Proposal for a Council Regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 397/2004 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of cotton-type bed linen originating in Pakistan
Date: 2006-04-04
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Pakistan, anti-dumping duty, anti-dumping legislation, cotton, import, originating product, textile product

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 4.4.2006 
COM(2006) 158 final 

Proposal for a 

COUNCIL REGULATION 

amending Regulation (EC) No 397/2004 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on 
imports of cotton-type bed linen originating in Pakistan 

(presented by the Commission) 

EN 

   EN 

 
 
 
  
EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM 

1)  CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL 

•  Grounds for and objectives of the proposal 

This  proposal  concerns  the  application  of  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  384/96  of 
22 December 1995 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members 
of  the  European  Community,  as  last  amended  by  Council  Regulation  (EC) 
No 2117/2005  of  21  December  2005  (‘the  basic  Regulation’)  in  the  proceeding 
concerning imports of cotton-type bed linen originating in Pakistan. 

•  General context 

This proposal is made in the context of the implementation of the basic Regulation and 
is the result of an investigation which was carried out in line with the substantive and 
procedural requirements laid out in the basic Regulation. 

•  Existing provisions in the area of the proposal 

There are no existing provisions in the area of the proposal. 

•  Consistency with other policies and objectives of the Union 

Not applicable. 

2)  CONSULTATION OF INTERESTED PARTIES AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT 

•  Consultation of interested parties 

Interested  parties  concerned  by  the  proceeding  have  already  had  the  possibility  to 
defend their interests during the investigation, in line with the provisions of the basic 
Regulation. 

•  Collection and use of expertise 

There was no need for external expertise. 

•  Impact assessment 

This proposal is the result of the implementation of the basic Regulation. 

The  basic  Regulation  does  not  foresee  a  general  impact  assessment  but  contains  an 
exhaustive list of conditions that have to be assessed. 

3)  LEGAL ELEMENTS OF THE PROPOSAL 

•  Summary of the proposed action 

On 3 August 2004, the Commission initiated ex-officio a partial interim review, limited 
to dumping, of the anti-dumping measures in force in respect of cotton-type bed linen 
originating in Pakistan. The purpose of this investigation was to determine, on the basis 

EN 

2 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
of verified data, whether, and to what extent, dumping was still taking place.  

The  review  investigation  showed  continuing  dumping  of  the  product  concerned,  and 
new dumping levels have been calculated on the basis of verified data.  

Therefore,  it  is  suggested  that  the  Council  adopts  the  attached  proposal  for  a 
Regulation in order to amend the existing measures. 

•  Legal basis 

Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  384/96  of  22  December  1995  on  protection  against 
dumped  imports  from  countries  not  members  of  the  European  Community,  as  last 
amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 461/2004 of 8 March 2004. 

•  Subsidiarity principle 

The proposal falls under the exclusive competence of the Community. The subsidiarity 
principle therefore does not apply. 

•  Proportionality principle 

The proposal complies with the proportionality principle for the following reasons: 

The form of action is described in the above-mentioned basic Regulation and leaves no 
scope for national decision. 

Indication  of  how  financial  and  administrative  burden  falling  upon  the  Community, 
national governments, regional and local authorities, economic operators and citizens is 
minimized and proportionate to the objective of the proposal is not applicable. 

•  Choice of instruments 

Proposed instruments: regulation. 

Other means would not be adequate for the following reason: 

Other  means  would  not  be  adequate  because  the  basic  Regulation  does  not  foresee 
alternative options. 

4)  BUDGETARY IMPLICATION 

The proposal has no implication for the Community budget. 

EN 

3 

   EN 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Proposal for a 

COUNCIL REGULATION 

amending Regulation (EC) No 397/2004 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on 
imports of cotton-type bed linen originating in Pakistan 

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, 

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,  

Having  regard  to  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  384/96  of  22  December  19951  on  protection 
against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (‘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 investigation 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

1 

2 

By Regulation (EC) No 397/20042 (‘the definitive Regulation’), the Council imposed a 
definitive anti-dumping duty of 13,1% on imports of bed linen of cotton fibres, pure or 
mixed  with  man-made  fibres  or  flax  (flax  not  being  the  dominant  fibre),  bleached, 
dyed or printed, originating in Pakistan. 

This  measure  had  been  imposed  on  the  basis  of  facts  available  since  it  had  been 
impossible  to  verify  on  spot  the  highly  implausible  figures  reported  in  the 
questionnaires  of  the  six  sampled  companies,  due  to  the  following  circumstances. 
During  the  verification  of  the  second  company,  the  Commission  had  received  a  life 
threatening  letter  addressed  personally  to  the  officials  carrying  out  the  verifications. 
With regard to the specific, personal nature of this letter, the Commission considered 
that the necessary conditions to carry out the verifications were not met and that these 
circumstances  significantly  impeded  the  investigation.  Consequently,  the  verification 
visits had to be interrupted. 

