Final Findings of ssr concerning ADD on imports of Fluoroelstomer FKM exported from China PR

``` REGD. No. D. L.-33004/99 The Gazette of India CG-DL-E-30102025-267261 EXTRAORDINARY PART I—Section 1 PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY NEW DELHI, WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 29, 2025/ KARTIKA 7, 1947 MINISTRY OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY (Department of Commerce) DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF TRADE REMEDIES NOTIFICATION New Delhi, the 29th October, 2025 FINAL FINDING CASE NO. ADD (SSR)-04/2025 Subject: Sunset Review investigation concerning anti-dumping duty on imports of 'Fluoroelstomer' (FKM) originating in or exported from China PR. F. No. 7/08/2025 – DGTR - Having regard to the Customs Tariff Act 1975, as amended from time to time (hereinafter also referred to as the "Act") and the Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of Anti-Dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules 1995 thereof, as amended from time to time (hereinafter also referred to as "Rules") thereof; a. Designated Authority (hereinafter referred to as “the Authority") received an application from Gujarat Fluorochemicals Limited (hereinafter referred to as the 'applicant' or the “the domestic industry") seeking initiation of a sunset review for extension of the present anti-dumping duty imposed on imports of Fluoroelastomer (hereinafter to be referred to as the “subject goods" or the "the product under consideration” or the “PUC”), originating in or exported from China PR (hereinafter referred to as the "subject country"). b. On the basis of prima facie evidence submitted by the applicant, the Authority issued a public notice vide notification no. 7/08/2025- DGTR dated 16th June 2025 published in the Gazette of India, Extraordinary, initiating the subject investigation. The investigation was initiated in accordance with Section 9A (5) of the Act read with Rule 23 of the Rules to examine whether the expiry of such duty is likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury to the domestic industry and if there is a need for continued imposition of the anti-dumping duties. A. BACKGROUND OF THE CASE. 1. The original anti-dumping investigation into imports of product under consideration from China was initiated on 2nd January 2018. The Authority had recommended anti-dumping duty on imports of Fluoroelstomer from China PR vide Final Finding Notification No. 6/25/2017-DGAD dated 27th December 2018 for a period of 18 months. The definitive antidumping duty was imposed on the subject goods vide Customs Notification No. 6/2019-Customs (ADD) dated 28th January 2019 for a period of 18 months till 27th July 2020. 2. Thereafter, a sunset review investigation was initiated vide Notification No. 7/03/2020-DGTR dated 07th February 2020. Pending the investigation, the anti-dumping duty was extended for a period of three months vide Custom Notification No. 19/2020-Customs (ADD) dated 21st July 2020 up to 27th October 2020. The final finding of the sunset review was issued on 19th October 2020, and definitive antidumping duty was imposed on the subject goods for a period of five years vide Notification No. 40/2020 dated 27th November 2020. 3. In the original investigation, the anti-dumping measures were imposed for a period of 18 months only. Thereafter in the first sunset review, the anti-dumping measures were extended for a period of 5 years. The duty was imposed on 28th January 2019 and shall, unless extended further, expire on 27th November 2025. 4. In terms of Section 9A (5) of the Act, any anti-dumping duty imposed shall, unless revoked earlier, cease to have effect on the expiry of five years from the date of such an imposition. Further, Rule 23(1B) of the Rules provides as follows: "Any definitive antidumping duty levied under the Act, shall be effective for a period not exceeding five years from the date of its imposition, unless the designated Authority comes to a conclusion, on a review initiated before that period on its own initiative or upon a duly substantiated request made by or on behalf of the domestic industry, within a reasonable period of time prior to the expiry of that period, that the expiry of the said anti-dumping duty is likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury to the domestic industry” 5. In accordance with the above, the Authority is required to review, on the basis of a duly substantiated request made by or on behalf of the domestic industry, whether the expiry of existing anti-dumping duty is likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury. 6. The scope of the present review covers all aspects of the final finding, no. F. No. 7/03/2020-DGTR dated 19th October 2020 and vide Notification No. 40/2020 dated 27th November 2020. B. PROCEDURE 7. The procedure described below has been followed with regard to the investigation: a. In accordance with Rule 5 of the Rules, before proceeding to initiate the investigation, the Authority notified the embassy of the subject country in India about the receipt of the present anti-dumping application. b. In accordance with Rule 6 of the Rules, the Authority issued a notification no. 7/08/2025- DGTR dated 16th June 2025, published in the Gazette of India Extraordinary, initiating the sunset review anti-dumping investigation concerning the imports of the product under consideration from the subject country. с. The period of investigation (POI) for the purpose of present investigation is 01 January 2024 – 31 December 2024. The injury information has been provided for the period of investigation and the three preceding years, that is, 1 April 2021 – 31 March 2022, 1 April 2022 – 31 March 2023, and 1 April 2023 – 31 March 2024 and period of investigation. d. A request was made to the Directorate General for Systems and Data Management (DG Systems) for transaction-wise import data of the subject goods for the injury period. The Authority received the data and has relied upon this data for the necessary analysis after due examination of the transactions. e. In accordance with Rule 6 (2) of the Rules, the Authority sent a copy of the initiation notification to the embassy of the subject country in India, the known producers, and exporters from the subject country, known importers and users in India, and the other interested parties, as per the email addresses made available by the applicant. f. In accordance with Rule 6 (3) of the Rules, the Authority provided a copy of the non-confidential version of the application to the known producers/exporters and to the embassy of the subject country in India. g. In accordance with Rule 6 (4) of the Rules, the Authority sent exporter's questionnaire to the known producers/ exporters in subject country. h. The Authority sent questionnaires to the governments of the subject country through their embassy in India. The Government of the subject country was requested to forward the Initiation Notification and the questionnaires to the producers of the subject goods and advise them to respond to the questionnaire within the prescribed time limit. i. The following producers and exporters have registered in the present investigation. | SN | Name of producer/exporters in the subject country. | |----+--------------------------------------------------------------------+ | 1 | Chemours Chemical (Shanghai) Co. Ltd | | 2 | Chemours Chenguang Fluoromaterials (Shanghai) Co. Ltd | | 3 | Chenguang Fluoro And Silicone Elastomers Co. Ltd | | 4 | Daikin Fluorochemicals (China) Co. Ltd | | 5 | Fure Industrial (Shanghai) Co. Ltd | | 6 | Hung Hua Construction Co. Ltd | | 7 | Sichuan Dowhon International Co. Ltd | | 8 | Sichuan Dowhon New Materials Co. Ltd | | 9 | Solvay Specialty Polymers (Changshu) Co. Ltd. | | 10 | Tokyo Zairyo Co. Ltd. Japan | | 11 | Zhonghao Chenguang Research Institute of Chemical Industry Co. Ltd | | 12 | Uni Alliance Limited | j. In accordance with Rule 6(4) of the Rules, the Authority sent initiation notification and copies of the importers' questionnaire to the known importers/users of the subject goods in India calling for necessary information. k. The following users/importers have registered in the present investigation. | SN | Name of users and importers. | |----+--------------------------------------------| | 1 | Eastcorp Polymers Private Limited | | 2 | Solvay Specialities India Private Limited | | 3 | Tokyo Zairyo Co. Ltd. | l. The Authority issued an Economic Interest Questionnaire (EIQ) to assess public interest and impact of the duties on the wider economy. The economic interest questionnaire was also shared with the administrative line ministry. Only the applicant has filed reply to the economic interest questionnaire. m. A list of all interested parties that registered themselves within the prescribed timeline was uploaded on the website. All registered interested parties were directed to circulate the non- confidential version of all their submissions in the present proceedings with all other interested parties n. In accordance with Rule 6(6), the Authority provided an opportunity to the interested parties to present their views orally in a hearing held on 30th July 2025. The parties presenting their views in the oral hearing were directed to make written submissions of the views expressed orally, followed by rejoinder submissions. o. In accordance with Rule 6(8), wherever an interested party has refused access to or has otherwise not provided necessary information in a timely manner during the course of the present proceedings, or has significantly impeded the investigation, the Authority has considered such parties as non-cooperative and recorded the findings on the basis of the facts available. p. In accordance with Rule 7, information provided by the interested parties on confidential basis was examined by the Authority with regard to the sufficiency of the confidentiality claimed. On being satisfied, the Authority has accepted the confidentiality claims, wherever warranted, and such information has been considered as 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. q. In accordance with Rule 8, the Authority conducted verification of the data provided by the applicant and other interested parties to the extent considered necessary for the present proceedings. The Authority has considered the verified data of the interested parties in its analysis in the present case. r. The Authority calculated the non-injurious price (NIP) for the product under consideration so as to ascertain whether duties lower than the dumping margin would be sufficient to remedy the injury being suffered by the domestic industry. The NIP has been calculated based on the optimum cost of production and cost to produce & sell the domestic like article in India, based on the information furnished by the applicant and having regard to the Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). s. The Authority examined the issues raised, information provided, and submissions made by the interested parties during the course of the proceedings, to the extent they were supported by evidence and considered relevant to the present purposes, in making the final findings. t. The Authority circulated the disclosure statement containing all essential facts under consideration for making the final recommendations to the Central Government to all interested parties on 20th August April 2025. The Authority has examined all the 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 has not been repeated for the sake of brevity. u. *** represents information furnished by a party on confidential basis and so considered by the Authority under the Rules. v. The exchange rate adopted by the Authority for the period of investigation is 1 US$= Rs' 84.38 C. PRODUCT UNDER CONSIDERATION AND LIKE ARTICLE C.1 Submission of the other interested parties. 8. The other interested parties have submitted as follows with regards to the scope of the product under consideration and like article: a. Authority should clarify whether compounds and FFKM are excluded in the scope of investigation. C.2. Submission of the applicant. 9. The applicant has submitted as follows with regards to the scope of the product under consideration and like article: a. The scope of the product under consideration in the present investigation is the same as defined in the original investigation. b. FKM has industrial use in hydraulic O-ring seals, check valve balls, electrical connectors, automotive use in shaft seals, fuel injector O-rings, and aerospace use in O-ring seals in fuels, lubricants and hydraulic system, manifold gaskets and fuel tank bladders. c. FKM does not have a dedicated customs classification either in India or in China. Imports have majorly entered under the HS Code 39046910 and 39046990. d. Compound and FFKM are excluded from the scope of the product under consideration in the previous investigation C.3. Examination by the Authority. 10. The present investigation is a sunset review investigation and the scope of the product under consideration remains the same as defined in the previous investigations. 11. The product under consideration as defined in the original investigation is reproduced hereunder: - “The product under consideration (PUC) in the present investigation is Fluoroelastomers (FKM). Fluoroelastomers (FKM) is a class of synthetic rubber designed for very high temperature operation. With excellent over-all properties, Fluoroelastomers (FKM) is called as the "Rubber King. It contains not-fully- fluorinated molecular structure, and its main and side chains contain strong electronegativity of fluorine atoms. "Fluoroelastomers” are a family of fluoropolymer rubbers, not a single entity. It can be classified by their fluorine content, 66%, 68%, & 70% respectively. FKMs are broadly categorized in two sets – Copolymer and Terpolymer." 12. In the sunset review investigation concluded by the Authority vide. F. No. 7/3/2020-DGTR-DGTR dated 19th October 2020, the Compounds and FFKM were excluded from the scope of product under consideration. The relevant extract is produced herein below. “16. Authority in view of the aforesaid proposed PCN, holds that the PUC i.e. Fluoroelastomers includes copolymer and terpolymer both in raw gum and pre- compound form and of different types. Compounds and FFKM are excluded from the scope of PUC.” 13. In the absence of any comments, the scope of the product under consideration is same as defined in the previous investigation. 14. The Authority notified a PCN methodology which was adopted by the Authority in the previous sunset review and proposed by the applicant for the present investigations. The interested parties in the subject investigation were asked to advise comments on the PUC/PCN methodology, if any, within 15 days from the date of initiation of this investigation. 15. Considering the submissions on record, the Authority notified scope of the PUC and PCN methodology vide notice dated 8th July 2025 and stated that the scope of the PUC & PCN methodology in the present sunset review investigation remains the same as defined in initiation notification. Post the clarification issued, no further submissions have been received from any interested party either on the scope of the PUC or on the PCN methodology. 