the country concerned and the product in question] and due account shall be taken of any reliable information made available at the time of the selection. Account shall also be taken within time Limits; where appropriate, of the investigation if any made in a similar matter in respect of any other market economy third country. The parties to the investigation shall be informed without unreasonable delay of the aforesaid selection of the market economy third country and shall be given a reasonable period of time to offer their comments. '8. (1) The term 'non-market economy country' means any country which the designated authority determines as not operating on market principles of cost or pricing structures, so that sales of merchandise in such country do not reflect the fair value of the merchandise, in accordance with the criteria specified in subparagraph (3). (2) There shall be a presumption that any country that has been determine to be, or has been treated as, a now- market economy country for purposes of an anti-dumping, investigation by the designated authority or by the competent authority of any WTO member country during the three- year period preceding the investigation is a nonmarket economy country. Provided, however, that the non-market economy country or the concerned firms from such country may rebut such a presumption by providing information and evidence to the designated authority that establishes that such country is not a non-market economy country on the basis of the criteria specified in subparagraph (3). (3) The designated Authority shall consider in each case the following criteria as to whether: (a) the decisions of the concerned firms in such country regarding prices, costs and inputs, including raw materials, cost of technology and Labour, output, sales anti investment, are made in response to market signals reflecting supply and demand and without significant State interference in this regard, and whether costs of major inputs substantially reflect market values; (b) the production costs and financial situation of such firms are subject to significant distortions carried over from the former non-market economy system, in particular in relation to depreciation of assets, other write-offs, barter trade and payment via compensation of debts; (c) such firms are subject to bankruptcy and property laws which guarantee legal certainty and stability for the operation of the firms, and (d) the exchange rate conversions are carried out at the market rate. Provided, however, that where it is shown by sufficient evidence in writing on the basis of the criteria specified in this paragraph that market conditions prevail for one or more such firms subject to anti- dumping investigations, the designated authority may apply the principles set out in paragraphs 1 to 6 instead of the principles set out in paragraph 7 and in this paragraph. (4) Notwithstanding, anything contained in sub-paragraph (2), the designated authority may treat such country as a market economy country, on the basis of doe Latest detailed evaluation of relevant criteria, which includes the criteria specified in subparagraph (3), has been, b) publication of such evaluation in a public document, treated or determined to be treated as a market economy country for the purposes of anti- clamping investigations, by a country which is a Member of the World Trade Organization.' 36. At the stage of initiation, the Authority proceeded with the presumption of treating China PR as a non -market economy country. Upon initiation, the Authority advised the producers/exporters in China PR to respond to the notice of initiation and provide information on whether their data/information could be adopted for normal value determination. The Authority sent copies of the market economy treatment/supplementary questionnaire to all the known producers/ exporters in China PR to provide relevant information in this regard. Article 15 of China's Accession Protocol in WTO provides as follows: '(a) in determining price comparability under Article VI of the GATT 1994 and the anti-Dumping agreement, the importing WTO Member shall use either Chinese prices or costs for the industry under investigation or a methodology that is not based on a strict comparison with domestic prices or costs in China based on the following rules: If the producers under investigation can clearly show that market economy conditions prevail in the industry producing the Like product with regard to the manufacture, production and sale of that product, the importing WTO A4ember shall use Chinese prices or costs for the industry under investigation in determining price comparability; The importing WTO Member may use a methodology that is not based on a strict comparison with domestic prices or costs in China if the producers under investigation cannot clearly show that market economy conditions prevail in the Industry producing the Like product with regard to manufacture, production and sale of that product. (b) in proceedings under Parts II, III and V of the SCM agreement, when addressing subsidies described in Articles 14(a), 14(b), 14(c) and 14(d), relevant provisions of the SCM agreement shall apply; however, if there are special difficulties in that application, the importing WTO Member may then use methodologies for identifying and measuring the subsidy benefit which take into account the possibility that prevailing terms and conditions in China may not always be available as appropriate benchmarks. In applying such methodologies, where practicable, the importing WTO Member should adjust such prevailing terms and conditions before considering the use of terms and conditions prevailing outside China. (c) The importing WTO Member shall notify methodologies used in accordance with subparagraph (a) to the Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices and shall notify methodologies used in accordance with subparagraph (b) to the Committee on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures. (d) Once China has established, under the national Law of the importing WTO Member, that it is a market economy, the provisions of subparagraph (a) shall be terminated provided that the importing Member's national Law contains market economy criteria as of the date of accession. In an) event, t toe provisions of subparagraph (a)(A) shall expire 15 years after the date of accession. In addition, should China establish, pursuant to the national Law of the importing WTO Member, that market economy conditions prevail in a particular industry or sector, the non-market economy provisions of subparagraph (a) shall no Longer apply to that industry or sector.' 37. The Authority notes that while the provisions of Article 15 (a)(ii) of China PR's Accession Protocol have expired with effect from11th December 2016, the provision under Article 2.2.1.1 of the Anti-Dumping Agreement read with an obligation under 15(a)(i) of the Accession Protocol require criterion stipulated in Para 8 of Annexure I of Anti-Dumping Rules to be satisfied through the information/data to be provided in the supplementary questionnaire for claiming MET status. The Authority notes that no producer or exporter from China PR has submitted market economy treatment or supplementary questionnaire response. Therefore, the normal value computation for these producers/exporters is required to be determined in terms of provisions of Para 7 of Annexure-1 of Anti-Dumping Rules. 