Council Regulation (EC) No 390/2005 of 7 March 2005 terminating the partial interim review of the anti-dumping measures applicable to imports of polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film originating, inter alia, in India
Date: 2005-03-07
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: India, anti-dumping legislation, plastics, plastics industry

10.3.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 63/1

I

(Acts whose publication is obligatory)

COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 390/2005

of 7 March 2005

terminating the partial

interim review of the anti-dumping measures applicable to imports of

polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film originating, inter alia, in India

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty
Community,

establishing the European

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22
December 1995 on protection against dumped imports from
countries not members of the European Community (1)
(the
basic Regulation), and in particular Article 11(3) thereof,

Having regard to the proposal submitted by the Commission
after consulting the Advisory Committee,

Whereas:

A. PROCEDURE

1. Previous procedure and existing measures

(1)

(2)

the Council

investigation),

Following an investigation initiated in May 2000 (the
original
imposed definitive
anti-dumping duties in August 2001, pursuant to Regu-
lation (EC) No 1676/2001 (2), on imports of polyethylene
terephthalate (PET) film originating,
in India.
The duties ranged from 0 % to 62,6 % on imports of
PET film originating in India.

inter alia,

Films Limited, previously

The existing anti-dumping duty applicable to imports
from Jindal Poly
Jindal
Polyester Limited (notice of change of name published
on 2 December 2004 (3)),
is 0 %. Imports of PET film
from the company are also subject to a countervailing
duty of 7 %, which was imposed in 1999 by Council
Regulation (EC) No 2597/1999 (4).

2. Request for a review

(3)

A request for a partial interim review limited to dumping
in respect of Jindal Poly Films Limited was lodged by the

(1) OJ L 56, 6.3.1996, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Regulation

(EC) No 461/2004 (OJ L 77, 13.3.2004, p. 12).

(2) OJ L 227, 23.8.2001, p. 1.
(3) OJ C 297, 2.12.2004, p. 2.
(4) OJ L 316, 10.12.1999, p. 1.

following Community producers: Du Pont Teijin Films,
Mitsubishi Polyester Film GmbH and Nuroll SpA (the
applicants). The applicants represent a major proportion
of the Community production of PET film. Toray Plastics
Europe indicated its support for the request although it
was not a formal applicant.

The applicants alleged that the dumping margin of Jindal
Poly Films Limited had changed and was higher than in
the original investigation leading to the imposition of the
existing measures.

3. Investigation

after

evidence,

consulting

determined,

Having
the Advisory
Committee, that the request contained sufficient prima
the Commission announced on 19
facie
February 2004 the initiation of a partial interim review
pursuant to Article 11(3) of the basic Regulation by a
notice of initiation published in the Official Journal of the
European Union (5).

The review was limited in scope to the examination of
dumping in respect of Jindal Poly Films Limited. The
investigation period was from 1 January 2003 to 31
December 2003.

the representatives of

The Commission officially informed Jindal Poly Films
Limited,
the exporting country
and the Community producers about the initiation of
the review. Interested parties were given the opportunity
to make their views known in writing and to request a
hearing within the time limit
in the notice of
initiation.

set

In order to obtain the information deemed necessary for
its investigation, the Commission sent a questionnaire to
Jindal Poly Films Limited,
exporting producer
concerned, which cooperated by replying to the ques-
tionnaire. A verification visit was carried out at
the
premises of the company in New Delhi to ensure the
integrity of the information submitted.

the

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)

(8)

(5) OJ C 43, 19.2.2004, p. 14.

L 63/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

10.3.2005

B. PRODUCT CONCERNED AND LIKE PRODUCT

(15)

1. Product concerned

(9)

The product concerned is, as defined in the original
investigation, polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film origi-
nating in India, normally declared under CN codes
ex 3920 62 19 and ex 3920 62 90.

The SG&A costs were based on such costs incurred by
the exporting producer with regard to its domestic sales
of the product concerned, which were found to be repre-
sentative. The profit margin was calculated on the basis
of the weighted average profit margin of the company
for those product types sold on the domestic market in
sufficient quantities in the ordinary course of trade.

2. Like product

2. Export price

(10) As in the original

investigation,

it was found that PET
film produced and sold on the domestic market in India
and PET film exported to the Community from India, as
well as PET film produced and sold by the Community
industry on the Community market, have the same
physical
uses.
Therefore, they are like products within the meaning of
Article 1(4) of the basic Regulation.

characteristics

technical

and

and

C. DUMPING

1. Normal value

(11)

In order to establish normal value,
it was first verified
that the total domestic sales of the exporting producer
were representative in accordance with Article 2(2) of the
basic Regulation, i.e. that they accounted for 5 % or more
of
the product concerned
exported to the Community.

the total sales volume of

(12)

It was then ascertained whether total domestic sales of
each product type constituted 5 % or more of the sales
volume of the same type exported to the Community.