16. Accordingly, the PCN methodology adopted in the present sunset review investigation is the same as defined in initiation notification and notified vide notice dated 8th July 2025. The same is reproduced herein. +----+-----------------------------------------+--------------+------------------------------------------------------+ | SN | Name of product type | PCN | Description of PCN | +====+=========================================+==============+======================================================+ | 1 | Co Polymer-Raw gum | FCP#RG0001 | Fluoroelastomers (FKM) Co-Polymer Raw | | | | | Gun | +----+-----------------------------------------+--------------+------------------------------------------------------+ | 2 | Terpolymer Bisphenol Curable Raw Gum | FTPBRG0002 | Fluoroelastomers (FKM) Terpolymer | | | | | Bisphenol Curable Raw Gum | +----+-----------------------------------------+--------------+------------------------------------------------------+ | 3 | Terpolymer Peroxide Curable Raw Gum | FTPPRG0003 | Fluoroelastomers (FKM) Terpolymer | | | | | Peroxide Curable Raw Gum | +----+-----------------------------------------+--------------+------------------------------------------------------+ | 4 | Copolymer Pre-Compound | FCP#PC0004 | Fluoroelastomers (FKM) Copolymer Pre- | | | | | Compound | +----+-----------------------------------------+--------------+------------------------------------------------------+ | 5 | Terpolymer Bis-Phenol Curable Pre-Compound | FCP#PC0005 | Fluoroelastomers (FKM) Terpolymer | | | | | Bisphenol Curable Pre-Compound | +----+-----------------------------------------+--------------+------------------------------------------------------+ 17. The product is classifiable under Chapter 39 under the customs code 39046910 and 39046990. It is also noted that the customs classification is indicative only and is in no way binding on the scope of subject investigation. The subject goods are being imported under the following HS codes: 39045090, 39046990, 39049000 and 39046910. 18. The Authority notes that the product produced by the applicant is comparable to the imported goods from the subject country in terms of chemical characteristics, product specifications, technical specifications, manufacturing process, and technology, functions and uses, pricing, distribution and marketing, and tariff classification of the goods. The two are technically and commercially interchangeable. Accordingly, the Authority notes that the product produced by the applicant are ‘like article' to the product under consideration imported from the subject country in terms of Rule 2(d) of the Rules and the scope of the product under consideration remains the same as defined in the original investigation. D. SCOPE OF DOMESTIC INDUSTRY AND STANDING. D.1 Submission made by the other interested parties. 19. The other interested parties have not made any submission with regards to the scope of the domestic industry and standing. D.2. Submission made by the applicant. 20. The applicant has submitted as follows with regards to the scope of the domestic industry and standing: a. Applicant is the sole producer of subject goods in India. b. The applicant has not imported the subject goods from the subject country c. The applicant is not related to any producer of the subject goods in the subject country or importer of the subject goods in India D.3. Examination by the Authority. 21. Rule 2(b) of the Anti-Dumping Rules defines the domestic industry as below: (b) “domestic industry” means the domestic producers as a whole engaged in the manufacture of the like article and any activity connected therewith or those whose collective output of the said article constitutes a major proportion of the total domestic production of that article except when such producers are related to the exporters or importers of the alleged dumped article or are themselves importers thereof in such case the term 'domestic industry' may be construed as referring to the rest of the producers " 22. The Authority notes that the present application has been filed by Gujarat Fluorochemicals Limited. There is no other producer of the subject goods in India. Considering the information on record the Authority notes that the applicant accounts for entire Indian production. 23. Gujarat Fluorochemicals Limited has certified that it has not imported the product under consideration. The Authority has examined DG System's transaction-wise data and found that there are no imports of the product under consideration by Gujarat Fluorochemicals Limited. 24. It is noted that the applicant is eligible domestic industry within the meaning of the Rule 2(b), and the application satisfies the criteria of standing in terms of Rule 5(3) of the Rules. Ε. MISCELLANEOUS SUBMISSION. E.1. Submission of the other interested parties. 25. The other interested parties have made the following misc. submissions: - a. Continuation of anti-dumping duties is an exception, and the normal provisions of the law require for termination of duties after five years. This is also supported by the Appellate Body Report in US-Anti Dumping Measures on OCTG from Mexico. b. There is no requirement to compulsorily initiate a sunset review investigation. с. The applicant should be directed to submit the post-period of investigation data. d. The application lacks critical information mandated by Trade Notice 03/2021 such as total and surplus capacity in China, information about export sales to third countries, and crucially any post-period of investigation data. E.2 Submission of the applicant. 26. The applicant has made the following misc. submissions: - a. There is no such requirement of proving an “exceptional circumstance” either under the Act or the Rules for extension of duties beyond 5 years. The only condition necessary for extension of duties is whether cessation of such duty is likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury. b. The Authority in the large number of cases recommended to continue duty in the second or even further sunset review. с. The duties were originally imposed for only 18 months. Thereafter, the duties continued for a period of 5 years in 2020, after an extension of further two months. Thus, the duties have only been in place for less than nearly 6.5 years. d. In the original investigation and first sunset review, the applicant was in continuous losses. The Authority had therefore increased the anti-dumping quantum. Therefore, it is only in the injury period of the current review, that the applicant was able to able to get effective remedy against dumping. This has only been possible due to the duties in place that restricted the influx of cheap imports into the country and allowed the domestic industry to serve the Indian market. If the duties are not continued, the exporters from China PR will start exporting aggressively at low prices and the domestic industry would once again suffer e. On the submission that the duty applicant has received adequate protection, the duties have only been in place for less than nearly 6.5 years. As against this European Union industry gets anti- dumping duty for a very longer period. A six-month period for which interim duty is in place is not even counted in five-year period. As opposed to Indian practice, European Union initiates sunset review in the last month, and sometimes last week of expiry of duty, and then extends the anti-dumping duty, pending outcome of review. E.3. Examination by the Authority. 27. As regards the submission that the application did not meet the requirements of Trade Notice 03/2021 which deals with revised timelines and the information to be provided by an applicant for sunset review investigation, the Authority notes that the applicant has provided in its application information on third country exports, capacity expansions, export orientation and surplus capacities in the application. The investigation was initiated based on sufficient prima facie evidence to justify the present sunset review investigation and upon initiation all the interested parties were advised to submit their data and views. The same has been considered by the Authority to the extent relevant in the present final finding. 28. As regards submission that that termination of anti-dumping duty after a period of 5 years is the norm and continuation of duty is an exception to the norm, the Authority notes that anti-dumping duty imposed shall, unless revoked earlier, cease to have effect on the expiry of five years from the date of such imposition, provided that, if the Central Government, in a review, is of the opinion that the cessation of such duty is likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury, it may, from time to time, extend the period of such imposition for a further period upto five years. Authority notes that as per Section 9(A)(5) of the Act and Rule 23 of the Rules, there is no restriction on the maximum period for which the duty can remain in force. The only condition necessary for extension of duties is whether cessation of such duty is likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and consequent injury to the domestic industry. The anti-dumping duty can be extended for a period as long as necessary to counteract likelihood of dumping and injury, or withdrawn, if there is no justification for continuation of duty. 29. The applicant in the present case has filed application contending continuance or recurrence of dumping and consequent injury to the domestic industry. A review, as provided under the Rule 23 (1B), was initiated and the Authority shall determine whether there is a likelihood of continuation of recurrence of dumping and injury in case of cessation of ADD. F. DETERMINATION OF NORMAL VALUE, EXPORT PRICE AND DUMPING MARGIN F.1 Submission by other interested parties 30. The other interested parties have made the following submissions with regard to the normal value, export price and dumping margin: a. Chemours Chenguang Fluoromaterials (Shanghai) Co. Ltd. (CCF) is a 50:50 Joint venture between Chemours and Zhonghao Chenguang. b. CCF is participating in this investigation for the first time and did not export the product during earlier investigations. c. CCF will be barred from being treated as a "new shipper" under Rule 22 of the AD Rules, as it is 'related' to an existing producer that has already been a part of the original investigation d. CCF is related to Zhonghao Chenguang because the person holding more than 5% shares in Zhonghao Chenguang also indirectly (through Zhonghao Chenguang) holds 50% shares in the JV entity and as such the situation meets the criteria set out in clause (iv) of Trade Notice No. 9/2018. e. The Authority in anti-dumping investigation concerning imports of LDPE from Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Thailand, United Arab Emirates and United States of America, treated two exporters (Sadara and Petro Rabigh) as single entity. The majority shareholding in Sadara is held by a wholly owned subsidiary of Saudi Aramco, and Saudi Armco is also related to Petro Rabigh. f. The use of third country export prices as normal value is discretionary under Paragraph 7 of Annexure I and should only be adopted if it results in a more accurate and fair comparison than domestic or constructed values in India. g. Zhonghao Chenguang Research Institute of Chemical Industry Co., Ltd has disputed the claim that Chemours Chenguang Fluoromaterials (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. is related to them. It has been stated that Chemours Shanghai and Zhonghao Chenguang are not the same group. h. Reference to LDPE case is not appropriate as there exporters were treated as a single entity because they were not only related but also operated through the same export channels and acted as an integrated group. In the current case, Chemours Shanghai and Zhonghao Chenguang are independent, compete with each other and export separately i. On the applicant's claim that the exporters could have provided information on price of its related entities in market economy third country, there is no legal obligation on an exporter to furnish data regarding a third country's cost of production or selling prices merely because a group entity is present in such third country. The data pertaining to each legal entity is confidential and the applicant has not pointed out the provision under which such data may be sought. F.2 Submissions by the domestic industry 31. The domestic industry has made the following submissions with regard to the normal value, export price and dumping margin: a. As per the Accession Protocol and practice of Authority, China should be treated as a non- market economy. Market economy treatment can be allowed only when the same is claimed and appropriateness thereof is demonstrated. b. None of the producers have filed the NME questionnaire c. None of the other have shown that market economy conditions prevail in their industry, the Authority is not required to determine the normal value based on domestic prices or costs in China. d. The normal value should based on the import price from United States of America adjusted to arrive at net ex-factory level. e. In the previous investigation, since the prices of raw gum from USA to India was more than pre- compound prices, this methodology was contested by other interested parties and the Authority determined the normal value based on the cost of production in India, duly adjusted. f. In the period of investigation of the present investigation, the prices of the raw gum and pre- compound from USA have moved in line with the global prices. g. Some of the participating exporters have operations in European Union, United States of America and other countries. Daikin Fluorochemicals (China) Co., Ltd is a part of Daikin Industries which has a division in USA called Daikin Fluorochemicals USA that exports the subject goods. Solvay Specialty Polymers (Changshu) Co. Ltd is a part of the Solvay group which has operations in multiple countries including USA, Europe and Asia. These exporters should have provided their exports from third countries to India for determination of normal value. h. Normal value should be determined based on the price actually paid in India. As per the hierarchy of determining the normal value, the price paid in a India takes precedent over the price payable in India. Since applicant has not suffered injury in the period of investigation, its selling price is the actual price available in the country and can be considered as normal value. i. On request of CCF to grant same duty as Zhonghao Chenguang, mere relationship of the two companies is insufficient to collapse duty. j. The applicant has sought extension of measures, and it is a case of no current injury, the existing duties are required to be extended. k. In the anti-dumping investigation relating to the imports of DOPP, Authority has not collapsed anti-dumping duty on Kodak and Lucky, despite their admitted relationship. F.3 Examination by the Authority a. Normal value 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 transhipped 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 response to Exporters' Questionnaire has been filed by the following producers and their associated exporters. a. Chenguang Fluoro And Silicone Elastomers Co. Ltd b. Chemours Chenguang Fluoromaterials (Shanghai) Co. Ltd through M/s Chemours Chemical (Shanghai) Co. Ltd., Tokyo Zairyo Co. Ltd. Japan c. Daikin Fluorochemicals (China) Co. Ltd and its exporter Uni Alliance. d. Sichuan Dowhon New Materials Co. Ltd and exporter Dowhon International e. Zhonghao Chenguang Research Institute of Chemical Industry Co. Ltd 34. The Authority notes the following provisions under Para 7 and Para 8 of Annexure-I to the Rules with regard to the determination of normal value for producers in China PR “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 determined to be, or has been treated as, a non-market economy country for purposes of an antidumping 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 non-market 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 sub-paragraph (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 and 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 market economy country which, on the basis of the latest detailed evaluation of relevant criteria, which includes the criteria specified in sub paragraph (3), has been, by publication of such evaluation in a public document, treated or determined to be treated as a market economy country for the purposes of anti-dumping investigations, by a country which is a Member of the World Trade Organization.” 