The Directorate General of Trade Remedies (DGTR) on December 11, 2023, issued a notification regarding the mid-term review of the anti-dumping duty imposed on the imports of “Aniline” originating in or exported from China PR.
The following has been stated: -
•The product under consideration (hereinafter also referred to as the "PUC") as defined in the original investigation and initiation notification for the present investigation is as follows:
The Authority has considered the PUC as under: -
The product under consideration for the purpose of the present investigation is "Aniline" which is also known as "Aniline Oil". Aniline is a transparent, oily liquid and is a primary amine compound. Its color transforms to light pale-yellow liquid when freshly distilled. Its color darkens when light or air. Aniline is a basic organic chemical, essential for vital industries such as drugs, pharmaceuticals, dyes, and dye intermediates exposed to The subject products are classified under Chapter Heading 29 under the code 292141 10. The customs classification is indicative only and in no way, binding upon the product scope.
•Having initiated and conducted the review as requested by the applicant and having regard to the contentions raised, information provided and submissions made by the interested parties, and facts available before the Authority through the submissions made by the interested parties or otherwise as recorded in this finding and on the basis of the analysis of the state of current and likely dumping and injury and likelihood of continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury, the Authority concludes that:
The landed price of imports increased till the POI but declined thereafter. The performance of the domestic industry improved post-imposition of anti-dumping measures but declined again in the post-POI.
Benzene is not the sole factor in the production of the PUC. The production of PUC also requires other raw materials such as concentrated nitric acid ("CNA"), Natural Gas, and Hydrogen. The prices of all the raw materials show an increase in the POI and post-POI. Therefore, it does not amount to a change in circumstances warranting withdrawal of anti-dumping duty.
The ex-works/selling price of the domestic industry for the subject goods was higher than the non-injurious price implying that there is no current injury. The mere absence of current injury, however, does not in itself imply the absence of likelihood of injury.
As regards the contention that the domestic industry's performance has improved, the Authority notes that the performance increased post the imposition of measures but declined in the post-period of investigation.
The Authority notes that the demand-supply gap had existed at the time of imposition of measures in the original investigation and therefore, it does not amount to change in circumstances warranting withdrawal of anti-dumping duty. The incidence of anti-dumping duty is insignificant in the prices of the downstream industry.
The fact that the import price has declined in the post period of investigation when the cost of sales has increased shows that an increase in delta as a changed circumstance is not of a lasting nature.
The changed circumstances of dumping and injury were not of lasting nature and injury to the domestic industry is likely to recur or intensify if the duties are revoked.
•Having concluded that the change in the circumstances was not of a lasting nature and the injury to the domestic industry is likely to recur if the existing anti-dumping duty is removed, the situation of the domestic industry continues to be fragile and there is the likelihood of continuation/resumption/intensification of dumping and injury on account of imports of the subject goods from the subject country if the duties are revoked, the Authority holds that it would not be appropriate to withdraw the measure in respect of imports of the subject goods from the subject country.
•In view of the above position, the Authority considers it necessary and recommends the continuation of the anti-dumping duties imposed on the imports of the subject goods, originating in or exported from the subject country, as notified earlier vide final findings no. 6/42/2019 DGAD dated January 20, 2021, and without any modification to the quantum of anti-dumping duty.
•An appeal against the order of the Central Government that may arise out of this recommendation shall lie before the Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Act.
The detailed notification is given in the document attached below.
[Case No. MTR-10/2022]
