Full Text
EXTRAORDINARY
PART I —Section 1
PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY
No. 222] NEW DELHI, TUESDAY , SEPTEMBER 19 , 2023/ BHADRA 28, 1945
CG-DL-E-20092023-248833
70052990 , 70053090 , 70071900 , 70072190 , 70072900 , 70169000 , 70200090 और
MINISTRY OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY
(Department of Commerce )
(DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF TRADE REMEDIES )
INITIATION NOTIFICATION
New Delhi, the 19th September , 2023
Case No. AD - SSR (05/2023)
Subject : Initiation of Sunset Review Investigation concerning imports of “Textured Tempered Coated and
Uncoated Glass” originating in or exported from Malaysia.
F. No. 07/11/2023 -DGTR .—M/s Borosil Renewables Limited (hereinafter referred to as the ‘applicant’), has
filed an application before the Designated Authority (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Authority’), on behalf of domestic
industry, in accordance with the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 as amended from time to time (hereinafter referred as the
‘Act’) and the Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment, and Collection of Anti -Dumping Duty on Dumped Articles
and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995, as amended fr om time to time (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Rules’),
seeking initiation of a sunset review investigation for continued imposition of anti -dumping duties levied on imports
of “Textured Tempered Coated and Uncoated Glass” (hereinafter referred to as the ‘subject goods’), originating in or
exported from Malaysia (hereinafter referred to as the “subject country”).
2. In terms of Section 9A (5) of the Act and Rule 23 (1B) of the AD Rules, the anti -dumping duties imposed
shall, unless revoked earlier, cease to have effect on expiry of five years from the date of such imposition and
the Authority is required to review the need for the continued imposition of the anti -dumping duties, and to
assess whether the expiry of the duty is likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury. In
accordance with the same, the Authority is required to review, on the basis of duly substantiated request
made by or on behalf of the domestic industry as to whether there is a need for the continued imposition of
the anti-dumping duty, and whether the expiry of the duty is likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of
dumping and injury.
A. Background
3. The original investigation concerning imports of the subject goods from Malaysia was initiated by the
Authority vide Notification No.6/45/2017 -DGAD dated 05.02.2018. The Final Findings was issued by the
Authority vide Notification No. 6/45/2017 -DGAD dated 17.01.2019, recommending the imposition of
definitive anti -dumping duties.
4. On the basis of the said recommendation, d efinitive anti -dumping duties were imposed by the Central
Government vide Custom Notification No.12/2019 -Customs (ADD) dated 26.02.2019 on the imports of the
subject goods, originating in or exported from Malaysia. The current anti -dumping duties are in force up to
25.02.2024.
B. Product under Consideration
5. The product under consideration is the same as in the original investigation i.e., “Textured Tempered Coated
and Uncoated Glass”. The product defined under the original investigation was as follows -
“Textured Toughene d (Tempered) Glass with a minimum of 90.5% transmission having thickness not
exceeding 4.2 mm (including tolerance of 0.2 mm) and where at least one dimension exceeds 1500 mm,
whether coated or uncoated”.
6. The present investigation being a sunset review inv estigation, the scope of the product under consideration
remains the same as defined in the original investigation.
7. The product under consideration is classified under Chapter 70 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 under
subheading 70071900 of the Customs Tar iff Classification. However, in the past, the PUC has also been
imported under other sub -headings as well, such as 70031990, 70051010, 70051090, 70052190, 70052990,
70053090, 70071900, 70072190, 70072900, 70169000, 70200090 and 85414011. The customs classi fication
is indicative only, and not binding on the scope of product under consideration since the proposed PUC may
be imported under other HS Codes.
8. The parties to the present investigation may provide their comments on the PUC and propose PCNs, if any,
within 15 days of circulation of the non -confidential version of the application filed before the Authority as
indicated in paragraph 27 of this initiation notification.
C. Like Article
9. The applicant has submitted that there are no significant differences in the subject goods produced by the
applicant and exported from the subject country and both are like articles. The product manufactured by the
applicant and imported from the subject country are comparable in terms of essential product characteristics
such as physical & chemical characteristics, manufacturing process & technology, functions & usage,
product specifications, pricing, distribution & marketing and tariff classification of the goods. Consumers can
use and have been using the two interchangeably. The two are technically and commercially substitutable,
and hence, should be treated as ‘like article’ under the Rules. Therefore, for the purpose of the present
investigation, the subject goods produced by the applicant in India are being treated as ‘lik e article’ to the
subject goods being imported from the subject country.