35. 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. 36. 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 Member 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 any event, the provisions of subparagraph (a)(ii) 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 from 11th December 2016, the provision under Article 2.2.1.1 of the Anti- Dumping Agreement read with obligation under 15(a)(i) of the Accession Protocol require criterion stipulated in Para 8 of the Annexure 1 of Anti-Dumping Rules to be satisfied through the information/data to be provided in the supplementary questionnaire for claiming MET status. 38. The Authority notes that none of the producers/exporters from China PR has filed supplementary questionnaire response to rebut the presumptions as mentioned in para 8 of Annexure – I of the Rules. Under these circumstances, the Authority has to proceed in accordance with para 7 of Annexure – I of the Rules. 39. It is noted that paragraph 7 of Annexure-I to the AD Rules stipulates multiple plausible methods for calculating the normal value for producers in non-market economy, including (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, including the price actually paid or payable in India for the like product, duly adjusted, if necessary, to include a reasonable profit margin. 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. 40. At the stage of filing the application, the applicant submitted that the normal value for China PR should be based on the import price from United States of America adjusted to arrive at net ex-factory level. The applicant has additionally submitted normal value based on price payable in India based on cost of production of the domestic industry. 41. No information/evidence has been provided by the parties for the consideration of the normal value on the basis of the price or constructed value in the market economy third country. 42. The Authority notes that during the period of investigation the import price of copolymer raw gum is higher than the import price of copolymer pre compound. Raw gum is the raw material used to produce copolymer pre compound and therefore, the import price of raw gum does not appear to reflect the market prices. 43. The Authority has determined normal value based on the price payable in India. The normal value has been determined based on the cost of production of production of the domestic industry including selling, general and administrative and reasonable profit margin. b. Export price. i. Chenguang Fluoro And Silicone Elastomers Co. Ltd 44. The producer has reported [***] MT as exports of the product under consideration to India during the period of investigation. The producer has claimed that it has directly exported the product to India and no other related/ unrelated party is involved in the export of the product under consideration. The producer has reported various adjustments to the export price to work out ex-factory export price. The net export price so determined is shown in the table below. ii. Chemours Chenguang Fluoromaterials (Shanghai) Co. Ltd 45. The producer has reported [***] MT as exports of the product under consideration to India during the period of investigation. The producer has claimed that it has exported the product to India through its related entity M/s Chemours Chemical (Shanghai) Co. Ltd. which has then exported through (a) unrelated exporter Tokyo Zairyo Co. Ltd. Japan or (b) to unrelated importer Tokyo Zairyo Co. Ltd. All these entities have filed questionnaire response. 46. The producer has stated that it is a 50:50 joint venture between Chemours Chemicals group and Zhonghao Chenguang (a participating producer). CCF has claimed that it has participated for the first time and did not export the product during earlier investigations. CCF has requested that either it may be granted an individual duty or the duty applicable to Zhonghao Chenguang may be extended to the producer. The applicant and Zhonghao Chenguang have disputed this and has claimed that mere existence of relationship is not sufficient. Zhonghao has also submitted that the two companies operate independently and have no control over each other's operations, with each company making its own commercial decisions, manages its own export. It is established practice that related exporters are not given the same rate unless they form part of a single economic entity or are under common control which is absent in the present investigation. 47. The Authority has examined the submission made. In the present case, it has not been disputed that the two entities have independent operations. Zhonghao Chenguang has on the contrary disputed the relationship and has claimed that they are not part of the same group. The two companies operate separately and compete with each other, and there is no coordination in pricing, exports, or production. 48. The net export price so determined is shown in the table below. iii. Daikin Fluorochemicals (China) Co. Ltd 49. The producer has reported [***] MT as exports of the product under consideration to India during the period of investigation. The producer has claimed that it has directly exported the product to India, and no other related/ unrelated party is involved in the export of the product under consideration. The producer has reported various adjustments to the export price. The net export price so determined is shown in the table below. iv. Sichuan Dowhon New Materials Co. Ltd 50. The producer has reported [***] MT as exports of the product under consideration to India during the period of investigation. The producer has claimed that it has exported through its related exporter - Dowhon International. The producer and exporter have reported various adjustments to the export price. The net export price so determined is shown in the table below. v. Zhonghao Chenguang Research Institute of Chemical Industry Co. Ltd 51. The producer has reported [***] MT as exports of the product under consideration to India during the period of investigation. The producer has claimed that it has directly exported the product to India, and no other related/ unrelated party is involved in the export of the product under consideration. The net export price so determined is shown in the table below. vi. Any other 52. The export price for other non-cooperative producers/exporters from China has been determined based on facts available in terms of Rule 6(8) of the Rules. 53. Based on the above, the dumping margin has been determined and is shown below. 54. It is seen that the dumping margin is positive for Chenguang Fluoro and Silicone Elastomers Co., Ltd and Sichuan Dowhon New Materials Co., Ltd., but negative for the others. +----+-----------------------------------------------------+------------------+---------------------+-----------------------+-------------------+ | SN | Particulars | Normal value | Net export price | Dumping margin | Dumping margin | | | | USD/MT | USD/MT | USD/MT | % | +====+=====================================================+==================+=====================+=======================+===================+ | 1 | Chenguang Fluoro and Silicone Elastomers Co., Ltd | *** | *** | *** | 20-30% | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+------------------+---------------------+-----------------------+-------------------+ | 2 | Sichuan Dowhon New Materials Co., Ltd | *** | *** | *** | 30-40% | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+------------------+---------------------+-----------------------+-------------------+ | 3 | Zhonghao Chenguang Research Institute of Chemical | *** | *** | *** | Negative | | | Industry Co., Ltd | | | | | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+------------------+---------------------+-----------------------+-------------------+ | 4 | Daikin Fluorochemicals (China) Co., | *** | *** | *** | Negative | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+------------------+---------------------+-----------------------+-------------------+ | 5 | Chemours Chenguang Fluoromaterials (Shanghai) Co. | *** | *** | *** | Negative | | | Ltd | | | | | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+------------------+---------------------+-----------------------+-------------------+ | 6 | Others | *** | *** | *** | 40-50% | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+------------------+---------------------+-----------------------+-------------------+ G. ASSESSMENT OF INJURY AND CAUSAL LINK AND LIKLIHOOD OF CONTINUATION OR RECURRENCE OF INJURY. G.1. Submission of the other interested parties 55. The other interested parties have made the following submissions with regard to injury and causal link: a. Rate of increase has dropped to a considerable extent in the period of investigation. b. Domestic production for sale has increased tremendously even when the total demand has decreased. c. The import value of the subject imports has been in tandem with the total demand for the subject goods. d. Profits of the applicant have increased considerably in the period of investigation even when demand has decreased. e. The anti-dumping duty has been in force for more than four years; the applicant has already consolidated and strengthened its market position to the extent it can cater to the Indian demand of subject goods. f. In the case of Indian Spinners Association v. Designated Authority, CESTAT held that 'existence of surplus production capacity cannot be taken as posing a clearly foreseen and imminent threat of injury.' g. Mere allegation of capacity expansion argument does not establish a likelihood of dumping. h. WTO Panel in US- Sunset Review of Anti-Dumping Duties on Corrosion- Resistant Carbon Steel Flat Products from Japan stated that any conclusions drawn with regard to a likelihood determination under Article 11.3 would have to be established positively and on demonstrable evidence. i. The claims of the applicant on likelihood of injury are not substantiated. The applicant has not provided any evidence of the likelihood of injury. j. Mere capacity expansion of one of the producers cannot be ground for likelihood. G.2. Submission of the applicant. 56. The applicant has made the following submissions with regard to injury and causal link: a. Volume of imports increased significantly over the period and was the highest in the period of investigation. In fact, since the duties have been imposed, the imports from the subject country have increased by 158%. b. The subject imports have taken away the market share of the applicant and have increased in relation to consumption in India. c. Price undercutting in respect of Daiken is negative, whereas price undercutting in respect of other Chinese producers is positive. d. During the present injury period, the applicant has set up a new plant in Jolva with a capacity of 3,600 MT. As a result, the capacity and production of the applicant has increased over the injury period, while the capacity utilization decreased. e. The domestic sales of the applicant have also increased but despite increase in capacity and domestic sales, the imports from the subject country have commanded nearly one third of the market share. f. The market share of the applicant has increased in the period of investigation. Despite increasing its capacity and production substantially, the applicant constitutes less than half the market share in the country. g. The profitability of the domestic industry improved in 2022-23 and then declined in 2023-24 and thereafter increased in the period of investigation. The cash profits have also shown a similar trend. The return on investment of the applicant has drastically decreased after 2022-23. h. Owing to the duties in force, the applicant has witnessed growth in its economic parameters. However, even then, its profitability has remained low in recent years. i. The information shows that the dumping margin continues to remain positive and significant. The fact of continued dumping demonstrates irrefutably that there is likelihood of continued and aggravated dumping in the event of expiry of duty. j. The applicant has not claimed continued injury in the present investigation. The Authority is required to examine whether the injury is likely to recur in the event of cessation of duty, having regard to the potential volume and price of imports and impact thereof on the domestic producers. k. The volume of imports increased significantly over the period and was the highest in the period of investigation. Since duties have been imposed, the imports from the subject country have increased by 158%. l. India is an important market for the exporters and in case the duties are revoked, the Chinese exporters will flood the Indian market. m. Separate price undercutting should be determined in respect of exports made by Daiken and other Chinese producers since price undercutting in respect of Daiken is negative, whereas price undercutting in respect of other Chinese producers is positive. n. The capacity and production of the applicant have increased over the injury period, while the capacity utilization decreased due to since the applicant has set up a new plant. o. Even though the domestic sales have, despite increase in capacity and domestic sales, the imports from the subject country have commanded nearly one third of the market share. p. The applicant is the sole producer in the country and has sufficient capacity to cater to the entire demand in the country. The market share of the applicant stood is significantly low in the period of investigation. q. The closing inventory of the applicant in the period of investigation was the highest. r. The average inventory as number of days of production and sales has also increased over the injury period and was highest in the period of investigation. s. Since the applicant has set up a new plant, the number of employees, wages and productivity have shown growth. t. The profitability and cash profits of the applicant improved in 2022-23 and then declined in 2023-24 and thereafter increased in the period of investigation. u. The return on investment of the applicant has drastically decreased after 2022-23. v. The dumping margin is not only de-minimis but significant. w. The fact of continued dumping shows that there is likelihood of continued and aggravated dumping in the event of expiry of duty. x. The fact that the imports have increased over the year and were the highest in the period of investigation shows that, in the event of expiry of duty, the volume of