38. It is noted that paragraph 7 of Annexure-I to the AD Rules stipulates three methods of constructing the normal value for Non-Market Economies: (a) on the basis of price or constructed value in a market economy third country; (b) export price from a third country to other countries, including India; and (c) on any other reasonable basis. The Authority notes that under the provisions of paragraph 7 of Annexure-I to the AD Rules, the normal value must first be determined on the basis of the price or constructed value in a surrogate country, or the price of the exports from such country to other countries, including India. 39. At the application filing stage, the domestic industry submitted a computation of the normal value based on a constructed normal value methodology, given that all major sources of the subject goods were under investigation. Following the initiation of the investigation, neither the domestic industry nor any interested parties proposed a surrogate country for consideration. Furthermore, it has been observed that there is no dedicated Harmonized System (HS) Code for the PUC. In the absence of export data from the subject countries to other jurisdictions, the Authority has been unable to determine the normal value based on the exports of the subject goods from China to other countries. Consequently, in light of the insufficient available information, the Authority has opted to construct the normal value using the third method outlined in the relevant provisions, specifically relying on any other reasonable basis, including the price actually paid or payable in India. 40. For this purpose, the Authority has considered the optimized cost of production of the domestic industry, with a reasonable addition of selling, general and administrative expenses and profits. Export price for producers / exporters from China. A. Export price in case of Xinyi Group entities from China 41. The Authority notes that four entities of Xinyi Group, namely, Guangxi Xinyi Photovoltaic Industry Co., Ltd, Xinyi PV Products (Anhui) Holdings Ltd, Xinyi Solar (Suzhou) Ltd and Xinyi Solar (Hong Kong) Limited, have filed the exporter questionnaire response. From their responses, it is noted that Guangxi Xinyi Photovoltaic Industry Co., Ltd. and Xinyi Solar (Suzhou) Ltd, have exported the subject goods directly to India and also through Xinyi PV Products (Anhui) Holdings Ltd, and Xinyi Solar (Hong Kong) Limited. Xinyi PV Products (Anhui) Holdings Ltd. has also exported the subject goods directly to India and also through Xinyi Solar (Hong Kong) Limited. The Authority has considered the data submitted by the above entities for the purpose of this Final Findings. The exporters have claimed adjustments on account of inland freight, ocean freight, marine insurance, port and handling charges, credit cost, bank charges, etc. and these have been accepted after desk verification of information submitted by cooperating producer and exporter. The CNV & net export price have been calculated separately for coated and uncoated PUC for fair comparison and then weighted average has been determined which is mentioned below in the dumping margin table. B. Export price in case of Kibing Group entities from China 42. The Authority notes that four entities of Kibing Group, namely, Hunan Kibing Solar Technology Co., Ltd., Zhangzhou Kibing Photovoltaic New Energy Technology Co., Ltd., Ningbo Kibing Photovoltaie Technology Co., Ltd and Zhejiang Ninghai Kibing New Energy Management Co., Ltd., have filed the exporter questionnaire responses. From their responses, it is noted that the three companies Hunan Kibing Solar Technology Co., Ltd., Zhangzhou Kibing Photovoltaic New Energy Technology Co., Ltd., Ningbo Kibing Photovoltaie Technology Co., Ltd, have exported the subject goods through Zhejiang Ninghai Kibing New Energy Management Co., Ltd. The Authority has considered the data submitted by the above entities for the purpose of these Final Findings. The exporter has claimed adjustments on account of inland freight, ocean freight, port and handling charges, credit cost, bank charges, etc. and these have been accepted after desk verification of information submitted by cooperating producer and exporter. The CNV & net export price have been calculated separately for coated and uncoated PUC for fair comparison and then weighted average has been determined which is mentioned below in the dumping margin table. C. Export price in case of Flat Glass Group from China 43. The Authority notes that the three entities of Flat Glass Group, namely, Anhui Flat Solar Glass Co., Ltd., Flat Glass Group Co., Ltd. and Flat (Hong Kong) Co., Limited. Have filed the exporter questionnaire responses. From their responses, it is noted that Anhui Flat Solar Glass Co., Ltd., Flat Glass Group Co., Ltd, have exported the subject goods through Flat (Hong Kong) Co. Ltd. The Authority has considered the data submitted by the above entities for the purpose of this Final Findings. The exporter has claimed adjustments on account of inland freight, port and handling charges, credit cost, bank charges, etc. and these have been accepted after desk verification of information submitted by cooperating producer and exporter. The CNV & net export price have been calculated separately for coated and uncoated PUC for fair comparison and then weighted average has been determined which is mentioned below in the dumping margin table. D. Export price in case of Topray Group from China 44. The Authority notes that the two entities of Topray Group, namely, Shenzhen Topray Solar Co., Ltd. and Shaanxi Topray Solar Co., Ltd., have filed the exporter questionnaire response. From their responses, it is noted that Shenzhen Topray has exported the subject goods through Shaanxi Topray Solar Co., Ltd. The Authority has considered the data submitted by the above entities for the purpose of this Final Findings. The exporter has claimed adjustments on account of inland freight, ocean freight, marine insurance, port and handling charges, credit cost, bank charges, etc. and these have been accepted after desk verification of information submitted by cooperating producer and exporter. The CNV & net export price have been calculated separately for coated and uncoated PUC for fair comparison and then weighted average has been determined which is mentioned below in the dumping margin table. E. Export price in case of Anhui CSG New Energy Material Technology Co., Ltd from China 45. The Authority notes from the questionnaire response of Anhui CSG New Energy Material Technology Co., Ltd. that during the POI it has directly exported the subject goods to India. The Authority has considered the data submitted by the above entity for the purpose of this Final Findings. The exporter has claimed adjustments on account of inland freight, port and handling charges, credit