“Having initiated and conducted the investigation into dumping, injury and causal link in terms of the provisions laid down under the Anti-Dumping Rules, the authority is of the view that imposition of provisional duty is required to offset dumping and injury, pending completion of the investigation,” the Directorate General of Trade Remedies (DGTR) said in its preliminary findings. The probe began on October 1, 2019.
DGTR can only recommend the duty but the finance ministry takes a final call on imposing it.
The provisional duty can be imposed only after the expiry of 60 days from the date of initiation of investigation and remain in force only for six months.
The department noted that India is the single largest market for Chinese exporters. China’s share increased from 5% in Apr-Sept, 2018 to 7% in Oct-Dec, 2018, 9% in Jan-Mar, 2019 and 10% in Apr-Jun, 2019.
“The exports from China to India are increasing at a much faster pace than those to third countries. The increasing importance of India as a market itself highlights threat of material injury,” it said.
PET resin is used in textiles, plastic bottles, tires, undersea cables and 3-D printing, among others. However, the department said that the scope of product under consideration does not include recycled PET Resin used to manufacture preforms, which are then converted into PET bottle and jars for the storage of mineral water, carbonated soft drinks, edible oils, and pharmaceutical products.
The department added that the imports from countries other than China are not significant in volume terms so as to cause or threaten to cause injury to the domestic industry. Thus, it cannot be said that imports from other countries are causing injury.
In its findings, the department said that imports have increased at a rapid rate and there are significant surplus capacities in China which are expected to increase further.
“Other markets such as the US, Canada, Brazil and Argentina may be closed for the exporters due to imposition of trade remedial measures…The imports are entering the domestic market at such prices as are likely to have a further suppressing or depressing effect,” it said.
As per the findings, Madras Hardtools Pvt Ltd submitted that there is no injury being caused to the domestic manufactures of goods and the imported goods catering to the local users are competitive in price and good in quality with delivery timelines well kept.
“RIL material is always in demand and not easily available. Their terms and prices are not capable of being affordable for small manufacturers therefore, the injury claimed by the complainant is simply a bullying tactic to have monopoly in PET market,” it said, adding that there is “inconsistency and one-upmanship and chaotic situations created by local suppliers. Direct interaction with the tertiary level dealers and manufacturers will reveal the position”.