imports is likely to increase further. y. Solvay, one of the biggest global producers of subject goods, has increased its capacity for FKM. z. Chinese producers are export oriented and most of the FKM exports targeted to India, Germany and United States. aa. Chenguang Fluoro & Silicone Polymer Co Limited, exports 80-90% of its annual production and 16% of the exports made by the company were made to India. bb. China is the largest fluororubber producer in the globe. China's fluororubber production capacity will reach 30,300 tons per year and accounts for about 46.62% of the world's total fluororubber production capacity. cc. The capacity of the fluororubber industry in China is much higher than the demand in India. dd. During the period of investigation, the production of product under consideration in Asia stood at 22,351 MT and has steadily increased over the last five years and will continue to do so over the next three years. China's share in the Asia Pacific Fluoropolymers market will be at 61% in 2027. ee. In addition to holding significant exportable capacities, the producers in the subject country were also suffering from significant idle capacities. ff. United States of America is one of the biggest export markets for the Chinese producers but with the recent increase in the customs duty, it is likely that the Chinese exporters will shift their export market from USA to India. gg. The product is produced first in raw gum form which is processed further into pre-compound by addition of few additives and further processing the product. The import price of pre compound is less than the import price of raw gum. hh. The applicant has provided a third-party report (by Astute Analytica) to show the Global Fluoropolymers Market. The report shows that China is a major producer of the product under consideration in ASIA Pacific region. ii. The product under consideration does not have a dedicated customs classification in India and China. Imports have taken place majorly in the HS code 39046910 and 39046990. Since transaction-wise data is not available to the applicant, it is not in a position to compare the PCN- wise export price of China to other countries for the purpose of likelihood of injury. jj. On the submission that the demand has declined and the domestic sales have increased, the respondent has presented incorrect facts. The demand for the product under consideration has increased. G.3. Examination by the Authority. 57. Rule 11 of Antidumping 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 the domestic producers of such articles...". In considering the effect of the dumped imports on prices, it is considered necessary to examine whether there has been a significant price undercutting by the dumped imports as compared with the price of the like article in India, or whether the effect of such imports is otherwise to depress prices to a significant degree or prevent price increases, which otherwise would have occurred, to a significant degree. For the examination of the impact of the dumped imports on the domestic industry in India, indices having a bearing on the state of the industry such as production, capacity utilization, sales volume, inventory, profitability, net sales realization, the magnitude and margin of dumping, etc. have been considered in accordance with Annexure II of the Anti-Dumping Rules. 58. The Authority has taken note of the various submissions made by the applicant and other interested parties on injury and causal link and has analyzed the same considering the facts available on record and applicable laws. The injury analysis carried out by the Authority ipso facto addresses submissions made by the applicant and other interested parties. 59. The interested parties have contended that the applicant should be asked to provide post period of investigation data. The Authority also notes that the interested party has not provided any justifiable reason why the post period of investigation data should be considered. The Authority does not find it appropriate in examining post period of investigation data. 60. The import data reported by the participating producer from China is more than the DG system transaction wise data The Authority had called for transaction wise import data for 39045090, 39046910, 39046990, and 39049000. However, the import data does not contain Chemours Chenguang Fluoromaterials (Shanghai) Co. Ltd. (CCF). The table below shows the export volume reported by the CCF. | Particulars | CY 2021 | CY 2022 | CY 2023 | POI (CY 2024) | |:-------------------------|:--------|:--------|:--------|:--------------| | (b) Export Sales-India | 100 | 2400 | 5800 | 5800 | | (Trend) | | | | | 61. To ascertain the volume of imports from China, the Authority has considered the import data as per DG System data and the import volume reported by the CCF. CCF has reported data prior to the period of investigation in calendar year format which is different than the accounting period considered by the Authority. The Authority has therefore, adopted the methodology only for the period of investigation. The volume of imports in the previous years is also low. +----+----------------------------+-----+ | SN | Particulars | POI | +====+============================+=====+ | 1 | Imports as per DG System (MT) | *** | +----+----------------------------+-----+ | 2 | Imports as per the producer | *** | +----+----------------------------+-----+ 62. In consideration of the various submissions made by interested parties in this regard, the Authority has examined the current injury, if any, to the applicant before proceeding to examine the likelihood aspects of dumping and injury. G.3.1. Volume effect of the dumped imports a. Assessment of demand/consumption 63. The demand or apparent consumption has been determined as the sum of domestic sales of the applicant and the imports from all sources. +----+-----------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | SN | Particulars | Unit | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | 2023-24 | POI | +====+=======================+=======+=========+=========+=========+=====+ | 1 | Sales of applicant | MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | +----+-----------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 2 | Trend | Index | 100 | 115 | 184 | 193 | +----+-----------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 3 | Subject imports | MT | 217 | 303 | 450 | 608 | +----+-----------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | | Undumped imports | MT | | | | *** | +----+-----------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 4 | Other Imports | MT | 548 | 559 | 590 | 574 | +----+-----------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 5 | Consumption | MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | +----+-----------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 6 | Trend | Index | 100 | 114 | 157 | 171 | +----+-----------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ 64. It is seen that the demand for the subject product has increased over the years and was the highest in the period of investigation. b. Imports in absolute and relative terms 65. The information on volume of imports in absolute terms and relative terms over the injury period and in the period of investigation is as below. +----+-----------------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | SN | Particulars | Unit | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | 2023-24 | POI | +====+=============================+=======+=========+=========+=========+=====+ | 1 | Subject Imports | MT | 217 | 303 | 450 | 608 | +----+-----------------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 2 | Subject import in relation to: | | | | | | +----+-----------------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | A | Production | % | *** | *** | *** | *** | +----+-----------------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | | Trend | Index | 100 | 59 | 106 | 94 | +----+-----------------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | B | Consumption | % | *** | *** | *** | *** | +----+-----------------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | | Trend | Index | 100 | 125 | 131 | 163 | +----+-----------------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | C | Total imports | % | 28% | 35% | 43% | 51% | +----+-----------------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ 66. It is seen that: a. The volume of imports has increased over the injury period and was highest in the period of investigation. b. The imports in relation to production declined in 2022-23, increased in 2023-24 but declined again in the period of investigation. c. The subject imports have shown an increasing trend in terms of consumption in India. The imports in relation to consumption are highest in the period of investigation. d. The subject imports in relation to the total imports into the country have shown a steady increase over the injury period. H.3.2. Price effect of dumped imports 67. 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 increases, which otherwise would have occurred, to a significant degree. a. Price undercutting 68. Price undercutting has been determined by comparing the net sales realization of the applicant with the landed price of the imports. The comparison has been undertaken PCN wise basis. The table below shows the price undercutting from the subject country. +----+--------------+-----------------+-------------+-------------+----------------+-----------+ | SN | PCN | Import volume | Selling price | Landed price | Undercutting | | | | | MT | Rs/KG | Rs/KG | Rs/KG | % | +====+==============+=================+=============+=============+================+===========+ | 1 | FCP#RG0001 | 5 | *** | 1,215 | *** | 30-40% | +----+--------------+-----------------+-------------+-------------+----------------+-----------+ | 2 | FTPBRG0002 | - | *** | *** | *** | 0% | +----+--------------+-----------------+-------------+-------------+----------------+-----------+ | 3 | FTPPRG0003 | 96 | *** | 3,522 | *** | (20-30)% | +----+--------------+-----------------+-------------+-------------+----------------+-----------+ | 4 | FCP#PC0004 | 229 | *** | 1,283 | *** | (0-10)% | +----+--------------+-----------------+-------------+-------------+----------------+-----------+ | 5 | FCP#PC0005 | 78 | *** | 2,059 | *** | 5-10% | +----+--------------+-----------------+-------------+-------------+----------------+-----------+ | 6 | Total | 409 | *** | 1,957 | *** | (0-10)% | +----+--------------+-----------------+-------------+-------------+----------------+-----------+ 69. The price undercutting is negative on an overall basis. The price undercutting is positive for co- polymer raw gum (FCP#RG0001) and Terpolymer Bis-Phenol Curable Pre-Compound (FCP#PC0005). 70. The Authority also notes that since the volume of imports reported by the participating producers is more than the volume of imports as per DG System data, it is considered appropriate to analyzed price undercutting based on response filed by the producers. The Authority has determined price undercutting based on the data of the participating producers and exporters which is shown below. +----+-----------------------------------------------------+-----------------+---------------------+---------------------+-----------------------+-------------------+ | SN | Particulars | Import volume | Net selling price | Landed price | Price undercutting | | | | | MT | Rs/KG | Rs/KG | Rs/KG | % | +====+=====================================================+=================+=====================+=====================+=======================+===================+ | 1 | Chenguang Fluoro and Silicone Elastomers Co., Ltd | *** | *** | *** | *** | 40-50% | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+-----------------+---------------------+---------------------+-----------------------+-------------------+ | 2 | Sichuan Dowhon New Materials Co., Ltd | *** | *** | *** | *** | 20-30% | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+-----------------+---------------------+---------------------+-----------------------+-------------------+ | 3 | Zhonghao Chenguang Research Institute of Chemical | *** | *** | *** | *** | 40-50% | | | Industry Co., Ltd | | | | | | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+-----------------+---------------------+---------------------+-----------------------+-------------------+ | 4 | Daikin Fluorochemicals (China) Co., | *** | *** | *** | *** | (10-20)% | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+-----------------+---------------------+---------------------+-----------------------+-------------------+ | 5 | Chemours Chenguang Fluoromaterials (Shanghai) Co. | *** | *** | *** | *** | (40-50)% | | | Ltd | | | | | | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+-----------------+---------------------+---------------------+-----------------------+-------------------+ | 6 | Total | 572 | *** | 2,164 | *** | (10-20)% | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+-----------------+---------------------+---------------------+-----------------------+-------------------+ 71. It is seen that while price undercutting is negative for Daikin Fluorochemicals (China) Co., and Chemours Chenguang Fluoromaterials (Shanghai) Co. Ltd, it is significantly positive for all other producers. b. Price suppression / depression 72. 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 increases which otherwise would have occurred in normal course, the changes in the costs and prices over the injury period, are compared as below. +----+---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | SN | Particulars | Unit | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | 2023-24 | POI | +====+===============+=========+=========+=========+=========+=====+ | 1 | Cost of Sales | Rs/KG | *** | *** | *** | *** | +----+---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 2 | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 114 | 110 | 90 | +----+---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 3 | Selling Price | Rs/KG | *** | *** | *** | *** | +----+---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 4 | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 137 | 100 | 91 | +----+---------------+---------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ 73. It is seen that: a. The cost of sales and selling price of the applicant increased in 2022-23 but declined in 2023- 24 and further declined in the period of investigation. b. The applicant has been able to sell at profitable prices over the injury period. c. There were no suppressing or depressing effect of imports on the domestic industry prices in the period of investigation. d. The applicant has stated that it has not suffered continued injury due to anti-dumping duty in force. The applicant is claiming likelihood of recurrence of material injury in the event of cessation of anti-dumping duty. H.3.4. Impact on economic parameters of the domestic industry. 74. 