The Director General of Anti Dumping gives relief to importers of Digital Offset Printing Plates against Domestic Giant, recommends removal of Anti Dumping Duty after challenge to Duty by various entities including K&T Law Offices appearing for Interested Party Kohli Graphics Systems

In a move not expected by most of the players in the Industry, the Director General of Anti Dumping (“DGAD”) was pleased to recommend removal of Anti Dumping Duty (“ADD”) on Digital Offset Printing Plates which is also referred to as Product Under Consideration (“PUC”). The said duty has been in place since after the first initiation Petition filed by Printing major Technova Imaging Systems on 13/06/2011 which is a virtual monopoly in the Indian market. The DGAD while stating that despite adequate opportunity being afforded to the exporters, importers and other interested parties to provide information on the aspects of dumping, injury and causal link and the same was not adequately provided to rebut the submissions made in favour of imposition of the Anti Dumping Duty, vide its final findings dated 03.10.2012 confirmed the abovesaid preliminary finding dated 16.03.2012. Thus, the Central government had imposed anti dumping duty on the subject goods, originated in or exported from China PR for a period of 5 years subject to a Mid-Term and a Sunset Review.

Thereafter, after the expiry of a period of five years, the Sunset Review was initiated in order to decide whether the ADD should continue and a host of interested parties filed their findings / submissions for and against the motion.

M/s K&T Law offices on behalf of Kohli Graphic Systems made their submissions against the imposition of ADD which can be summarized as under:

  1. China’s present status as Non Market Economy
  2. Change in Dollar Value from 45 to 65
  3. Increase in value of imports despite imposition of ADD
  4. No safeguards in case of any contingency befalling the sole producer
  5. Sole Petitioner is contrary to the meaning ascribed in the Act
  6. Sole Petitioner isn’t able to fulfil domestic demand despite producing at close to optimal
  7. Apparent that goods from China are superior to goods produced by Sole Producer and hence the comparison falls outside the scope of Duty

The DGAD after taking note of all the submissions arrived at the final conclusion-

The Authority also holds that capacity utilisation, production and overall profitability of the industry do not indicate existence of injury or a deterioted economic condition. The factors submitted by Domestic Industry on likelihood of recurrence of injury on withdrawal of ADD are not supported by the price realisations and price trends of PUC during POI and post POI. The Authority on account of the aforesaid examination concludes that continuance of Anti-dumping duty is not warranted in any of the three categories of the product and hereby recommends dis-continuance of the ADD levied on the PUC vide Customs Notification No. 24/2017 – Customs (ADD) dated 2nd June, 2017.

The complete findings can also be viewed on the website of the Director General of Anti Dumping.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *