G/SG/N/8/IND/25  
G/SG/N/10/IND/16  
G/SG/N/11/IND/11  
 
25 April 2014  
(14-2537)  Page: 1/7  
Committee on Safeguards  Original: English  
 
  NOTIFICATION UNDER ARTICLE 12 .1(B) OF THE AGREEMENT ON  
SAFEGUARDS ON FINDING A SERIOUS INJURY OR THREAT  
THEREOF CAUSED BY INCREASED IMPORTS 
 
NOTIFICATION OF A PROPOSAL TO IMPOSE A MEASURE 
 
NOTIFICATION PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 9, FOOTNOTE 2, 
OF THE AGREEMENT ON SAFEGUARDS 
INDIA 
Seamless Pipes, Tubes and Hollow profiles of Iron or non-alloy steel 
(other than cast iron and stainless steel) 
The following communication, dated 25 April 2014, is being circulated at the request of the 
Delegation of India. 
 
_______________ 
  
1. Serious injury or threat ther eof caused by increased imports 
 An evaluation of the overall position of the Domestic Industry (DI), in the light of almost all the 
relevant factors having a bearing on the situation of the DI, shows a significant overall 
impairment. This would also be evident from the basic relevant factors stated in subsequent paragraphs below. No single factor has been considered as dispositive and all relevant factors 
within the context of the relevant business cycle and conditions of competition, which are relevant 
to the affected industry, have been considered to  evaluate the overall position of the domestic 
industry. It is thus concluded that DI has suffered serious injury as a result of increased imports of the Product Under Consideration (PUC). 
 
2. Information on whether there is an increase in imports 
 
PUC is imported into India from a number of countries. The imports of PUC have shown an 
increasing trend in absolute terms as well as compared to the domestic production & demand, causing serious injury to the domestic Industry. 
 
a. Imports in absolute terms 
The quantum of imports of PUC  during 2009-10 to 2012-13 is shown in the table below: 
 
Financial Year Total Import (MT) Total Import (indexed Yearly) 
2009-10  307581 100 
2010-11  344829  112 
2011-12  425194  138 
2012-13 QI  99880  
2012-13 Q2 76118  
2012-13 Q3 104335  
2012-13 Q4 93515  
2012-13  373848 122 G/SG/N/8/IND/25 • G/SG/N/10/IND/16 • G/SG/N/11/IND/11 
 
- 2 - 
 
   
From the table above, it would be evident that  the total import of Seamless pipes and tubes 
in 2012-13 has been 373848 MT showing decrease of 51346 MT over previous year's Import 
of 425194 MT, i.e., the decrease is about 12% in percentage term. End-point to end-point 
comparison indicates that there is an increase in imports by 22% in 2012-2013 as compared to 
base year 2009-10. Except in the year 2012-13, there has been continuous increase in imports. End-point to end point comparison also indicates that import has increased in absolute terms. 
 
b. Share of imports relative to production 
Share of imports has gone up during the period of investigation and in the most recent period, i.e., 
2012-13, both from the base year as well as fr om the preceding year. Therefore, there is an 
increase in import in relative terms, in relation to production in 2012-13 both from the base period 
and the preceding year by about 14%. 
 3. Evidence of Serious Injury  
 
The increased imports of the PUC into India have caused Serious Injury  to the domestic producers 
as reflected by the following factors: 
 
a. Market Share 
Financial 
Year Total 
Imports 
(MT) Sales 
of DI 
(MT) Sales of other 
Indian 
Producers 
(including 
MSL) (MT) Total 
Demand  
(MT) % of Market Share 
     DI Others 
(including 
MSL) Imports 
2009-10 307581 143017 104823 555420 25.75 18.87 55.38 
2010-11 344829 168740 101020 614589 27.46 16.43 56.11 
2011-12 425194 170826 93386 689406 24.78 13.54 61.68 
2012- 13 373848 141558 68692 584098 24.24 11.75 64.01 
 
The DI had a market share of 25.25 % in 2009-10 which increased to 27.46% in 2010-11. The market share of the DI fell to 24.78% during 2011-12 and further declined to 24.24% in 2012-13. 
Thus, though the market share of DI declined marginally in the recent period of 2012-13, when 
compared to the preceding year, the market share of  the DI declined by 1.51% in last four years. 
On the other hand, the market share of im port increased from 55.38% in 2009-10 to 64.01 /% 
in 2012-13, i.e, by 8.63%. Thus, during the POI, the imports have captured the market at the cost 
of the Domestic Industry's share.   2009-10  2010-11  2011-12 2012-13 
Import (MT) 307581 344829 425194 373848 
Total production (MT)  422820 538554 583780 429454 
Share of Imports (%) 73 64 73 87 G/SG/N/8/IND/25 • G/SG/N/10/IND/16 • G/SG/N/11/IND/11 
 
- 3 - 
 
  b. Production 
The table below provides relevant statistics of the cumulative domestic production of DI and that 
of "All Indian Producers including MSL". 
 
Year 2009-10 2010-2011 2011-12 2012-13 
Production by 'domestic 
industry' (MT) 224216 283619 318968 254316 
Indexed 100 126.49 142.25 113.42 
Cumulative production 
by all Indian producers 
including MSL 422820 538554 583780 429454 
Indexed 100 127.37 138.06 101.56 
 
The total production of domestic industry ha s increased since 2009-10 till 2011-12. The total 
production of 'domestic industry' in 2012-13 fell by 64652 MT compared to the year 2011-12, i.e., 
by 20%. The total production by all Indian produc ers show trend similar to the DI, where however, 
almost at the same level in 2012-13 as compared to the base year 2009-10 is noticed but the decline from the preceding year 2011-12 is very sharp, causing injury to the DI. 
 
c. Change in level of domestic sales 
Year 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 
Domestic sales 
by 'domestic 
industry' (MT) 143017 168740 170826 141558 
Indexed 100 118 119 99 
 
The sales of DI have shown an upward tren d from 2009-10 to 2011-12 but declined thereafter 
in 2012-13. End point to end point comparison also indicates marginal dip in sales of the DI. The 
drop in sales is in tandem to the decline in demand for the PUC. The drop in sales of 17.13% is sharper than the decline in demand of 15.28% in 2012-13 as compared to the preceding 
year 2011-12, with a rise in import share in relation to demand, causing injury to the DI. 
 
d. Capacity Utilization 
Year 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 
Installed capacity of 'domestic industry' (MT) 375000 685000 685000 685000 
Capacity utilization of 'domestic industry' (%) 60 41 47 37 
 
The capacity utilization of the DI has shown continuous declining trend since 2009-10. Exception being in 2011-12, when there was marginal improvement of 6% in capacity utilization as 
compared to previous year. In the year 2010-11, the DI has increased its capacity by 310000 MT 
which resulted a fall in capacity utilization by 19% in 2010-11 compared to 2009-10, despite improvement in production by 26% during the same period. The DI managed to recover 
in 2011-12 but again capacity utilization fell in 2012-13. 
 
e. Profits and losses: 
Year (Unit) Profit (Rs./MT) (Indexed) 
2009-10 100 
2010-11 86 
2011-12 64 
2012-13 43 G/SG/N/8/IND/25 • G/SG/N/10/IND/16 • G/SG/N/11/IND/11 
 
- 4 - 
 
   
Profitability of the DI has declined drastically in the recent period of 2012-13 from the base year as well as when compared with the preceding year of 2011-12.   
f. Employment 
The number of employees (on average) increa sed from 2245 (2009-10) to 2645 (2012-13), as 
would be apparent from the facts indicated in the table below: 
 
Year 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 
Avg. number of employees in 
'domestic industry'  
(in numbers) 2245 2388 2567 2645 
Indexed 100 106 114 117 
 
g. Productivity 
The productivity of domestic industry has dec lined in the most recent period of 2012-13 when 
compared to 2011-12 and also when compared from  the base year, as would be evident from the 
table below:  
 
Year 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13  
Productivity/employee 'domestic industry' 
(MT/Employee) 100 118 124 96 
 
h. Inventor 
Inventory of the goods has increased throughout the injury period and more significantly in the 
recent period of 2012-13 by 3888 MT., i.e., by 41% in comparison to the period 2011-12. This piling up of the inventory is despite the fact that domestic sales have continuously increased 
from 2009-10 to 2011-12 with a corresponding rise in production, which has outpaced sales. This 
situation is further aggravated by the fact that this piling up of inventory is in a situation when the production itself has declined more than the domestic sale in the most recent period of 2012-13 
than the preceding year. This situation has worsen ed in the most recent period of 2012-13 where 
it appears to be the result of declining exports as well as decline in overall demand for the PUC.   
4. Overall position of the DI 
 
Financial Year 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 
(Q1) 2013-14 
(Annualized) 
Total Import (MT) 307581 344829 425194 373848 85011 340044 
Production of DI(MT) 224216 283619 318968 254316 55468 221872 
Sales DI 143017 168740 170826 141558 35785 143140 
Sale of others(MT) 104823 101020 93386 68662  45246 
Consumption/demand 555421 614589 689406 584064  528430 
Import (%) w.r.t 
consumption 55 56 62 64  64 
DI Sales 26 27 25 24  27 
 Year 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 
Inventory (MT) 5691 8805 9583 13471 G/SG/N/8/IND/25 • G/SG/N/10/IND/16 • G/SG/N/11/IND/11 
 
- 5 - 
 
  From the entire analysis made above, it is seen  that the market share of domestic producers has 
fallen during the investigation period. The total production of domestic industry has increased since 2009-10 till 2011-12. However, the total production of 'domestic industry' in 2012-13 fell as compared to the year 2011-12. The sales of DI have shown an upward trend from 2009-10 
to 2011-12 but declined thereafter in 2012-13. Th e capacity utilization of the DI has shown 
continuous declining trend since 2009-10. Exception being 2011-1 when there was marginal improvement of 6% in capacity utilization as compared to previous year. Profitability has declined 
drastically in the recent period of 2012-13 from the base year as well as when compared 
in 2012-13 from the preceding year of 2011-12. The pr oductivity of domestic industry has declined 
in the most recent period of 2012-13 when comp ared to 2011-12 and also when compared from 
the base year. The Inventory of the goods has incr eased throughout the injury period. The exports 
from India by the DI has declined in 2012-13 from 2011-12, after a continuous rise till 2011-12 
from 2009-10.   
5. Causal Link  
 For the purpose of causation, all relevant factors of an objective and quantifiable nature having a 
bearing on the situation of the industry have be en evaluated. As the market share of DI has 
declined from 24.78% in FY 2011-12 to 24.24% in FY 2012-13 i.e. by 0.54% and from 25.75% in FY 2009-10 (base year) to 24.24% in FY 2012-13 i.e. by 1.51% with the corresponding increase in the share of imports from 55.38% in FY 2009-10 to  64.01% in 2012-13, the casual link appears to 
be established. Moreover, even though the quantum of decline in sales of the DI is lower than the 
fall in imports volume during 2012-13 as compared  to 2011-12, there has been an increase in the 
market share of imports with a corresponding decline in the share of the DI. 
 
The evaluation of almost all the factors individual ly and in totality suggests causal link between 
imports and serious injury caused by such imports. 
 
6. Unforeseen circumstances 
 It has been observed that the following unforeseen factors/developments have led to the increased 
imports of the product. 
 
a. Trade Remedial actions on imports of PUC by other member countries 
The trend of imports during last four years indi cates that import from China in year 2012-13 has 
increased by 59887 MT as compared to base year 2009-10. Further, imports into India post 2009-10 indicates that the import has consistently showing significant increase. Since most of the 
measures are in force since 2008-09, the trade remedial measures by other member countries on 
imports of the PUC, led to increase in import to India during POI confirming the contention of the 
DI that trade remedy measures against China by EU and other Nations has diverted the import to India.  
 
b. Unexpected drop in consumption in European Market 
As regard to the above submission of the DI and co ntentions made by the interested parties, it is 
observed that the European markets have reported  an unexpected drop in demand as a result of 
the massive capacities of the subject goods in foreign countries and the foreign producers have resorted to increased exports to India. It may be seen that imports from Europe has been 
consistently increasing in last four years. In 2009-10 it was 16% of the total imports and it has 
increased to 19% of the total imports in 2013. An in crease of 3% over a period of four years is 
relative terms and in absolute terms, the increased quantum of imports from EU has risen by 46% in 2012-13 over 2009-10, i.e. a clear surge which is unforeseen and supports the submissions 
made by the DI.  
 7. Adjustment Plan 
 
The DI have laid down adjustment plan which mainly focuses on cost reduction for the raw materials, power and utilities and management of inventory and personnel and finances.  
 G/SG/N/8/IND/25 • G/SG/N/10/IND/16 • G/SG/N/11/IND/11 
 