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 such products. With regard to consequent impact of dumped imports on domestic producers of such products, the Rules further provide that the examination of the impact of the dumped imports on the domestic industry should include an objective and unbiased evaluation of all relevant economic factors and indices having a bearing on the state of the industry, including actual and potential decline in sales, profits, output, market share, productivity, return on investments or utilization of capacity; factors affecting domestic prices, 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 applicant are discussed herein below. a. Capacity, production, capacity utilization and domestic sales 75. Information on capacity, production, capacity utilization and domestic sales over injury period is as follows. Raw gum is used to produce pre-compound. The Authority has considered capacity and capacity utilization at the level of raw gum which is shown below. +----+-------------------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | SN | Particulars | Unit | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | 2023-24 | POI | +====+===============================+=======+=========+=========+=========+=====+ | 1 | Installed capacity of raw gum | MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | +----+-------------------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 2 | Trend | Index | 100 | 360 | 320 | 320 | +----+-------------------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 3 | Total production of raw gum | MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | | | for capacity utilization purpose | | | | | | +----+-------------------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 4 | Trend | Index | 100 | 241 | 175 | 261 | +----+-------------------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 5 | Capacity utilization | % | *** | *** | *** | *** | +----+-------------------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 6 | Trend | Index | 100 | 67 | 55 | 82 | +----+-------------------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ 76. The table below shows total production of the applicant, the domestic and the export sales. Production of sellable raw gum has been calculated considering the total raw gum produced reduced by raw gum transferred to production of other product under consideration. +----+---------------------------------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | SN | Particulars | Unit | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | 2023-24 | POI | +====+=============================================+=======+=========+=========+=========+=====+ | 1 | Production of saleable raw gum | MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | +----+---------------------------------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 2 | Production of pre-compound and other terpolymer | MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | +----+---------------------------------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 3 | Total saleable production of product under | MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | | | consideration | | | | | | +----+---------------------------------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 4 | Trend | Index | 100 | 240 | 188 | 287 | +----+---------------------------------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 5 | Domestic sales | MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | +----+---------------------------------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 6 | Trend | Index | 100 | 115 | 184 | 193 | +----+---------------------------------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 7 | Export sales | MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | +----+---------------------------------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 8 | Trend | Index | 100 | 255 | 162 | 245 | +----+---------------------------------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ 77. It is noted that: a. The applicant has set up a new plant with a capacity of *** MT during the injury period. b. The production of the applicant has increased over the injury period, while capacity utilization has witnessed a decrease. c. Both the domestic sales and export sales of the applicant have increased over the injury period. 78. It is thus seen that the performance of the domestic industry has improved in respect of production, capacity utilization and sales. However, the domestic industry is operating with idle capacities and the imports at present cater to a significant share in the demand. b. Market share 79. Information on market share of imports and the domestic industry over the injury period was as follows: +----+-------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | SN | Market Share | Unit | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | 2023-24 | POI | +====+===================+=======+=========+=========+=========+=====+ | 1 | Domestic industry | % | *** | *** | *** | *** | +----+-------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 2 | Trend | Index | 100 | 101 | 117 | 113 | +----+-------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 3 | Subject imports | % | *** | *** | *** | *** | +----+-------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 4 | Trend | Index | 100 | 123 | 132 | 164 | +----+-------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 5 | Other imports | % | *** | *** | *** | *** | +----+-------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ 80. It is seen that that market share of the domestic industry has increased over the injury period. The market share of subject imports from China has also increased over the injury period. Despite substantial increase in its capacity and production, the applicant caters to only half of the demand in the country, thus showing its vulnerability. c. Inventories 81. Information on inventories is as follows: +----+-------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | SN | Particulars | Unit | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | 2023-24 | POI | +====+===================+=======+=========+=========+=========+=====+ | 1 | Opening inventory | MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | +----+-------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 2 | Trend | Index | 100 | 59 | 195 | 185 | +----+-------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 3 | Closing inventory | MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | +----+-------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 4 | Trend | Index | 100 | 330 | 265 | 481 | +----+-------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 5 | Average inventory | MT | *** | *** | *** | *** | +----+-------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 6 | Trend | Index | 100 | 160 | 221 | 295 | +----+-------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ 82. It is seen that the average inventory has consistently increased over the injury period. The closing inventory in the period of investigation was highest when seen over the injury period. d. Profitability, cash profits and return on investment 83. Information on profitability, return on investment and cash profits is as follows: +----+-------------------------+----------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | SN | Particulars | Unit | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | 2023-24 | POI | +====+=========================+==========+=========+=========+=========+=====+ | 1 | Profit/ (loss) | Rs/KG | *** | *** | *** | *** | +----+-------------------------+----------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 2 | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 215 | 65 | 93 | +----+-------------------------+----------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 3 | Profit/ (loss) | Rs. Lacs | *** | *** | *** | *** | +----+-------------------------+----------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 4 | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 247 | 121 | 180 | +----+-------------------------+----------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 5 | Cash profit | Rs. Lacs | *** | *** | *** | *** | +----+-------------------------+----------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 6 | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 243 | 130 | 188 | +----+-------------------------+----------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 7 | PBIT | Rs. Lacs | *** | *** | *** | *** | +----+-------------------------+----------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 8 | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 240 | 127 | 175 | +----+-------------------------+----------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 9 | Return on investment | % | *** | *** | *** | *** | +----+-------------------------+----------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 10 | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 147 | 29 | 49 | +----+-------------------------+----------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ 84. It is seen that: a. The profitability increased in 2022-23 but declined in 2023-24. While the profitability has increased again in the period of investigation, it is lower than 2021-22 and 2022-23. b. Cash profit and profit before interest and tax has followed similar trend as that of profits. c. The return on capital employed has declined in the period of investigation by more than half from the beginning of the injury period. e. Employment, wages and productivity 85. Information on employment, wages and productivity over the injury period is as under: +----+---------------------------+-----------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | SN | Particulars | Unit | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | 2023-24 | POI | +====+===========================+===========+=========+=========+=========+=====+ | 1 | No. of employees | Nos. | *** | *** | *** | *** | +----+---------------------------+-----------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 2 | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 209 | 209 | 209 | +----+---------------------------+-----------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 3 | Salaries and wages | Rs/lakh | *** | *** | *** | *** | +----+---------------------------+-----------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 4 | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 111 | 91 | 335 | +----+---------------------------+-----------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 5 | Productivity per day | MT/Days | *** | *** | *** | *** | +----+---------------------------+-----------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 6 | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 225 | 170 | 253 | +----+---------------------------+-----------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 7 | Productivity per employee | MT/Nos | *** | *** | *** | *** | +----+---------------------------+-----------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | 8 | Trend | Indexed | 100 | 108 | 82 | 121 | +----+---------------------------+-----------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ 86. It is seen that the number of employees, wages and productivity of the domestic industry has shown improvement. With the increase in the capacity of the domestic industry, the number of employees and wages paid have increased. The domestic industry has submitted that employment and wages may not be reflective of the adverse effects of dumping on the domestic industry, as these factors are governed by overall operations of the company and the economy. f. Growth. 87. The information on growth is provided below: +----+--------------------------+-------+---------+---------+-----+ | SN | Particulars | Unit | 2022-23 | 2023-24 | POI | +====+==========================+=======+=========+=========+=====+ | 1 | Production | % | (33) | (18) | 49 | +----+--------------------------+-------+---------+---------+-----+ | 2 | Domestic sales | % | 15 | 61 | 5 | +----+--------------------------+-------+---------+---------+-----+ | 3 | Profit/Loss | % | (33) | (18) | 49 | +----+--------------------------+-------+---------+---------+-----+ | 4 | Cash profits | % | 115 | (70) | 43 | +----+--------------------------+-------+---------+---------+-----+ | 5 | Inventory | % | 47 | (80) | 66 | +----+--------------------------+-------+---------+---------+-----+ | 6 | Return on capital employed | % | 60 | 38 | 34 | +----+--------------------------+-------+---------+---------+-----+ 88. It is seen that the growth in the period of investigation is positive in most of the factors. It has been stated by the domestic industry that the duties have allowed the domestic industry to grow. g. Ability to raise capital investment. 89. The domestic industry was in losses in the original and the sunset review investigation. The domestic industry has recorded profits after the measures were increased in the 1st sunset review which has allowed the domestic industry to undertake capacity addition. Therefore, the imposition of duties has now allowed the domestic industry to expand the capacities. h. Margin of dumping. 90. It is seen that there is continued dumping of the subject goods in India from China PR, and dumping margin is more than de minimis and significant for some of the participating producers. i. Factors affecting prices. 91. It is seen that the duties have allowed the applicant to grow. The domestic industry has earned profits throughout the injury period. The prices of the domestic industry have not been affected by any other factor. H. LIKLIHOOD OF CONTINUATION OR RECURRENCE OF DUMPING & INJURY 92. The present investigation is a sunset review of duties imposed on the imports of the product under consideration from China PR. Under the Rules, the Authority is required to determine whether cessation of existing duty is likely to lead to continuance or recurrence of dumping and injury to the domestic industry. 93. The Authority has examined the likelihood of continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury considering the requirement laid down under Section 9A (5), Rule 23 and parameters relating to the threat of material injury in terms of Annexure - II (vii) of the Rules and other relevant factors brought on record by the interested parties. 94. There are no specific methodologies available to conduct such a likelihood analysis. However, Clause (vii) of Annexure II of the Rules provides, inter alia, for factors which are required to be taken into consideration, viz. a. A significant rate of increase of dumped imports into India indicating the likelihood of substantially increased importation. b. Sufficient freely disposable, or an imminent, substantial increase in, capacity of the exporter indicating the likelihood of substantially increased dumped exports to Indian markets, taking into account the availability of other export markets to absorb any additional exports. c. Whether imports are entering at prices that will have a significant depressing or suppressing effect on domestic prices and would likely increase demand for further imports; and d. Inventories of the article are being investigated. 