(13)

(14)

For those product types where domestic sales constituted
5 % or more of
the same type
the sales volume of
it was then examined
exported to the Community,
whether sufficient sales had been made in the ordinary
course of trade pursuant to Article 2(4) of the basic
Regulation. For each product type where the volume of
domestic sales made above the cost of production repre-
sented at least 80 % of sales, normal value was estab-
lished on the basis of
the weighted average price
actually paid for all domestic sales. For those product
types where the volume of profitable transactions was
equal to or lower than 80 %, but not lower than 10 %
of sales, normal value was based on the weighted average
price actually paid for the profitable domestic sales only.

types where domestic prices of

the
For the product
exporting producer could not be used to establish
normal value owing to insufficient representativity or
to a lack of sales in the ordinary course of
trade,
normal value was constructed on the basis of the manu-
facturing costs
incurred by the exporting producer
concerned plus a reasonable amount for selling, general
and administrative costs (SG&A costs) and for profits, in
accordance with Article 2(3) and (6) of the basic Regu-
lation.

(16)

(17)

(18)

(19)

The exporting producer reported sales (one consignment)
made to a related company in the Community. Given
these sales
that
were disregarded.

the quantity involved was negligible,

The other export sales of the product concerned to the
Community during the investigation period had been
made to independent customers. Therefore, the export
price was established in accordance with Article 2(8) of
the basic Regulation on the basis of export price actually
paid or payable.

3. Comparison

The normal value and export price were compared on an
ex-works basis. For
the purpose of ensuring a fair
comparison, due allowance in the form of adjustments
was made for differences affecting price comparability in
accordance with Article 2(10) of the basic Regulation.
Accordingly, adjustments were made for differences in
handling,
transport,
discounts,
and
costs,
loading
and
supported by
applicable
commissions, where
verified evidence.

insurance,
packing,
and

ancillary

rebates,

credit

(a) Import charges

Jindal Poly Films Limited claimed an adjustment to the
normal value for the import duty not collected under the
raw
Advance Licence Scheme (ALS) on imports of
material used in the manufacture of goods for export.
The ALS permits the importation of raw materials free of
duty, provided that the company exports a corresponding
quantity and value of
finished product determined in
standard input-output
accordance with officially set
norms. Imports under the ALS can either be used for
the production of export goods or for the replenishment
of domestic inputs used to produce such goods. The
company
product
the
concerned to the EC were used to satisfy
requirements under the ALS in respect of raw materials
imported.

claimed

exports

that

the

of

(20) No conclusion was made as to whether or not an
adjustment was warranted for this claim, given that it
would have no impact on the final outcome of
the
review investigation.

10.3.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 63/3

(b) Other adjustments

(26)

(21)

the

this

scheme,

The exporting producer claimed, for a limited number of
exports, an adjustment on the export price pursuant to
Article 2(10)(k) of the basic Regulation, based on the
amount of the benefits received on exportation under
the Duty Entitlement Passbook Scheme (DEPB) on a
post-export basis. Under
credits
received when exporting the product concerned could
be used to offset customs duties due on imports of
any goods or could be freely sold to other companies.
In addition,
the imported
goods should only be used in the production of the
exported product. The producer did not demonstrate
the benefit under the DEPB scheme on a post-
that
export basis
in
particular, that the customers consistently paid different
prices on the domestic market because of
the DEPB
benefits. Therefore, the claim was rejected.

there is no constraint

affected price

comparability

and,

that

4. Dumping margin

(22)

The dumping margin was established on the basis of a
comparison of a weighted average normal value with a
weighted average export price, in accordance with Article
2(11) of the basic Regulation.

(23)

This comparison showed a dumping margin of 0 %.

transactions,

since they alleged that

sold not only to customers
film type, but

the dumping calculation
The applicants argued that
should have been made on the basis of a comparison
the weighted average normal value to individual
of
export
targeted
dumping to a special category of purchaser existed.
They argued that if sales of a particular film type were
made only to customers within a specific end-use
segment, this would amount to targeting by customer.
They also considered that their approach was justified in
view of an increase in Indian production capacity, which
they believed related mainly to that particular film type.
In this regard, it should first be noted that the film type
concerned was
solely
purchasing that
also to customers
purchasing other film types. A comparison of prices
for the same film types sold to different customers did
not show a pattern of price differentiation by customer.
In the absence of such a pattern, the existence of an
is irrelevant for
alleged pattern of dumping by model
the purpose of the selection of the dumping calculation
methodology, as indicated in Article 2(11) of the basic
Regulation. Moreover,
should also be noted that
changes
in production capacity are not a relevant
factor in determining the methodology to be followed
for the determination of
the dumping margin either.
Since no targeting by customer, region or time period
was identified, the applicants’ claim was rejected and the
comparison of normal value to export price on the basis
of a weighted average to weighted average approach was
maintained as the appropriate methodology,

it

D. CONCLUSION

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

(24) On the basis of the above facts and considerations, and
in view of the information available,
it was concluded
that, in accordance with Article 11(3) of the basic Regu-
lation,
review investigation should be
terminated and the anti-dumping duty of 0 % imposed
by Regulation (EC) No 1676/2001 on imports of PET
film produced and exported to the European Community
by Jindal Poly Films Limited should be maintained.

current

the

Article 1

interim review of

The partial
the anti-dumping measures
applicable to imports of polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film
in India, normally declared under CN
originating,
codes ex 3920 62 19 and ex 3920 62 90,
these
measures concern the Indian exporting producer Jindal Poly
Films Limited, is hereby terminated.

insofar as

inter alia,

(25) All parties concerned were informed of the essential facts
and considerations on the basis of which the decision to
maintain the current anti-dumping duty was made and
were given the opportunity to comment.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that
of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 7 March 2005.

For the Council
The President

J. KRECKÉ