D. Domestic Industry & Standing
10. The application for the sunset review investigation has been filed by M/s Borosil Renewables Limited, which
is the sole producer of the product under con sideration in India. The Authority notes that the applicant holds
100% share of the total domestic production in India and has submitted that it has neither imported the
subject goods from the subject country nor is it related to any importer of the subjec t goods in India or any
exporter or producer of the subject goods in the subject country. In view of the above, the Authority notes
that the applicant constitutes an eligible ‘domestic industry’ within the meaning of Rule 2(b) of the Rules and
the applicat ion satisfies the criteria of standing in terms of Rule 5(3) of the Rules.
E. Subject Country
11. The subject country in the present review investigation is Malaysia.
F. Period of Investigation
12. The period of investigation (POI) proposed for the present sunset rev iew investigation is from April 2022 to
March 2023 (12 months) and 2019 -20, 2020 -21 & 2021 -22 i.e., the immediately preceding three years as the
injury investigation period. It is noted that the period proposed is the most recent period of the applicant’s
performance. Accordingly, the injury period proposed to be examined is 1st April 2019 - 31st March 2020,
1st April 2020 - 31st March 2021, 1st April 2021 - 31st March 2022, and the POI.
G. Procedure
13. The sunset review investigation will cover all aspects of the final findings published vide Notification No.
6/45/2017 -DGAD dated 17.01.2019, recommending the imposition of anti -dumping duty on the imports of
subject goods originating in or exported from Malaysia.
14. The provisions of Rules 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 16 , 17, 18, 19, and 20 of the Rules shall be mutatis mutandis
applicable in this review.
H. Likelihood of Continuation or Recurrence of Dumping
Normal Value
15. The subject country i.e., Malaysia is a market economy, and hence the normal value of the subject goods will
be based on the information provided by them.
16. However, for the purpose of initiation of the present review investigation, the normal value has been
constructed based the cost of production of the said article along with reasonable addition for admin istrative,
selling and general costs, and for profits, as determined in accordance with the rules.
Export Price
17. The export price for the subject goods has been computed based on the transaction -wise import data obtained
from the Directorate General of Com mercial Intelligence and Statistics (DGCI & S). Appropriate price
adjustments have been carried out to make the prices at ex -factory levels so that they become comparable
with normal value.
Dumping Margin
18. The normal value and the export price have been co mpared at the ex -factory level, which prima facie
establishes that the dumping margin is above the de minimis level and is significant with respect to the
product under consideration from the subject country. Thus, there is sufficient prima facie evidence that the
product under consideration from the subject country is being dumped in the domestic market of India by the
exporters from the subject country.
I. Likelihood vis-a-vis Injury and Causal Link
19. The quantity of imports of the subject goods from the subj ect country has remained high despite the existence
of anti -dumping duties on the imports of the subject goods from the subject country. In view of the same, the
Authority has examined the prima facie likelihood of dumping or recurrence of injury in the ev ent of
cessation of the existing anti -dumping duty. The Authority has also prima facie examined the continuation of
existing duties based on the grounds alleged in the application.
20. The applicant has claimed that while the domestic industry has not suffered continued injury, the non -
remunerative dumped and subsidized imports from other countries halted the recovery process, and hence
cessation and continuation of anti -dumping duties will likely result in injury to the domestic industry.
Furthermore, the appl icant has claimed the likelihood of injury based on factors such as the positive dumping
and injury margins, the history of dumping, capacities available in the subject country and capacity
expansion, the lack of domestic demand in the subject country, and the likely impact of recurrence of
dumping on the domestic industry in the event of cessation of duties. There is prima facie evidence regarding
the likelihood of dumping and injury to the domestic industry in the event of cessation of anti -dumping duty.
J. Initiation of Sunset Review Investigation
21. On the basis of the duly substantiated application by the domestic industry, and having satisfied itself, on the
basis of prima facie evidence submitted by the applicant substantiating likelihood of dumping and
consequent injury to the domestic industry, and in accordance with Rule 23(1B) of the Rules, the Authority
hereby initiates the present investigation to review the need for continued imposition of the duties in force in
respect of the subject goods, originat ing in or exported from the subject country, and to examine whether the
expiry of existing anti -dumping duty is likely to lead continuation or recurrence of dumping and consequent
injury to the domestic industry.
K. Submission of Information
22. All communication should be sent to the Designated Authority via email at email addresses dd11 -
[email protected] and [email protected] with a copy to adg14 [email protected] and adv13 [email protected] . It must be
ensured that the narrative part of the submission is in searchable PDF/MS -Word format and data files are in
MS-Excel format.
23. The known producers/exporters in the subject co untry, the Government of the subject country through its
Embassy in India, and the importers and users in India who are known to be associated with the subject
goods are being informed separately to enable them to file all the relevant information within t he time limits
mentioned in this initiation notification. All such information must be filed in the form and manner as
prescribed by this initiation notification, the Rules, and the applicable trade notices issued by the Authority.
24. Any other interested pa rty may also make a submission relevant to the present investigation in the form and
manner as prescribed by this initiation notification, the Rules, and the applicable trade notices issued by the
Authority within the time limits mentioned in this initiati on notification.
25. Any party making any confidential submission before the Authority is required to make a non -confidential
version of the same available to the other interested parties.
26. Interested parties are further directed to regularly visit the officia l website of the Directorate General of Trade
Remedies ( https://www.dgtr.gov.in/ ) to stay updated and apprised with the information as well as further
processes related to the investigation.
L. Time Limit
27. Any informati on relating to the present investigation should be sent to the Designated Authority via email at
email address dd11 [email protected] and dd16 [email protected] with a copy to adg14 [email protected] and adv13 -
[email protected] within 30 days from the date on which the non -confidential version of the application filed by
the domestic industry would be circulated by the De signated Authority or transmitted to the appropriate
diplomatic representative of the exporting country as per Rule 6(4) of the Rules. If no information is received
within the stipulated time limit or the information received is incomplete, the Authority m ay record its
findings based on the facts available on record and in accordance with the Rules.
28. All the interested parties are hereby advised to intimate their interest (including the nature of interest) in the
instant matter and file their questionnaire responses within the above time limit as stipulated in this
notification.
29. Where an interested party seeks additional time for filing of submissions, it must demonstrate sufficient cause
for such extension in terms of Rule 6(4) of the AD Rules, 1995 and su ch request must come within the time
stipulated in this notification.
M. Submission of Information on Confidential Basis
30. Where any party to the present investigation makes confidential submissions or provides information on a
confidential basis before the Aut hority, such party is required to simultaneously submit a non -confidential
version of such information in terms of Rule 7(2) of the Rules and in accordance with the relevant trade
notices issued by the Authority in this regard.
31. Such submissions must be cle arly marked as “confidential” or “non -confidential” at the top of each page.
Any submission that has been made to the Authority without such markings shall be treated as “non -
confidential” information by the Authority, and the Authority shall be at liberty to allow other interested
parties to inspect such submissions.
32. The confidential version shall contain all information which is, by nature, confidential, and/or other
information, which the supplier of such information claims as confidential. For the infor mation which is
claimed to be confidential by nature, or the information on which confidentiality is claimed because of other
reasons, the supplier of the information is required to provide a good cause statement along with the supplied
information as to w hy such information cannot be disclosed.
33. The non -confidential version of the information filed by the interested parties should be a replica of the
confidential version with the confidential information preferably indexed or blanked out (where indexation i s
not possible) and such information must be appropriately and adequately summarized depending upon the
information on which confidentiality is claimed.
34. The non -confidential summary must be in sufficient detail to permit a reasonable understanding of the
substance of the information furnished on a confidential basis. However, in exceptional circumstances, the
party submitting the confidential information may indicate that such information is not susceptible to
summary, and a statement of reasons containing a sufficient and adequate explanation in terms of Rule 7 of
the Rules, 1995, and appropriate trade notices issued by the Authority, as to why such summarization is not
possible, must be provided to the satisfaction of the Authority.
35. The interested parties can offer their comments on the issues of confidentiality claimed by the domestic
industry within 7 days from the date of circulation of the non -confidential version of the application as
indicated in paragraph 27 of this initiation notification.
36. Any submi ssion made without a meaningful non -confidential version thereof or a sufficient and adequate
cause statement in terms of Rule 7 of the Rules, and appropriate trade notices issued by the Authority, on the
confidentiality claim shall not be taken on record by the Authority.
37. The Authority may accept or reject the request for confidentiality on examination of the nature of the
information submitted. If the Authority is satisfied that the request for confidentiality is warranted or if the
supplier of the infor mation is either unwilling to make the information public or to authorize its disclosure in
generalized or summary form, it may disregard such information.
38. The Authority on being satisfied and accepting the need for confidentiality of the information provi ded, shall
not disclose it to any party without specific authorisation of the party providing such information.
39. A list of registered interested parties will be uploaded on the DGTR’s website along with the request therein
to all of them to email the non -confidential version of their submissions and other information to all other
interested parties.
N. Non-Cooperation
40. In case any interested party refuses access to and otherwise does not provide necessary information within a
reasonable period or within the ti me stipulated by the Authority in this initiation notification or subsequently
time period provided through separate communication, or significantly impedes the investigation, the
Authority may declare such interested party as non -cooperative and record it s findings based on the facts
available and make such recommendations to the Central Government as it deems fit.
ANANT SWARUP , Designated Authority
Uploaded by Dte. of Printing at Government of India Press, Ring Ro ad, Mayapuri, New Delhi -110064
and Published by the Controller of Publications, Delhi -110054.
Login to read full text