95. The Authority has, inter alia, considered the above requirements and following parameters in order to determine whether dumping is likely to continue or recur in the event of cessation of anti-dumping duty, and if so, whether the same is likely to cause injury to the domestic industry. Additionally, the Authority has examined all the relevant information brought on record by the domestic industry and the other interested parties. a. Continued dumping of the subject goods from China PR 96. The table below shows the dumping margin determined by the Authority in the original, the first sunset and the present investigation (for the participating producers). +----+--------------------------+------------------------+ | SN | Particulars | Dumping margin % | +====+==========================+========================+ | 1 | Original investigation | 20-30% to 40-50% | +----+--------------------------+------------------------+ | 2 | First sunset review | 0-20% to 20-40% | +----+--------------------------+------------------------+ | 3 | Present sunset review | Negative and 20-50% | +----+--------------------------+------------------------+ 97. The Authority notes that the dumping from China PR has continued. Continued dumping demonstrates that there is likelihood of continued and aggravated dumping in the event of expiry of duty as the dumping margin continues to remain positive and significant. b. Increase in imports of the subject goods. 98. The table below shows the import volume in the injury period. +----+-------------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ | SN | Particulars | Unit | 2021-22 | 2022-23 | 2023-24 | POI | +====+=========================+=======+=========+=========+=========+=====+ | 1 | Total imports from China | MT | 217 | 303 | 450 | 608 | +----+-------------------------+-------+---------+---------+---------+-----+ 99. It is seen that the imports of the subject goods have increased substantially over the injury period and were the highest in the period of investigation. The increase in the dumped imports despite anti- dumping duties in place shows the likelihood of further increase in imports in the event of expiry of measures. c. Third country dumping and third country injurious imports. 100. The Authority has examined the information with regard to exports to third countries, as provided by the participating producers. Export price of these third countries exports was compared with selling price in India, normal value determined for the Chinese producers and non-injurious price of the domestic industry. The comparison was done for each export transaction of these participating exporters. On this basis, the Authority determined volume of exports to third countries below selling price in India (price attracting exports), normal value determined for the Chinese producers (exports at dumping prices) and non-injurious price of the domestic industry (injurious exports to third countries). The exports to related entities have not been considered for the purpose of the below analysis. +----+-----------------------------------------------------+--------------+-----------------------------+-------------------------+---------------------------+ | SN | Particulars | Total exports | Exports below price in India | Exports at dumped prices | Exports at injurious price | | | | MT | MT | MT | MT | +====+=====================================================+==============+-----------------------------+-------------------------+---------------------------+ | 1 | Chenguang Fluoro and Silicone Elastomers Co., Ltd | *** | *** | *** | *** | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+--------------+-----------------------------+-------------------------+---------------------------+ | 2 | Sichuan Dowhon New Materials Co., Ltd | *** | *** | *** | *** | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+--------------+-----------------------------+-------------------------+---------------------------+ | 3 | Zhonghao Chenguang Research Institute of Chemical | *** | *** | *** | *** | | | Industry Co., Ltd | | | | | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+--------------+-----------------------------+-------------------------+---------------------------+ | 4 | Daikin Fluorochemicals (China) Co., | *** | *** | *** | *** | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+--------------+-----------------------------+-------------------------+---------------------------+ | 5 | Chemours Chenguang Fluoromaterials (Shanghai) Co. | *** | *** | *** | *** | | | Ltd | | | | | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+--------------+-----------------------------+-------------------------+---------------------------+ | 6 | Total of participating | 1430 | 1007 | 300 | 658 | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+--------------+-----------------------------+-------------------------+---------------------------+ | 7 | In relation to total imports % | | 70% | 21% | 46% | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+--------------+-----------------------------+-------------------------+---------------------------+ 101. Based on the above, it is seen that a. Majority of the exports to other countries for the participating producers are priced below the price in India which establishes that the prices in the Indian market are lucrative and therefore, the Indian market is a price attractive market for these producers. This shows that the Chinese producers would intensify their exports to India, in case the present measure is not extended further. b. In case of Chenguang Fluoro and Silicone Elastomers Co., Ltd, Sichuan Dowhon New Materials Co., Ltd, and Chemours Chenguang Fluoromaterials (Shanghai) Co. Ltd, large share of the exports to third countries are at dumped prices. c. In case of Chenguang Fluoro and Silicone Elastomers Co., Ltd, Sichuan Dowhon New Materials Co., Ltd, and Zhonghao Chenguang Research Institute of Chemical Industry Co., Ltd, majority of the exports to third countries are at injurious prices. d. Cumulative volume of exports from the participating companies to 3rd countries at prices below normal value, selling price in India and non injurious price for the domestic industry is quite significant in relation to total imports, production of the domestic industry and consumption in India. d. Chinese producers are export oriented. 102. The domestic industry has claimed that the Chinese producers are export oriented since China is amongst the top three exporters of the subject goods and most of the FKM exports are targeted to India, Germany and United States. The applicant has also submitted evidence to show that Chenguang Fluoro & Silicone Polymer Co Limited exports 80-90% of its annual production and 16% of the exports made by the company were made to India. 103. The Authority has examined the data for the participating exporters. The table below shows the export volume and the production of the producers. +----+-----------------------------------------------------+------------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-----------------------+ | SN | Particulars | Production in MT | Exports in MT | | | Export orientation in % | | | | | India | ROW | Total | | +====+=====================================================+==================+-------------+-------------+-------------+-----------------------+ | 1 | Chenguang Fluoro and Silicone Elastomers Co., Ltd | *** | *** | *** | *** | 45-55% | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+------------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-----------------------+ | 2 | Sichuan Dowhon New Materials Co., Ltd | *** | *** | *** | *** | 5-15% | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+------------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-----------------------+ | 3 | Zhonghao Chenguang Research Institute of Chemical | *** | *** | *** | *** | 25-35% | | | Industry Co., Ltd | | | | | | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+------------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-----------------------+ | 4 | Daikin Fluorochemicals (China) Co., | *** | *** | *** | *** | 45-55% | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+------------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-----------------------+ | 5 | Chemours Chenguang Fluoromaterials (Shanghai) Co. | *** | *** | *** | *** | 30-35% | | | Ltd | | | | | | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+------------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-----------------------+ | 6 | Total of participating | 10,064 | 596 | 2522 | 3117 | 31% | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+------------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-----------------------+ 104. Some of the participating producers have reported significant high exports as a percentage of their production. This shows that the major share of the production is for export market, indicating a likelihood of increase in the imports in the event of expiry of measures. e. Importance of the Indian market for the producers in subject country. 105. The applicant had claimed that Indian market is an important market for the producers in the subject country. The Authority has compared the share of the Indian exporters in the total exports of the participating producers in the subject country. +----+-----------------------------------------------------+-----------------+--------------+---------------------+ | SN | Particulars | Exports to India | Total exports | Share of Indian exports | +====+=====================================================+=================+==============+---------------------+ | 1 | Chenguang Fluoro and Silicone Elastomers Co., Ltd | *** | *** | 25-35% | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+-----------------+--------------+---------------------+ | 2 | Sichuan Dowhon New Materials Co., Ltd | *** | *** | 30-40% | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+-----------------+--------------+---------------------+ | 3 | Zhonghao Chenguang Research Institute of Chemical | *** | *** | 10-20% | | | Industry Co., Ltd | | | | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+-----------------+--------------+---------------------+ | 4 | Daikin Fluorochemicals (China) Co., | *** | *** | 10-20% | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+-----------------+--------------+---------------------+ | 5 | Chemours Chenguang Fluoromaterials (Shanghai) Co. | *** | *** | 10-20% | | | Ltd | | | | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+-----------------+--------------+---------------------+ | 6 | Total of participating | *** | *** | 10-20% | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+-----------------+--------------+---------------------+ | 7 | Less Exports to related entities | *** | *** | *** | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+-----------------+--------------+---------------------+ | 8 | Net exports to unrelated entities | 596 | 2062 | 29% | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+-----------------+--------------+---------------------+ 106. It is seen based on the total data reported by the participating producers, around ***% exports are to India. It is also seen that in case of Daikin Fluorochemicals (China) Co., close to ***% exports to other countries are to related entity. Similarly, in case of Chemours Chenguang Fluoromaterials (Shanghai) Co. Ltd, ***% of exports are to related entity. If the exports to unrelated entities are excluded, share of exports to India is 29% of total exports to India. f. Significant capacities held by Chinese producers. 107. The domestic industry claimed that the producers in China are operating with high capacities. The Authority has examined the data for the participating exporters. The table below shows the capacity, production and domestic sales of the producers. +----+-----------------------------------------------------+--------------+-----------------------+---------------------+ | SN | Particulars | Capacity in MT | Capacity utilization % | Idle capacity in MT | +====+=====================================================+==============+-----------------------+---------------------+ | 1 | Chenguang Fluoro and Silicone Elastomers Co., Ltd | *** | *** | *** | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+--------------+-----------------------+---------------------+ | 2 | Sichuan Dowhon New Materials Co., Ltd | *** | *** | *** | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+--------------+-----------------------+---------------------+ | 3 | Zhonghao Chenguang Research Institute of Chemical | *** | *** | *** | | | Industry Co., Ltd | | | | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+--------------+-----------------------+---------------------+ | 4 | Daikin Fluorochemicals (China) Co., | *** | *** | *** | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+--------------+-----------------------+---------------------+ | 5 | Chemours Chenguang Fluoromaterials (Shanghai) Co. | *** | *** | *** | | | Ltd | | | | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+--------------+-----------------------+---------------------+ | 6 | Total of participating | 17,800 | 56.54% | 7,736 | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+--------------+-----------------------+---------------------+ 108. The Authority notes that the Chinese producers hold significant production capacities. The capacities are in excess of domestic demand, which is also established by significant share of production being used for export purposes. Despite significant capacities already being utilised for exports, the participating Chinese exporters alone hold unutilised capacities which are significantly more than the gross Indian demand. Thus, the Chinese producers are in a position to take over entire Indian demand. The existence of idle capacities indicates that these are likely to be utilized for exports to India in the absence of duties. 109. Having already found that the Indian market is price attractive, it is also seen that the excess capacity in China can be used to cater domestic demand in India. The capacity in China is much more than the Indian demand. g. Imposition of measures by other jurisdictions. 110. The applicant has submitted that United States of America is the biggest export market for China for the product under consideration. However, in light of the new tariff under International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), producers in China may shift their export market from United States of America. The applicant has provided the following information in support of the contention. It is seen that the current volume of exports to USA is more than twice the gross Indian demand. Thus, if the Chinese producers were to loose USA market (which is quite imminent with the increase in tariff by USA), the Chinese producers are likely to significantly increase their exports to India. +----+------+--------------+---------------+----------------------------------+ | SN | Year | Total exports | Exports to USA | Share of exports to USA in total | | | | | | exports | +====+======+==============+================+==================================+ | 1 | 2020 | 19,655 | 2,374 | 12% | +----+------+--------------+----------------+----------------------------------+ | 2 | 2021 | 26,570 | 3,420 | 13% | +----+------+--------------+----------------+----------------------------------+ | 3 | 2022 | 31,732 | 5,695 | 18% | +----+------+--------------+----------------+----------------------------------+ | 4 | 2023 | 32,124 | 5,555 | 17% | +----+------+--------------+----------------+----------------------------------+ | 5 | 2024 | 32,003 | 6,020 | 19% | +----+------+--------------+----------------+----------------------------------+ Source – Trademap data for tariff code 390469 as provided in the application. I. CAUSAL LINK & NON-ATTRIBUTION ANALYSIS 111. As per the Rules, the Authority is required to, inter alia, examine any known factors other than dumped imports which are injuring or are likely to cause injury to the domestic industry, so that the injury caused by these other factors may not be attributed to the dumped imports. While the present investigation is a sunset review investigation and causal link has already been examined in original investigation, the Authority examined whether other known listed factors have caused or are likely to cause injury to the domestic industry. It was examined whether other factors listed under the Rules could have contributed or likely to contribute to the injury suffered by the domestic industry. a. Volume and price of imports from third countries 112. There are significant imports from other countries. These are at a price materially higher than the import price from China. Thus, import price from other countries could not have been a cause of present or potential injury to the domestic industry. b. Contraction in demand and / or change in pattern of consumption 113. It is seen that the demand for the subject goods has shown an increasing trend. Thus, possible contraction in demand could not have been a cause of present or potential injury to the domestic industry. c. Trade restrictive practices 114. The Authority notes that there are no trade restrictive practices or conditions of competition. d. Development of technology 115. There has been no change in technology for production of the subject goods. The applicant has set up a new plant for the production of the subject goods. Further, the domestic industry has recently enhanced capacities to a significant degree. e. Export performance 116. It is noted that the applicant has segregated the export performance from the domestic performance, and thus, no injury has been caused in this account. f. Performance of other products 117. The applicant has provided segregated data with regard to the subject goods only. g. Productivity. 118. The Authority notes that the productivity of the applicant has increased and thus, it has not suffered injury on this account. h. Overall conclusions on dumping and likelihood of injury. 119. Based on the above analysis, the Authority concludes as follows: - i. The volume of imports has increased over the injury period and was highest in the period of investigation. ii. The subject imports have shown an increasing trend in terms of consumption in India. iii. The price undercutting is negative on an overall basis. The price undercutting is positive for co- polymer raw gum (FCP#RG0001) and Terpolymer Bis-Phenol Curable Pre-Compound (FCP#PC0005). iv. Because of the anti-dumping duty in force, the prices of the applicant have not been suppressed or depressed in the period of investigation. v. Capacity, production and domestic sales of the applicant has increased over the injury period because of the anti-dumping duty in force. vi. The profitability increased in 2022-23 but declined in 2023-24 and has increased again in the period of investigation. vii. The applicant has the capacity to cater for the entire demand, but its share is less than 50%. The imports from China cater to one forth of the market. viii. The dumping margin and injury margin in third countries exports, price attractiveness of Indian market, clearly establish a likelihood of increase in imports. ix. The producers in the subject country have significant exportable capacity and majority of their production is for export market. x. The data on record also shows that the Indian market is an attractive export market for the participating producers. xi. The prices in the Indian market are lucrative providing the producers an incentive to divert their exports to Indian market in event of expiry of measures. 120. The performance of the applicant has improved both in volume and price parameters, as a result of the anti-dumping duty in force. Therefore, the Authority concludes that the applicant has not suffered continued injury. 121. The imports from China have increased and in the absence of anti-dumping duty in place, any imports at dumped prices and undercutting the domestic prices are therefore likely to cause adverse price effect on the industry. The Authority concludes that there is a likelihood of continuation/recurrence of dumping and consequent injury, in the event of expiry of duty. J. MAGNITUDE OF INJURY MARGIN. 122. The Authority has determined the non-injurious price for the domestic industry on the basis of principles laid down in the Rules read with Annexure III, as amended. The non-injurious price has been determined by adopting the information/data relating to the cost of production provided by the domestic industry. The non-injurious price has been compared with the landed price of the product under consideration from the subject country for calculating injury margin. For determining the non- injurious price, the best utilization of the raw materials and utilities and best utilization of production capacity has been considered. Extraordinary or non-recurring expenses and/or assets have been excluded from the cost of production and/or non-injurious price. A reasonable return (pre-tax 22%) on average capital employed (i.e., average net fixed assets plus average working capital) deployed for the product under consideration has been allowed for recovery of interest, corporate tax, and profit to arrive at the non-injurious price as prescribed in Annexure III of the Rules. +----+-----------------------------------------------------+---------+-------------+--------------+--------------+--------------+ | SN | Particulars | NIP | Landed price | Injury margin | Injury margin | Injury margin | | | | $/MT | $/MT | $/MT | % | % | +====+=====================================================+=========+-------------+--------------+--------------+--------------+ | 1 | Chenguang Fluoro and Silicone Elastomers Co., Ltd | *** | *** | *** | *** | 50-60% | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+---------+-------------+--------------+--------------+--------------+ | 2 | Sichuan Dowhon New Materials Co., Ltd | *** | *** | *** | *** | 30-40% | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+---------+-------------+--------------+--------------+--------------+ | 3 | Zhonghao Chenguang Research Institute of Chemical | *** | *** | *** | *** | Negative | | | Industry Co., Ltd | | | | | | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+---------+-------------+--------------+--------------+--------------+ | 4 | Daikin Fluorochemicals (China) Co., | *** | *** | *** | *** | Negative | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+---------+-------------+--------------+--------------+--------------+ | 5 | Chemours Chenguang Fluoromaterials (Shanghai) Co. | *** | *** | *** | *** | Negative | | | Ltd | | | | | | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+---------+-------------+--------------+--------------+--------------+ | 6 | Others | *** | *** | *** | *** | 50-60% | +----+-----------------------------------------------------+---------+-------------+--------------+--------------+--------------+ K. INDIAN INDUSTRY'S INTEREST AND OTHER ISSUES K.1. Submission of the other interested parties. 123. The other interested parties have not made any submissions on the Indian industry interest. K.2. Submission of the applicant. 124. The applicant has made been following submissions on Indian industry interest: a. The subject goods are majorly used in the automotive industry for manufacturing o-rings and gaskets which are used to manufacture engines, transmission, fuel system, and air conditioning system. b. These manufacturers do not bear any increase in the prices as these products are not imported. The manufacturer of these components directly passes on any increase in the prices of the inputs to the automotive manufacturer. c. The refinery sector also uses the product as consumable in converting crude into various products. Since it is not even raw material in this sector, any increase in the prices would have negligible effect on the industry. d. The applicant has set up a new plant with a capacity of *** MT during the injury period in order to meet the growing demand in the country and reduce reliance on imports, which is at risk if duties are revoked. e. At the time of the original investigation in 2018, there was a demand-supply gap for the subject goods. However, the duties have allowed the applicant to grow and now there is no gap now. f. Continuation of duties would lead to conservation of outgoing foreign exchange and would be a step towards a favorable balance of payment account. g. No user has participated in the investigation which shows that the duties in place will not impact on the user industry. L.3. Examination of the Authority 125. The Authority considered whether imposition of the recommended anti-dumping duty will be against public interest. This determination is based on consideration of information on records and interests of various parties including the applicant, foreign producers and consumers. 126. The Authority issued gazette notification inviting views from all the interested parties, including importers, consumers and other interested parties. The Authority also prescribed a questionnaire for the users to provide the relevant information with regard to the present review investigation, including possible effect of the anti-dumping duty on their operation. The Authority sought information on, inter- alia, interchangeability of the product supplied by the various suppliers from different countries, ability to switch sources, the effect of the anti- dumping duty on the consumers, the factors that are likely to accelerate or delay the adjustment to the new situation caused by the continuation of the anti-dumping duty. 127. It is noted that the purpose of anti-dumping measures, in general, is to eliminate injury caused to the applicant by the unfair trade practices of dumping so as to re-establish a situation of open and fair competition in the Indian market, which is in the general interest of the country. The Authority recognizes that the continuation of the anti-dumping duties might affect the price levels of the product under consideration as well as other downstream products manufactured by using the subject goods in India. However, fair competition in the Indian market will not be reduced by the imposition of anti- dumping measures. On the contrary, the continuation of anti-dumping measures would prevent the decline in the performance parameters of the applicant that may ensue as a consequence of low-priced imports from the subject country and help maintain the wider availability of choices to the consumers of the product under consideration. 128. The Authority had prescribed an economic interest questionnaire which was sent to all interested parties to this review investigation. Only the applicant has responded to the economic interest questionnaire. The applicant has supplied information related to the applicant. No user of the subject goods has stepped forward to participate before the Authority. No participating party has claimed or presented any evidence to indicate the adverse effect of the duties in force. This lack of evidence and silence of the stakeholders reinforces the necessity of anti-dumping measures to ensure fair trade practices. 129. The Authority notes that prior to the establishment of the plant by the applicant, India was completely import dependent. The applicant has heavily invested in the plant to manufacture the subject goods and make India self-reliant. The applicant has also set up a new plant in the injury period. 130. The domestic industry has highlighted that the users will not be adversely impacted by the duties as they are not a major cost to downstream industry. This clearly indicates that the duties in place have not affected the user industry and their performance. 131. The Authority further notes that the imposition of anti-dumping duty will not lead to scarcity of the subject goods in India. It is noted that anti-dumping duty does not restrict imports but ensures that imports are available at fair prices. The imposition of duty would, therefore, not affect the availability of the product. In any case, the capacity of the applicant is more than the demand in India, thereby ensuring that there remains sufficient supply in the country. There are various other countries as well supplying the product under consideration in the Indian market. L. POST-DISCLOSURE COMMENTS L.1. Submission of the other interested parties. 132. The following post disclosure comments have been filed by the interested parties. a. Chemours Chenguang Fluoromaterials (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. and Zhonghao Chenguang Research Institute of Chemical Industry Co., Ltd., are independent entities, despite their joint venture relationship. They operate separately, compete in the same markets, and have filed independent responses in this investigation. b. During the current period of Investigation, Solvay Specialty Polymers (Changshu) Co. Ltd. did not export the product under consideration to India. This material fact has not been reflected in the disclosure statement. c. While the injury margin for certain producers is negative, the price undercutting remains positive. This indicates that the domestic industry has been able to sell the product under consideration at prices above the non-injurious price, thereby mitigating injury. d. In quantifying the volume of imports, while the period of investigation data from CCF has been considered, the import volumes have not been adjusted for the preceding injury period. This has resulted in an inconsistency in the import volume used for injury analysis. e. Disclosure Statement incorrectly records that price undercutting is positive for both Co-Polymer Raw Gum (FCP#RG0001) and Terpolymer Bis-Phenol Curable Pre-Compound (FCP#PC0005), however, price undercutting for FCP#PC0005 is negative. f. There is mismatch in the import volume in paragraph 68 and paragraph 70. g. The Authority should focus its analysis on dumped imports rather than total imports when evaluating the likelihood of injury as dumping margin for 3 producers is negative. h. The Authority has not examined third country dumping on PCN basis, which is crucial for fair assessment as there are large number of PCNs. i. The applicant has failed to provide, and the Authority has failed to analyse post POI data to showcase the likelihood of the continuance of dumping or injury that will be suffered by it, if the duty ceases to exist. j. CCF did not export during the POI of original and first sunset review investigation and hence it must be granted a rate in the current investigation. k. Zhonghao Chenguang and CCF are related parties as the relationship falls squarely within the ambit of Trade Notice No. 9/2018, which establishes a relationship where a person holds more than 5% shares in two entities – the said two entities are deemed to be related. l. CCF products can never injure the domestic industry because CCF's prices are found to be non- dumped and non-injurious to the domestic industry. CCF sells quality products, and its prices cannot injure the domestic industry even in future periods. m. The Authority is requested to verify the import data from the DG Systems by specifically searching for exports originating from TZCL or Chemours Shanghai to India during the period of investigation. The data associated with these entities should be considered as representing the imports of CCF's products into India n. The applicant has kept their focus on the capacity expansion by one of the producers, but they have failed to provide any substantial data to prove the surplus capacity. L.2. Submission of the applicant. 