cost, etc. and these have been accepted after desk verification of information submitted by cooperating producer and exporter. The CNV & net export price have been calculated separately for coated and uncoated PUC for fair comparison and then weighted average has been determined which is mentioned below in the dumping margin table. F. Export price in case of Dongguan CSG Solar Glass Co., Ltd from China 46. The Authority notes from the questionnaire response of Dongguan CSG Solar Glass Co., Ltd that during the POI it has directly exported the subject goods to India. The Authority has considered the data submitted by the above entity for the purpose of this Final Findings. The exporter has claimed adjustments on account of inland freight, ocean freight, marine insurance, port and handling charges, credit cost, bank charges, etc. and these have been accepted after desk verification of information submitted by cooperating producer and exporter. The CNV & net export price have been calculated separately for coated and uncoated PUC for fair comparison and then weighted average has been determined which is mentioned below in the dumping margin table. G. Export price in case of Wujiang CSG Glass Co., Ltd from China 47. The Authority notes from the questionnaire response of Wujiang CSG Glass Co., Ltd. that during the POI it has directly exported the subject goods to India. The Authority has considered the data submitted by the above entity for the purpose of this Final Findings. The exporter has claimed adjustments on account of inland freight, ocean freight, marine insurance, port and handling charges, credit cost, bank charges, etc. and these have been accepted after desk verification of information submitted by cooperating producer and exporter. The CNV &net export price have been calculated separately for coated and uncoated PUC for fair comparison and then weighted average has been determined which is mentioned below in the dumping margin table. Export price for all non-cooperative producers/exporters from China PR 48. The export price for all the non-cooperative producers/exporters from China has been determined based on facts available in terms of Rule6(8) of the Rules. Normal value for Flat (Vietnam) Co. Ltd. from Vietnam 49. Based on the information furnished in the questionnaire response, the Authority notes that M/s Flat (Vietnam) Co., Ltd. is a producer of the subject goods and has exported the subject goods to India during the POI through Flat (Hong Kong) Co. Ltd. 50. The exporter has sold *** MT of the PUC in the domestic market whereas, it has exported *** MT of the subject goods to India through Flat (Hong Kong) Co. Ltd during the POI. The Authority has first examined whether the total domestic sales of the subject goods by the producer/exporter concerned in the subject country were representative when compared to their total sales of the subject goods in the exporting country. Thereafter, it was examined whether their sales are under ordinary course of trade in terms of the Annexure-I to the Anti-dumping Rules. The Authority has considered the data submitted by the above entities after onsite verification. 51. The Authority examined all domestic sales transactions concerning the cost of production of the subject goods to determine if these sales were in the ordinary course of trade. To establish the normal value, the Authority conducted a test to identify profit-making domestic sales transactions. If more than 80% of these transactions are profitable, all domestic sales are considered for determining the normal value. If profitable transactions constitute less than 80%, only those profitable sales are considered. In this case, since over 80% of the sales were profitable by volume, all domestic sales were included in the determination of the normal value. The producer's claims for inland freight, credit costs, and bank charges as post-factory expenses have been accepted by the Authority after onsite verification. The normal value has been calculated separately for coated and uncoated PUC for fair comparison and then weighted average has been determined which is mentioned below in the dumping margin table. Export prices for Flat (Vietnam) Co., Ltd. 52. The Authority notes that Flat (Vietnam) Co. Ltd. has exported the subject goods through Flat (Hong Kong) to India during the POI. The Authority has considered the data submitted by the above entity for the purpose of this Final Findings. The exporter has claimed adjustments on account of inland freight, ocean freight, port and handling charges, credit cost, bank charges, etc. and these have been accepted after onsite verification of information submitted by cooperating producer and exporter. The net export price has been calculated separately for coated and uncoated PUC for fair comparison and then weighted average has been determined which is mentioned below in the dumping margin table. Export price and Normal value for all non-cooperative producers/exporters from Vietnam 53. The export price and normal value for all the non-co-operative producers/exporters has been determined based on facts available in terms of Rule6(8) of the Rules. F. 3.8 Dumping margin. 54. The normal value, export price and dumping margin determined in the present investigation are as follows: +--------------------+---------------+----------+--------------+--------------+--------------+ | Producer | Export Price | Normal | Dumping | Dumping | Dumping | | | (USD/MT) | value | Margin | Margin (%) | Margin | | | | (USD/MT) | (USD/MT) | | | | | | | | | (Range) | +====================+===============+==========+==============+--------------+--------------+ | China | | | | | | +--------------------+---------------+----------+--------------+--------------+--------------+ | Shaanxi Topray | *** | *** | *** | *** | 60-70 | | Solar Co., Ltd / | | | | | | | Shenzhen Topray | | | | | | | Solar Co., Ltd | | | | | | +--------------------+---------------+----------+--------------+--------------+--------------+ | Anhui Flat Solar | *** | *** | *** | *** | 50-60 | | Glass Co., Ltd./ | | | | | | | Flat Glass Group | | | | | | | Co., Ltd.,/ Flat | | | | | | | (Hong Kong) Co., | | | | | | | Limited., Ltd. | | | | | | +--------------------+---------------+----------+--------------+--------------+--------------+ | Anhui CSG New | *** | *** | *** | *** | 40-50 | | Energy Material | | | | | | | Technology Co., Ltd| | | | | | +--------------------+---------------+----------+--------------+--------------+--------------+ | Dongguan CSG Solar | *** | *** | *** | *** | 40-50 | | Glass Co., Ltd | | | | | | +--------------------+---------------+----------+--------------+--------------+--------------+ | Wujiang CSG Glass | *** | *** | *** | *** | 50-60 | | Co., Ltd | | | | | | +--------------------+---------------+----------+--------------+--------------+--------------+ | Xinyi group: | *** | *** | *** | *** | 60-70 | | Guangxi Xinyi | | | | | | | Photovoltaic | | | | | | | Industry Co., Ltd /| | | | | | | Xinyi PV Products | | | | | | | (Anhui) Holdings | | | | | | | Ltd./ Xinyi Solar | | | | | | | (Suzhou) Ltd / | | | | | | | Xinyi Solar (Hong | | | | | | | Kong) Limited | | | | | | +--------------------+---------------+----------+--------------+--------------+--------------+ | Kibing Group: | *** | *** | *** | *** | 50-60 | | Zhangzhou Kibing | | | | | | | Photovoltaic New | | | | | | | Energy Technology | | | | | | | Co., Ltd./Hunan | | | | | | | Kibing Solar | | | | | | | Technology Co., | | | | | | | Ltd./ Ningbo | | | | | | | Kibing | | | | | | | Photovoltaic | | | | | | | Technology Co., | | | | | | | Ltd. | | | | | | +--------------------+---------------+----------+--------------+--------------+--------------+ | Others | *** | *** | *** | *** | 80-90 | +--------------------+---------------+----------+--------------+--------------+--------------+ | Vietnam | | | | | | +--------------------+---------------+----------+--------------+--------------+--------------+ | Flat (Vietnam) | *** | *** | *** | *** | 30-40 | | Solar Glass Co., | | | | | | | Ltd/ Flat (Hong | | | | | | | Kong) Co., Limited.,| | | | | | | Ltd. | | | | | | +--------------------+---------------+----------+--------------+--------------+--------------+ | Others | *** | *** | *** | *** | 50-60 | +--------------------+---------------+----------+--------------+--------------+--------------+ G. INJURY AND CAUSAL LINK G.1 Submissions made on behalf of the opposing interested parties. 55. The opposing interested parties have made the following submissions with regard to injury and causal link. a. Domestic production volumes rose consistently during the period under investigation, disproving claims that imports suppressed production. This growth indicates that the domestic industry managed to increase output despite alleged injury from imports, suggesting that imports did not impede their competitiveness. b. While import volumes increased, the domestic industry's selling prices also rose during some periods, indicating that imports did not lead to price suppression. The injury claimed by the domestic industry is not aligned with this data and points to other underlying factors. с. d. e. f. g. h. i. The injury attributed to imports is overstated because it fails to consider significant external factors, such as raw material price volatility, global inflation, and supply chain disruptions. These factors independently impacted the domestic industry's financial health. The domestic industry's losses stem from decisions like capacity over-expansion, which strained their financial resources. This expansion resulted in higher depreciation and interest costs, compounding operational inefficiencies. These self-inflicted issues cannot be attributed to imports. The 22% Return on Capital Employed (ROCE) used to calculate NIP is excessive compared to renewable energy industry standards, which are typically around 14-15%. Such inflated benchmarks exaggerate injury margins, leading to unfair conclusions about injury from imports. The lack of clarity and consistency in the methodology used for calculating NIP has raised concerns among stakeholders. A standardized approach would enhance fairness and ensure that duty recommendations are based on realistic and equitable assessments. The evidence fails to establish that imports are the primary cause of injury. Market dynamics, such as fluctuating demand and rising input costs, were likely more influential in determining the domestic industry's financial outcomes. The domestic industry's outdated production technology and inefficient operations are key contributors to its challenges. Without modernizing their processes, the industry's financial problems will persist, irrespective of the presence of imports. Imported solar glass adheres to internationally accepted standards, including those established by leading certification bodies like IEC (International Electrotechnical Commission). Domestic producers have yet to fully align their products with these benchmarks, particularly in terms of durability, optical clarity, and anti-reflective coating efficacy. Renewable energy project developers argue that using lower-quality domestic glass can lead to higher maintenance costs and efficiency losses over time, discouraging foreign investment in India's solar sector. This reliance on imports is not a matter of preference but of necessity to ensure long-term project viability and performance. j. Imported textured tempered glass offers innovative features, such as bifacial technology compatibility and high thermal stability, which domestic manufacturers have not yet been able to replicate. This technological gap further reinforces the reliance on imports for modules intended for large-scale solar projects. k. The domestic industry's failure to invest in R&D to meet these specialized needs exacerbates the issue, leaving downstream industries no choice but to source high-quality glass internationally. 1. Quality issues in domestically produced glass can compromise module efficiency, increase energy losses, and reduce the overall lifespan of photovoltaic systems, making imports indispensable for ensuring reliability and competitiveness in international markets. m. It was also emphasized that quality variations in local glass have previously resulted in increased rejection rates during module manufacturing, driving up operational costs for manufacturers and forcing reliance on imports to maintain production schedules and quality benchmarks. n. Interested parties have highlighted significant concerns regarding the inability of domestic producers to meet the strict specifications required by global standards for advanced solar modules. For instance, imported glass often achieves transmission rates exceeding 91%, while domestic producers struggle to consistently meet these thresholds, leading to performance issues in solar panels. G.2 Submissions made on behalf of the domestic industry. 56. The domestic industry has submitted as follows on the issue of injury and causal link: a. Despite the presence of the domestic industry and other producers, the imports have dominated the entire market. The imports from subject countries constitute ***% of the market share during the period of investigation. b. The volume of imports from the subject country was *** times the Indian production in the period of investigation despite significant new capacities added in the Indian market. This clearly shows that the exporters are flooding the Indian market to drive out the domestic industry. с. The dumped imports are undercutting the prices of the domestic industry which is significantly positive during the period of investigation. d. The subject imports have continuously caused strain on the prices of the domestic industry as they were priced lower than the selling price of the domestic industry throughout the injury period. e. In the period of investigation, the landed value of the subject goods was below the cost of sales and selling price of the domestic industry. This clearly shows the price pressure on the domestic industry. f. g. h. i. j. k. 1. The dumped imports have had a suppressing effect on the prices of the domestic industry. The share of the domestic industry in the demand is a meagre ***%, despite having sufficient capacity to meet the