Government of India
Ministry of Commerce & Industry
(Department of Commerce)
(DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF ANTI-DUMPING AND ALLIED DUTIES)
New Delhi, The 3rd March 2006
Subject: Initiation of Sunset Review of the definitive anti-dumping duty imposed on Potassium Permanganate originating in or exported from China P.R., Hong Kong and Chinese Taipei.
No. 15/5/2006-DGAD – Whereas the Designated Authority, having regard to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 as amended in 1995 and the Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of Duty or Additional Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995, recommended imposition of definitive Anti Dumping Duty on imports of Potassium Permanganate (hereinafter referred to as subject goods) originating in or exported from China P.R., Hong Kong and Chinese Taipei, vide notification dated 8th Sept 2001 and duty was imposed by Customs vide Notification No: 113/2001 dated 01.11.2001 as amended by Notification No: 85/2003-Customs dated 27.05.2003.
And whereas vide notification dated 3rd June 2005 the designated Authority recommended continued imposition of antidumping duty on the subject goods originating in or exported from China PR and recommended revocation of duty against imports from Chinese Taipei and Hong Kong. Revised duty was imposed by the Central Government vide notification No 82/2005-Cus dated 14.09.2005 and the said duty is in force till 11th March 2006.
2. Request for Review
WHEREAS in terms of the Customs Tariff (Amendment) Act 1995 the antidumping duty imposed shall unless revoked earlier, cease to have effect on expiry of five years from the date of such imposition.
AND WHEREAS the Rules supra require the Authority to review from time to time, the need for continued imposition of Anti Dumping Duty and if it is satisfied, on the basis of information received by it that there is no justification for continued imposition of such duty, the authority may recommend to the central government for its withdrawal. Notwithstanding the above provision the authority is required to review, on the basis of a duly substantial request made by or on behalf of the domestic industry, within a reasonable period of time prior to the date of the expiry of the measure, whether the expiry of duty is likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury.
3. Grounds for review
The applicant has inter-alia claimed that the Chinese exporters have continued to dump the goods in the Indian market, though the volume has declined in view of the antidumping duty in force, in spite of the fact that the cost of production has significantly increased. Therefore, dumping would be intensified should the present antidumping duty be revoked.
The applicant further claims that the existing capacities of the subject goods in the subject countries far exceed their domestic demands, which increases the likelihood of recurrence of dumping once the antidumping duty is removed.
Having satisfied itself on the basis of the positive evidence submitted by the domestic industry, substantiating the need for a review, the Authority hereby initiates a review in accordance with Section 9 a (5) of the Act read with Rule 23 of Antidumping Rules, to review the need for continued imposition of the duty in force against potassium permanganate, imposed vide Customs Notification 82/2005-Cus dated 14.09.2005
5. Product under consideration
The product under consideration in the present review investigation is Potassium Permanganate, which is an inorganic chemical. Potassium Permanganate is a dark purple crystalline material. It is a compound of manganese, potassium and oxygen. The product is odourless and soluble in water. The chemical formula of Potassium Permanganate is KmnO4. The product is classified under custom sub-heading 2841.61 of the Custom Tariff Act, 1975. The classification is however indicative only and in no way binding on the scope of the present investigations.
The investigation will determine whether the expiry of the measure would be likely to lead to a continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury. The authority will examine whether the continued imposition of the duties is necessary to offset dumping and whether the injury would be likely to continue or recur if the duty were removed or varied, or both.
(i) The review will cover all aspects of Notification No. 15/2/2004-DGAD dated 3rd June 2005;
(ii) The country involved in this investigation is the Peoples Republic of China;
(iii) The period of investigation for the purpose of the present review is from 01.10.2004 to 30.09.2005;
(iv) The provisions of Rules 6,7,8,9,10,11,16,17,18,19 and 20 of the Rule supra shall be mutatis mutandis applicable in this review.
6.1 Submission of Information:
The exporters in subject country, the government of Peoples Republic of China through its embassy in India, the importers and users in India known to be concerned with the product and the domestic industry are being addressed separately to submit relevant information in the form and manner prescribed and to make their views known to the Authority in the following address:
Directorate General of Anti-Dumping and Allied Duties
Government of India
Ministry of Commerce and Industry
Any other interested party may also make its submissions relevant to the investigation in the prescribed form and manner within the time limit set out below.
6.2 Time Limit:
Any information relating to the present review and any request for hearing should be sent in writing so as to reach the Authority at the address mentioned above not later than forty days (40 Days) from the date of publication of this review notification. If no information is received within the prescribed time limit or the information received is incomplete, the Designated Authority may record its findings on the basis of the facts available on record in accordance with the Rules supra.
6.3 Submission of information on Non-confidential basis:
In terms of Rule 6(7), of the Rules the interested parties are required to submit non-confidential summary of any confidential information provided to the Authority and if in the opinion of the party providing such information, such information is not susceptible to summary, a statement of reason thereof is required to be provided. In case where an interested party refuses access to, or otherwise does not provide necessary information within a reasonable period, or significantly impedes the investigation, the Authority may record its findings on the basis of the facts available to it and make such recommendations to the Central Government as deemed fit.
6.4 Inspection of public file:
Any interested party may inspect the public file containing non-confidential version of the evidence submitted by other interested parties in terms of Rule 6 (7).