133. The following post disclosure comments have been filed by the applicant. a. Prior to 2017-18, there was no indigenous production of the subject goods in India. The imposition of anti-dumping measures has enabled the domestic industry to expand its capacity but has also attracted new producers to enter the Indian market. b. Chemours Company (USA) in partnership with SRF Limited are planning to start domestic production in India. Continuation of the anti-dumping measures is critical to sustaining long- term growth of the Indian industry. c. Whereas terpolymer prices during the period of investigation were Rs 3,146 per KG, one of the Chinese producers has started selling terpolymer products at much reduced prices, thus threatening damage to Indian industry d. Submissions of the domestic industry on normal value have been completely disregarded without any reasons provide and this has resulted in an unfavourably low normal value. e. Domestic industry had requested a reasonable element of profit be factored in in respect of captive inputs while determining the normal value. Excluding profit margin does not reflect the true economic value of the product. However, the same has not been considered. f. Valuation of R142 B based on import price is not in accordance with Annexure III of the Rules. The Authority has also completely ignored the fixed costs incurred by the domestic industry on its production facilities. Actual cost of production should be considered for determining cost of R142 B. If the Authority considers that it would not be improper to consider the actual cost of production, the Authority is requested to consider adding the fixed cost to the purchase price. g. As per Section 9A (5) of the Act and Rule 23 of the Rules, the only objective and purpose of a sunset review is to determine, after examination of relevant factors, whether the period of imposition is needed to be extended for a further duration of five years. h. If any party needs re-quantification of anti-dumping duty, the party is free to approach the Authority through the provisions of review under the law. A sunset review is not the appropriate review to seek re-quantification of anti-dumping duty. i. WTO member countries, such as European Union (EU), USA, China, Argentina etc. extend the same quantum of anti-dumping and do not re-quantify quantum in sunset review. j. In the sunset review of Caustic Soda from Chinese Taipei, Indonesia and EU (excluding France), the Authority determined a negative dumping margin for PT Asahimas & Tricon. Since there was likelihood of duties, the Authority recommended same duties as determined in the 1st sunset review investigation. k. In the sunset review investigation concerning imports of Viscose Staple Fibre, PT Asia Pacific did not participate in the original and 1st sunset review investigation. The injury margin determined for the producer in the second sunset review was negative. The Authority concluded that there is likelihood of continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury and recommended same duties for the producer as determined in the 1st sunset review investigation. l. While the anti-dumping duties are operative, no definitive inference can be drawn from the change in the dumping margin and injury margin in such situations due to the fact that anti- dumping duty is in place. L.3. Examination of the Authority 134. The Authority has examined the post-disclosure submissions made by the interested parties. It is observed that most of these submissions are reiterations of arguments and contentions that have already been examined and addressed to the extent deemed necessary in the relevant paragraphs of these final findings. The issues raised for the first time in the post disclosure comments/submissions by the interested parties and the domestic industry and considered relevant by the Authority are examined below. Any submission which was merely a reproduction of the previous submissions, and which had been adequately examined by the Authority has not been repeated for the sake of brevity. 135. On the comments of Chemours Chenguang Fluoromaterials (Shanghai) Co. Ltd. that it is related to Chenguang Fluoro And Silicone Elastomers Co. Ltd, the Authority considers that in a situation where two companies are operating as independent entities and competing with each other (as established by the submissions of the two companies wherein one company has sought same duty to the two companies, whereas other company has objected to the same) and where the two companies are selling at materially different prices the product falling under one PCN, it is evident that despite legal relationship, the two companies are two separate and independent legal entities in so far as their pricing and dumping behaviour is concerned. Both the domestic industry and Zhonghao Chenguang have contended that these companies have operated as different business entities. The Authority therefore considers that it would not be appropriate to consider the two entities as related. Similarly, the Authority also considers that it will not be appropriate to extend individual duty earlier determined for Zhonghao Chenguang to exports by Chemours Chenguang Fluoromaterials (Shanghai) Co. Ltd. 136. On the comments that there is a mismatch in the volume of imports as reported in price undercutting in paragraph 68 and 70, the Authority notes that the price undercutting in para 68 is based on DG System transaction wise data and the price undercutting in para 70 is based on response of the participating producers as clarified in the relevant paragraphs. 137. The Authority observes that Solvay Specialty Polymers Co. Ltd., though registered as an interested party in the present investigation, did not submit its exporter's questionnaire response. The producer has stated that no exports of the subject product were made during the period of investigation. The Authority notes that the company did not provide Part I and II of the questionnaire response which relates to information regarding exports. 138. On the comments that the Authority has not examined third country dumping on PCN basis, it is clarified that the Authority has conducted third country dumping and injury analysis on PCN basis. 139. On the comments that the domestic industry has focused on the capacity expansion by one foreign producer but failed to provide any substantial data to prove the surplus capacity, the Authority clarifies that the likelihood analysis has been conducted based on the questionnaire response of the participating producers from the subject country. 140. On the comments made on normal value and non-injurious price, these have been calculated based on the consistent practice of the Authority. M. CONCLUSION 141. Having regard to the contentions raised, information provided, submissions made and the facts available before the Authority as recorded above and on the basis of the above analysis of the likelihood of continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury to the domestic industry, the Authority concludes that: a. The product under consideration in the present investigation is Fluoroelastomers (FKM). Fluoroelastomers includes copolymer and terpolymer both in raw gum and pre-compound form and of different types. Compounds and FFKM are excluded from the scope of product under consideration. b. The product produced by the domestic industry is a like article to the imported product. c. The applicant constitutes domestic industry under Rule 2(b) of the Rules, and the application satisfies the requirements under the Rules. d. Dumping margin is positive for Chenguang Fluoro and Silicone Elastomers Co., Ltd, Sichuan Dowhon New Materials Co., Ltd, and other non participating exporters. e. The import volume from the subject country has increased in absolute and relative terms. f. The price undercutting is negative on an overall basis. The price undercutting is positive for co- polymer raw gum (FCP#RG0001) and Terpolymer Bis-Phenol Curable Pre-Compound (FCP#PC0005). g. The domestic industry has expanded capacity over the injury period, and the production and domestic sales have increased. h. The domestic industry had suffered losses in past. The domestic industry has earned profits throughout the injury period. i. Cumulative volume of exports from the participating companies to 3rd countries at prices below normal value, selling price in India and non injurious price for the domestic industry is quite significant in relation to total imports, production of the domestic industry and consumption in India. j. In addition to significant capacities already being utilised for exports, the participating Chinese producers have more than 7000 MT of unutilised capacity which is almost thrice the demand in India. k. The performance of the applicant has improved both in volume and price parameters, as a result of the anti-dumping duty in force. However, as determined above, the Authority concludes that there is a likelihood of continuation/recurrence of dumping and consequent injury, in the event of expiry of duty. l. The impact of anti-dumping duty on the end consumer is found insignificant. m. The investigation had not brought to light any considerations demonstrating that such continuation of measures would not be in the public interest. n. Another producer Chemours Company (USA) in partnership with SRF Limited is starting domestic production in India. Continuation of the anti-dumping measures is critical to sustaining long-term growth of the Indian industry. N. RECOMMENDATIONS 142. The Authority notes that the investigation was initiated and notified to all interested parties and adequate opportunity was given to the domestic industry, exporters, importers and other interested parties to provide information on the aspects of likelihood of continuation/recurrence of dumping and injury. 143. Having concluded that there is a need for continued imposition of anti-dumping duty as there is a likelihood of continuation/recurrence of dumping and injury if the anti-dumping measure are allowed to cease, the Authority considers that the quantum of anti-dumping duty is not required to be modified, considering that the duty is proposed to be extended on the grounds of likelihood of dumping and injury. The cumulative volume of dumped and injurious exports from cooperating exporters to India and to the rest of the world have been considered. The Authority notes that in the instant case the likelihood of injury has been found by the Authority which has been assessed and evaluated on the basis of questionnaire response of the Chinese exporters and considering their cumulative volume of dumped and injurious exports to India. The Authority considers that the modification of duties based on dumping margin and injury margin determined in the present investigation will not be appropriate, considering that the anti-dumping duty is proposed to be extended on the grounds of likelihood of injury to the domestic industry. 144. In view of same, the Authority considers it appropriate and necessary to recommend continuation of definitive antidumping duty as notified vide final finding F. No. 7/03/2020-DGTR dated 19th October 2020 (as modified by corrigendum), except in respect of those producer exporters who have not participated in the current sunset review investigation. Those non-cooperating producer exporters in this sunset review investigation have been accorded residual duty as mentioned in the table below. Further Chemours Chenguang Fluoromaterials (Shanghai) Co. Ltd. and Sichuan Dowhon New Materials Co., Ltd. had not participated in the original and first sunset review investigation and the fact that the Authority has recommended continuation of measures based on likelihood of injury in the subject review investigation, the Authority considers that it would not be appropriate to accord individual anti-dumping duty to the producers. However, the producers are free to seek an appropriate review in accordance with the Rules. 145. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as established hereinabove, anti-dumping duty equal to the amount indicated in Column (7) of the duty table given below is recommended to be imposed from the date of notification to be issued in this regard by the Central Government, on all imports of the product under consideration, from the subject country for a further period of five (5) years. Duty table +----+-------------------+---------------------+--------------------+-----------------------+---------------------+--------+-------+----------+ | SN | Heading | Description | Country of origin | Country of export | Producer | Amount | UOM | Currency | +====+===================+=====================+====================+=======================+=====================+========+=======+==========+ | 1 | 3904 50 90. | Fluoroelastomers | China PR | Any country including | Daikin | 1.04 | KG | US$ | | | 3904 69 90. | (FKM)* | | China PR | Fluorochemicals | | | | | | 3904 90 90, | | | | (China) Co., Ltd | | | | | | 3904 69 10** | | | | | | | | +----+-------------------+---------------------+--------------------+-----------------------+---------------------+--------+-------+----------+ | 2 | -do- | -do- | -do- | -do- | Zhonghao Chenguang | 1.30 | KG | US$ | | | | | | | Research Institute | | | | | | | | | | of Chemical Industry | | | | | | | | | | Co., Ltd | | | | +----+-------------------+---------------------+--------------------+-----------------------+---------------------+--------+-------+----------+ | 3 | -do- | -do- | -do- | -do- | Chenguang Fluoro and | 3.85 | KG | US$ | | | | | | | Silicone Elastomers | | | | | | | | | | Co., Ltd. | | | | +----+-------------------+---------------------+--------------------+-----------------------+---------------------+--------+-------+----------+ | 4 | -do- | -do- | -do- | -do- | Any producer other | 8.86 | KG | US$ | | | | | | | than mentioned in | | | | | | | | | | S. N. 1 to 3 above | | | | +----+-------------------+---------------------+--------------------+-----------------------+---------------------+--------+-------+----------+ | 5 | -do- | -do- | Any country other | China PR | Any | 8.86 | KG | US$ | | | | | than China PR | | | | | | +----+-------------------+---------------------+--------------------+-----------------------+---------------------+--------+-------+----------+ *The scope of the product under consideration is Fluoroelastomers. including Copolymer Fluoroelastomers, Terpolymer Fluoroelastomers. Copolymer Raw gum, Copolymer Pre Compound, Terpolymer Bisphenol Curable Raw Gum, Terpolymer Peroxide Curable Raw Gum and Terpolymer Bisphenol Curable Raw Gum. However, FKM compound and Perfluoroelastomer (FFKM) are excluded from the scope of the subject goods. ** Customs classification is only indicative and not binding on the scope of the investigation. O. FURTHER PROCEDURE. 146. An appeal against the determination of the Designated Authority in these final findings shall lie before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Act/ Rules. SIDDHARTH MAHAJAN, (Designated Authority) Uploaded by Dte. of Printing at Government of India Press, Ring Road, Mayapuri, New Delhi-110064 and Published by the Controller of Publications, Delhi-110054. GORAKHA NATH Digitally signed by GORAKHA NATH YADAVA YADAVA Date: 2025.10.30 16:22:02 +05'30' ```