Indian demand. Due to the constant pressure of dumped imports, the domestic industry has not been able to dispose of its production sufficiently. As a result, the domestic industry was forced to undertake exports to dispose of their inventories to avoid piling up the goods. In the period of investigation, the profitability of the domestic industry has declined by nearly ***% when compared to the base year. The domestic industry has also faced significant cash losses and a negative return of ***%. This is substantial by any standards. The domestic industry has also submitted that post initiation, their losses increased substantially and imports also increased. In relation to the alleged high return, it is submitted that the return of 22% has been the consistent practice of the DGTR which has also been upheld by the higher authorities in a number of cases. Moreover, the return of 22% is on capital employed (working capital and fixed assets) determined with proper guidelines and is used for the limited purpose of arriving at the NIP. Domestic Industry also highlighted that 22% of ROCE typically translated to *** to ***% profit on cost and even less in many cases and, therefore, this cannot be considered as high or extraordinary. In support of 22%, Domestic Industry has also provided judgements wherein courts / tribunals have upheld 22% return on capital employed. The Domestic Industry emphasizes that injury parameters cannot be analyzed in isolation. Domestic Industry has submitted that both price undercutting and price depression exist in the present case and therefore, requirements of Article 3.2 of the AD Agreement are clearly met with. Similarly, as per m. n. 0. p. q. r. S. Article 3.4 of the AD Agreement, the Domestic Industry highlights that all relevant economic factors must be evaluated collectively, even if not all of them may indicate injury. Domestic Industry also provided statistical evidence of injury and submitted that increased installed capacity to meet increasing demand, should not be interpreted as an absence of injury, as claimed by the interested parties. They have also highlighted that there is huge increase in the inventories despite higher production, sales and demand, indicating injurious impact of subject goods from subject countries. It is further submitted that verified data on record shows that Domestic Industry is suffering critically as there are losses, negative return on investment, coupled with increased inventories and reduced capacity utilization declining sales realization and losses, worsening financial performance, and reduced market share. In relation to demand and supply gap, the Domestic Industry submitted that Indian producers can meet ***% of Indian demand but has faced challenges due to dumped imports since the discontinuation of anti-dumping duties in 2022. It is further submitted that despite added module manufacturing capacities, domestic glass production has not gone up essentially due to unremunerative prices on account of incessant dumping. Domestic Industry has submitted that levy of provisional duties has revitalized plans for capacity expansion. It is also stated that even the 2024 budget speech of the Hon'ble Finance Minister supports these efforts. It is further submitted that due to sufficient domestic solar glass capacities existing in the country, exemptions of basic customs duty on imports of the subject goods have been discontinued. In relation to quality claims, Domestic Industry submitted that the quality of its goods is on par with imported goods. It is further submitted that the claims of inferior quality by some parties lack factual evidence, as no supporting data or impact on final products has been provided. In relation to specific issues raised by the interested parties, the Domestic Industry has submitted that most of the issues raised by the interested parties barring some stray instances, are not concerned with the product as such. It has been further submitted that transition from "glass-to-back sheet" to "glass-to-glass", technology has increased demand and is unrelated to quality concerns. Further, issues relating to pasting, blasting during lamination, adhesive failure cannot be attributed to quality of glass. None of the interested parties has provided any evidence to show that their modules were downgraded in quality index by their users because of using subject goods produced by Domestic Industry. In addition to above, it is submitted that the quality claims against the Domestic Industry account for less than ***% of total sales volume, indicating its insignificance. Domestic Industry further submitted that the Authority has consistently dismissed quality-related arguments when domestic and imported products are substitutable in the market. In relation to claims of higher depreciation and interest costs, Domestic Industry submits that both depreciation and interest costs account for only ***% of total costs, which is insufficient to account for the massive losses and cash losses of the industry. G.3 Examination by the Authority 57. Rule 11 of the Rules read with Annexure II provides that an injury determination shall involve examination of factors that may indicate injury to the domestic industry, '... taking into account all relevant facts, including the volume of dumped imports, their effect on prices in the domestic market for like articles and the consequent effect of such imports on domestic producers of such articles...'. 58. In relation to issues related to appropriate return for the purpose of Non-Injurious Price, it is noted that the Authority has consistently used 22% return on capital employed in all its investigations and no substantive grounds have been made to deviate from Authority's consistent practice which has been also upheld by Courts/Tribunals in the past. 59. In relation to quality issues, it is noted that none of the interested parties has provided any concrete evidence related to technical difficulty in achieving specific quality specifications by the Domestic Industry. Some interested parties have submitted email communications and minutes of the meeting stating quality issues pertaining to the subject goods produced by the Domestic Industry. Domestic Industry has refuted the claims supported by email communications and minutes of the meeting with customers. The Authority also checked the compensation given by the Domestic Industry for not meeting the quality during the POI and it was found to be miniscule. In view thereof, it is noted that merely because of the existence of some stray quality-related issues, it cannot be considered that the Domestic Industry's injury cannot be attributed to the dumped imports. It is also noted that total quality claims received by the Domestic Industry is less than *** % of their total sales. 60. The Authority has examined the arguments and counter-arguments of the interested parties with regard to injury to the domestic industry. The injury analysis made by the Authority hereunder addresses the various submissions made by the interested parties. Cumulative assessment of imports 61. Article 3.3 of WTO agreement and Para (iii) of Annexure II of the AD provide that in case where imports of a product from more than one country is 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 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. Cumulative assessment of the effect of imports is appropriate in light of the conditions of competition between the imported article and the like domestic articles. 62. The Authority notes that: a. b. с. The subject goods are being dumped into India from subject countries. The margins of dumping from each of the subject countries are more than the de minimis limits prescribed under the Rules. The volume of imports from each of the subject countries is individually more than 3% of total volume of imports. Cumulative assessment of the effects of imports is appropriate as the exports from the subject countries not only directly compete inter se but also with the like articles offered by the domestic industry in the Indian market. 63. In view of the above, the Authority considers it appropriate to assess injury to the domestic industry cumulatively from exports of the subject goods from the subject countries. Volume effect of the dumped imports G.3.1 Assessment of demand / apparent consumption 64. The Authority has defined, for the purpose of the present investigation, demand or apparent consumption of the product concerned in India as the sum of the domestic sales of the domestic industry and other Indian producers and imports from all sources. The demand so assessed is given in the table below: +--------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Particulars | Unit | 2020-21 | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | POI | +====================+=========+==========+==========+==========+=========+ | Subject countries | MT | 29,980 | 106,464 | 312,595 | 779,017 | +--------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | China | MT | 29,324 | 28,372 | 209,317 | 659,732 | +--------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Vietnam | MT | 656 | 78,093 | 103,277 | 119,285 | +--------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Other Imports | MT | 128,819 | 91,972 | 82,930 | 16,537 | +--------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Total Imports | MT | 158,799 | 198,436 | 395,524 | 795,555 | +--------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Sales of the | MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | | domestic industry | | | | | | +--------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Sales of Other | MT | 0 | 0 | 0 | *** | | Domestic Producers | | | | | | +--------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Total | MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | | Demand/Consumption | | | | | | +--------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Production-PUC | MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | +--------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 118 | 129 | 209 | +--------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Import from | % | *** | *** | *** | *** | | Subject countries | | | | | | | in relation to | | | | | | | Consumption | | | | | | +--------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 297 | 514 | 633 | +--------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ 65. The Authority notes the following from the table and the graph above: a. Imports from Subject Countries: Imports from subject countries (including China and Vietnam) showed a significant increase over the years. Starting at 29,980 MT in 2020-21, they surged to 779,017 MT during the POI (Period of investigation). b. China's Contribution: Imports from China grew from 29,324 MT in 2020-21 to 659,732 MT during the POI. с. Vietnam's Contribution: Imports from Vietnam increased from 656 MT in 2020-21 to 119,285 MT in the POI, with the highest spike between 2020-21 and 2021-22. d. Other Imports: Imports from other sources outside the subject countries decreased over time, starting from 128,819 MT in 2020-21 to 16,537 MT during the POI. e. Total Imports: Reflecting the rise in imports from subject countries, the total imports grew significantly from 158,799 MT in 2020-21 to 795,555 MT in the POI, indicating a shift towards imports from the subject countries. f. Sales of the domestic industry: Sales volumes of the domestic industry remained relatively stable over the first three years, ranging between *** MT to *** MT, and increased to *** MT during the POI. g. Sales of Other Domestic Producers: There were no sales recorded for other domestic producers from 2020-21 to 2022-23. Sales of *** MT were made during the POI. h. Total Demand/Consumption: The overall market demand or consumption has been on an upward trend throughout the period, growing from *** MT in 2020-21 to *** MT during the POI, indicating increased market activity. i. Imports in relation to consumption and production has increased manifold during the injury investigation period. G.3.3Price effect of dumped imports 66. In terms of Annexure II (ii) of the Rules, with regard to the effect of the dumped imports on prices, the Authority is required to consider whether there has been a significant price undercutting by the dumped imports as compared with the price of the like product in India, or whether the effect of such imports is otherwise to depress prices to a significant degree or prevent price increase, which otherwise would have occurred, to a significant degree. a) Price undercutting 67. 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 | 2020-21 | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | POI | +===================+=========+==========+==========+==========+=========+ | Net selling price | ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | +-------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Landed Price | ₹/MT | 48,072 | 47,848 | 45,606 | 42,872 | +-------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Price undercutting | ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | +-------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Price undercutting | % | *** | *** | *** | *** | +-------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Range | Range | 0-10 | 10-20 | 10-20 | 0-10 | +-------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ It is noted that during the period of investigation, the subject imports were undercutting the prices of the domestic industry. b) Price suppression/depression 68. In order to determine whether the dumped imports are depressing the domestic prices and whether the effect of such imports is to suppress prices to a significant degree or prevent price 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 | 2020-21 | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | POI | +=======================+=========+==========+==========+==========+=========+ | Cost of sales Domestic | ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | +-----------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 109 | 119 | 105 | +-----------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Selling price | ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | +-----------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 114 | 111 | 93 | +-----------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Landed Price | ₹/MT | 48,072 | 47,848 | 45,606 | 42,872 | +-----------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 100 | 95 | 89 | +-----------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ 69. 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. 70. 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 prices. 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. G.3.4 Economic parameters related to the domestic industry 71. Annexure II to the Anti-Dumping Rules requires that the determination of injury shall involve an objective examination of the consequent impact of dumped imports on domestic producers of the subject goods. The Rules further provide that the examination of the impact of the dumped 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 dumping; actual and potential negative effects on cash flow, inventories, employment, wages, growth, ability to raise capital investments. The various injury parameters relating to the domestic industry are discussed herein below. a) Production, capacity, capacity utilization and sales volumes 72. Capacity, production, sales and capacity utilization of the domestic industry over the injury period were as below: +-------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Particulars | Unit | 2020-21 | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | POI | +===================+=========+==========+==========+==========+=========+ | Installed Capacity| MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | +-------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 114 | 128 | 232 | +-------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Total Production | MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | +-------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 115 | 125 | 199 | +-------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Production-PUC | MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | +-------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 118 | 129 | 209 | +-------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Capacity | % | *** | *** | *** | *** | | Utilization | | | | | | +-------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 100 | 98 | 86 | +-------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Domestic Sales | MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | +-------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 109 | 107 | 188 | +-------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Export Sales | MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | +-------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 153 | 210 | 271 | +-------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Demand / | MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | | Consumption | | | | | | +-------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 120 | 203 | 411 | +-------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ 73. From the above, the Authority notes that: a. The domestic industry has increased their capacity throughout the injury investigation period to cater to the increasing demand of India. Capacity utilization of the domestic industry was ***% of the installed capacity during the period of investigation. This implies that around ***% of the installed capacity remained unutilized, despite significant increase in the demand of the subject goods. b. The domestic sales of the domestic industry are negligible (around ***%), in comparison to the total demand of the subject goods. с. As per the data available on record, other producers have combined capacity of *** MT. The total available capacity in India along with applicant industry is as follows: +------------------------------------+----------+----------+---------------+--------------+ | Particulars | Capacity | Sales | Imports - Total | Total Demand | +====================================+==========+==========+===============+==============+ | Production (MT) | | | | | +------------------------------------+----------+----------+---------------+--------------+ | Applicant (MT) | *** | *** | | | +------------------------------------+----------+----------+---------------+--------------+ | Gobind Glass & Industries Ltd. (MT)| *** | *** | | | +------------------------------------+----------+----------+---------------+--------------+ | Triveni Renewables Private Ltd. (MT)| *** | *** | | | +------------------------------------+----------+----------+---------------+--------------+ | Vishakha Glass Pvt. Ltd. (MT) | *** | *** | | | +------------------------------------+----------+----------+---------------+--------------+ | Gold Plus Float Glass Pvt. Ltd. (MT)| *** | | | | +------------------------------------+----------+----------+---------------+--------------+ | Emerge Glass (MT) | *** | | | | +------------------------------------+----------+----------+---------------+--------------+ | Total (MT) | *** | *** | 795,555 | *** | +------------------------------------+----------+----------+---------------+--------------+ d. From the above, it is noted that currently Indian producers have around ***% of the Indian demand. Moreover, as submitted by the Indian industries, some of the other producers have delayed the installation of their machineries because of influx of imports from China, post expiry of anti-dumping duties. b) Market Share 74. Market share of the domestic industry and of imports was as shown in the table below: +------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Market share | Unit | 2020-21 | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | POI | +========================+=========+==========+==========+==========+=========+ | Domestic industry Sales| MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | +------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 109 | 107 | 188 | +------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Sales of Other Indian | MT | - | - | - | *** | | Producers | | | | | | +------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Trend | Indexed | | | | 100 | +------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Total Indian Sales | MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | +------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 109 | 107 | 225 | +------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Imports from Subject | MT | 29,980 | 1,06,464 | 3,12,595 | 7,79,017| | Countries | | | | | | +------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 355 | 1,043 | 2,598 | +------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Imports from Other | MT | 1,28,819 | 91,972 | 82,930 | 16,537 | | Countries | | | | | | +------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 71 | 64 | 13 | +------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Total Imports | MT | 1,58,799 | 1,98,436 | 3,95,524 | 7,95,555| +------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 125 | 249 | 501 | +------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Demand in India | MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | +------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 120 | 203 | 411 | +------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Market Share | | | | | | +------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Domestic industry | %- | *** | *** | *** | *** | +------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 91 | 53 | 46 | +------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Other Producers | %- | 0% | 0% | 0% | *** | | Industry | | | | | | +------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Trend | Indexed | | | | 100 | +------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Indian producers | %- | *** | *** | *** | *** | +------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 91 | 53 | 55 | +------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Subject imports | %- | *** | *** | *** | *** | +------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 292 | 500 | 615 | +------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Other Country Imports | %- | *** | *** | *** | *** | +------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 60 | 31 | 4 | +------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ 75. It is noted that despite having sufficient capacity of approximately ***% of the demand, the share of the domestic industry in the Indian market is only *** %. The imports from the subject countries have continued to dominate the Indian market throughout the injury period with an ***% share during the period of investigation. (c) Inventories 76. Inventory position of the domestic industry over the injury period is given in the table below: +-------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Particulars | Unit | 2020-21 | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | POI | +===================+=========+==========+==========+==========+=========+ | Opening Inventory | MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | +-------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Closing Inventory | MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | +-------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Average Inventory | MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | +-------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 104 | 289 | 405 | +-------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ 77. It is noted that the average inventories of the domestic industry have increased throughout the injury investigation period. Further, it is seen that the average inventory was highest during the period of investigation. (d) Profit/loss, cash profit and return on capital invested. 78. Profitability, return on investment and cash profits of the domestic industry over the injury period are given in the table below: +-------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Particulars | Unit | 2020-21 | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | POI | +=========================+=========+==========+==========+==========+=========+ | Cost of sales (domestic)| ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | +-------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 109 | 119 | 105 | +-------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Selling price | ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | +-------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 114 | 111 | 93 | +-------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Profit/ (loss) | ₹/MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | +-------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Trend | Indexed | -100 | -56 | -236 | -269 | +-------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Profit/ (loss) | ₹ Lacs | *** | *** | *** | *** | +-------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Trend | Indexed | -100 | -61 | -253 | -505 | +-------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Cash Profit / Loss | ₹ Lacs | *** | *** | *** | *** | +-------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Trend | Indexed | -100 | -43 | -316 | -633 | +-------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Return of investment | % | *** | *** | *** | *** | +-------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Trend | Indexed | -100 | -83 | -269 | -453 | +-------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ 79. From the above, the Authority notes that: a. The selling price of the domestic industry has declined in the POI vis-i-vis year 2021-22 and 2022-23 b.During the POI, the cost of the domestic industry declined, however, the decline in selling price was steeper. The applicant has submitted that it has further worsened their position. c. The applicant has incurred losses and cash losses and is suffering negative return on investment during the period of investigation. (e) Employment, wages and productivity. 80. The Authority has examined the information relating to employment, wages and productivity, as given below. +-----------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Particulars | Unit | 2020-21 | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | POI | +=======================+=========+==========+==========+==========+=========+ | No. of employees | Nos. | *** | *** | *** | *** | +-----------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 125 | 172 | 177 | +-----------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Salaries & Wages | ₹ Lacs | *** | *** | *** | *** | +-----------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 153 | 118 | 115 | +-----------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Salaries & Wages | Rs/Nos | *** | *** | *** | *** | +-----------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 122 | 68 | 65 | +-----------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Productivity per day | MT/Days | *** | *** | *** | *** | +-----------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 118 | 129 | 209 | +-----------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Productivity per | MT/Nos | *** | *** | *** | *** | | employee | | | | | | +-----------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 95 | 75 | 118 | +-----------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ 81. It is noted that the number of employees increased throughout the injury investigation period, as the domestic industry has increased the capacity to cater to the increased demand. It is further noted that the productivity has also increased which shows that there is no negative impact of increase in the number of employees. 82. The salary paid to the employees decreased by around ***% i.e., from 100 indexed points in the base year to 65 indexed points in the period of investigation, which, as submitted by the domestic industry indicates the negative impact of dumping on it. (f) Growth. +-------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Particulars | Unit | 2020-21 | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | POI | +=========================+=========+==========+==========+==========+=========+ | Demand - MT | % | - | *** | *** | *** | +-------------------------+---------+----------+----------+----------+---------+ | Production -