- 6 - 
 
  The DI has already started positive adjustments an d some of them are planned over a period of 
2-3 years which will enable them to adjust to heightened competition from import. The adjustment plan of the domestic industry is reasonable and reliable.  
8. Conclusion 
 There has been a significant increase in imports in relation to production. There is also substantial 
increase in imports in absolute terms when seen fr om end to end point of the POI. This increase in 
import has resulted in decrease in production, sales, export and productivity, capacity utilization and profitability and increase in inventory of the product. This has resulted into causing serious injury to the Domestic Industry, though there may not be a serious threat of serious injury. There 
is a causal link between increase in import and serious injury caused to the Domestic Industry 
during the POI. The DI has also provided a viable adjustment plan showing they are making positive adjustments to become competitive to rising imports and that imposition of safeguard 
duty on the PUC will have minimal impact on the end udders of the PUC and therefore are in Public 
Interest. Hence, the request of the DI for impositi on of safeguard duty meets all the requirements 
of both domestic as well as international law. Therefore the Investigating Authority has concluded 
that the DI deserves to be protected at this st age from the onslaughts of increased imports by 
adoption of emergency measures of safeguard duty.   9. Product involved (PUC) 
 
The product involved is  Seamless pipes, Tubes and Hollow profiles of iron or non –alloy 
steel (other than cast iron and stainless steel)  classified under Customs sub-heading no. 
73041910; 73041920; 73041990; 73042310; 73042390; 73042910; 73042990; 73043111; 
73043119; 73043121; 73043129; 73043131; 73043139; 73043911; 73043919; 73043921; 73043929; 73043931: 73043939; 73045110; 73045120; 73045130; 73045910; 73045920; 
73045930; 73049000 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 excluding : 
 
i. Seamless alloy–steel pipes, tubes and hollow profiles of specification ASTM 
A213/ASME SA 213 and ASTM A335 /ASME SA 335 or equivalent BIS/DIN/BS/EN or 
any other equivalent specifications. 
ii. Non API and Patented Premium Joints/P remium Connections/Premium Threaded 
Tubes & Pipes of grades Q-125, 13CR,L-80,P110,C-90,C-95,T-90 &T-95 
iii. All 13 Chromium (13CR) Grades Tubes and Pipes not included in(2) above and 
iv. Drill Collars. 
10. Precise description of the proposed measure 
 
DG Safeguards, the competent authority, has reco mmended to impose safeguard duty at the rate 
of 25% ad valorem  for the first year, 15% ad valorem  for the second year and 5% for third year 
(for six months only) on imports of Seamless pipes, Tubes and Ho llow profiles of iron or 
non-alloy steel (other than cast iron and stainless steel ) 
 11. Further information 
 
The Final Findings were published in gazette of India on11/03/2014.  
12. Proposed date of imposi tion of safeguard measure 
 The safeguard measure will be applicable from the date  of issue of notification in this regard by the 
Department of Revenue, Ministry of  Finance, Government of India. 
 G/SG/N/8/IND/25 • G/SG/N/10/IND/16 • G/SG/N/11/IND/11 
 
- 7 - 
 
  NOTIFICATION PURSUANT TO ARTICLE 9, FOOTNOTE 2, 
OF THE AGREEMENT ON SAFEGUARDS 
1. Specify the measure 
 
Safeguard duty at the rate of 25% ad valorem  for the first year, 15% ad valorem  for the second 
year and 5% for third year ( for six months only) when imported into India has been recommended by DG(Safeguards) the competent authority. 
 
2. Specify the product subject to the measure  Seamless pipes, Tubes and Hollow profiles of iron or non –alloy steel (other than cast 
iron and stainless steel)  classified under Customs sub-heading no. 73041910; 73041920; 
73041990; 73042310; 73042390; 73042910; 73042990; 73043111; 73043119; 73043121; 73043129; 73043131; 73043139; 73043911; 73043919; 73043921; 73043929; 73043931: 
73043939; 73045110; 73045120; 73045130; 73045910; 73045920; 73045930; 73049000 of the 
Customs Tariff Act, 1975 excluding : 
 
i. Seamless alloy–steel pipes, tubes and hollow profiles of specification ASTM 
A213/ASME SA 213 and ASTM A335 /ASME SA 335 or equivalent BIS/DIN/BS/EN or any other equivalent specifications 
ii. Non API and Patented Premium Joints/P remium Connections/Premium Threaded 
Tubes & Pipes of grades Q-125, 13CR,L-80,P110,C-90,C-95,T-90 &T-95 
iii. All 13 Chromium (13CR) Grades Tubes and Pipes not included in(2) above and 
iv. Drill Collars 
3. Specify the developing countries to which the measure is not applied under 
article 9.1 of the agreement on safeguards , and the import share of these countries 
individually and collectively 
 
As the imports from developing nations except Ch ina PR did not exceed 3% individually and 9% 
collectively, the import of PUC originating from developing nations except China PR, will not attract safeguard duty in terms of proviso to Section 8B of the Customs Tariff Act 1975. 
 
__________