G/ADP/Q2/IND/14  
 
26 April 2013  
(13-2224)  Page: 1/2  
Committee on Anti-Dumping Practices  Original: English  
 
ARTICLE 16.4 OF THE AGREEMENT 
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT OF AN TI-DUMPING DUTY ACTIONS 
REPLIES TO QUESTIONS POSED BY JAPAN1 REGARDING THE 
SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT FROM INDIA2 
 
 The following communication, dated 24 April 2013,  is being circulated at the request of the 
Delegation of India.  
_______________ 
 
 Question  
With regard to India's investigation on "Mel amine" from Japan, India notes that Final 
Findings were issued on 1 June 2012, while the disclosure document of essential facts 
reached the Japanese Embassy in Delhi on 13  June 2012. Japan would like to know why 
the disclosure document reached its Embassy in Delhi nearly two weeks after the final 
determinations.  
Reply 
 
India would like to clarify that Disclosure statement was dispatched by Speed Post to Embassy of Japan in India on 17 May 2012, i.e., well before the issuance of the Final Findings. It was received 
by the Embassy on 18 May 2012. 
 Question 
 
In India's investigations, we sometime experi ence the late delivery or even non-delivery 
of the disclosure documents. In case of "Acetone", "Phenol" and 
"1,1,1,2 Tetrafluoroethane" , Japan understands that the disclosure documents of 
essential facts have not yet reached the Japanese Embassy in Delhi while the measures 
are already in place. With regard to the investigation on "PVC Paste Resin", the 
disclosure document of essential facts reac hed the Japanese Embassy in Delhi only 5 
days before the Final Findings. Japan would lik e to know if India's Directorate General of 
Antidumping and Allied Duties (DGAD) has pl ans to improve the current situations and 
to ensure the due-process rights of interested parties. 
 
Reply 
 
Directorate General of Anti-Dumping (DGAD) follow s the procedures laid down for processing and 
finalising the Anti-dumping investigations, in-line with its rights and obligations under WTO. Based on feedback from Member-countries, the procedures are reviewed from time to time and the requisite amendments, if necessitated, are being made.  
 
                                               
1 G/ADP/Q2/IND/12. 
2 G/ADP/N/230/IND. G/ADP/Q2/IND/14 
 
- 2 - 
 
  Question 
 On page 35 of India’s semi-annual report, G/ADP/N/230/IND, "Anili ne" from Japan is 
found as a terminated measure for the reason that "Duty lapsed". As far as Japan 
knows, DGAD issued the Final Findings on 17 January 2012 and recommended 
"withdrawal of duties imposed". Could Indi a clarify whether the measure has already 
been terminated or not? If it has already been terminated, could India explain when the 
measure was terminated and why the notice of  termination has not yet been published? 
 Reply 
 
As per Section 9A(3) of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 and Department of Revenue Circular 
No. 28/2011-Customs, dated 8th July, 2011, the duty lapses beyond a period of 5 years from its date of levy, unless the measure is to be terminated prior to the normal expiry date. Thus there is 
no need for issuance of a separate termination order for the product and the measure 
automatically lapses on expiry of the stated time period.  
__________