In  the  period  following  the  imposition  of  the  anti-dumping  measures,  sufficient 
information  was  received  by 
the  security 
the  Commission 
circumstances  had  changed,  i.e.  that  the  impediment  to  the  conduct  of  verification 
visits  had  been  removed.  Under  these  circumstances,  the  Commission  decided  to 

indicating 

that 

OJ  L  56,  6.3.1996,  p.  1.  Regulation  as  last  amended  by  Council  Regulation  (EC)  No  2117/2005  (OJ 
L 340, 23.12.2005, p. 17). 
OJ L 66, 4.3.2004, p. 1. 

EN 

4 

   EN 

 
                                                 
(4) 

(5) 

(6) 

(7) 

(8) 

(9) 

initiate an interim review limited to dumping aspects in order to review the findings on 
the  basis  of  data  that  have  been  fully  verified  and  better  reflect  the  situation  of 
Pakistani exporters. 

2. 

Initiation 

On 3 August 2004, the Commission, after having consulted the Advisory Committee, 
announced by a notice published in the Official Journal of the European Union3, the 
initiation  pursuant  to  Article  11(3)  of  the  basic  Regulation  of  an  ex-officio  partial 
interim review, limited to dumping, of the anti-dumping measures imposed by Council 
Regulation (EC) No 397/2004. 

The Commission officially advised the exporting producers and importers known to be 
concerned  as  well  as  their  known  associations,  the  Pakistani  authorities  and  the 
associations of Community producers of the initiation of the investigation. Interested 
parties were given the opportunity to make their views known in writing and to request 
a hearing within the time limits set in the notice of initiation. 

A  number  of  exporting  producers  and  the  Pakistan  Bedwear  Exporters  Association, 
one of several bed linen producers associations in Pakistan, as well as the association 
of  the  Community  producers  (EUROCOTON),  which  was  the  complainant  in  the 
original investigation, made their views known in writing. A hearing was granted to all 
parties who so requested within the established time limits and showed that there were 
reasons why they should be heard. 

3. 

Sampling 

In  view  of  the  large  number  of  exporting  producers  and  importers  involved  in  this 
investigation,  sampling  was  envisaged  in  the  notice  of  initiation,  in  accordance  with 
Article 17 of the basic Regulation. 

In  order  to  enable  the  Commission  to  decide  whether  sampling  would  be  necessary 
and, if so, to select a sample, exporting producers, importers and representatives acting 
on their behalf were requested to make themselves known and to provide, as specified 
in  the  notice  of  initiation,  basic  information  on  their  activities  related  to  the  product 
concerned  within  15  days  of  the  date  of  publication  of  the  notice  of  initiation.  The 
authorities  of  Pakistan  and  the  association  of  producers/exporters,  which  made  itself 
known,  were  also  consulted  by  the  Commission  on  the  selection  of  the  sample  for 
exporters. 

After examination of the information submitted, it was decided that sampling was only 
necessary  with  regard  to  exporters.  In  total,  110  companies  replied  to  the  sampling 
questionnaire within the time limits and provided the requested information. However, 
11  of  these  companies  neither  produced  nor  exported  the  product  concerned  and 
therefore  could  not  be  considered  as  interested  parties  in  the  investigation. 
Furthermore,  one  company  only  partially  cooperated  as  it  did  not  provide  any 
information  on  production  volumes.  In  total,  98  companies  were  considered  as 
cooperating. 

3 

OJ C 196, 3.8.2004, p. 2. 

EN 

5 

   EN 

 
                                                 
(10)  The sample was selected in accordance with Article 17(1) of the basic Regulation, on 
the  basis  of  the  largest  representative  volume  of  exports  from  Pakistan  into  the 
Community that could reasonably be investigated within the time available. 

(11)  The  Commission  informed  the  Pakistani  authorities  and  the  associations  of 
producers/exporters of its intention to select a sample of eight companies representing 
31%  of  Pakistan’s  exports  to  the  Community.  The  Pakistani  authorities  and  one 
association  of  exporters,  however,  contested  this  proposal  and  asked  to  limit  the 
sample to six companies, i.e. taking the same sample as in the previous investigation. 

(12) 

In  accordance  with  Article 17(1)  of  the  basic  Regulation,  after  this  consultation,  the 
Commission  eventually  decided  that,  in  order  to  reach  the  highest  possible 
representativity  of  the  sample,  it  was  appropriate  to  include  eight  companies  in  the 
sample  since  (i)  this  allowed  to  cover  a  larger  volume  of  exports,  including  from 
companies having also domestic sales; and (ii) it was feasible to investigate these eight 
companies within the time available. 

4. 

Individual examination 

(13)  Requests  for  the  determination  of  an  individual  dumping  margin  were  submitted  by 
22 companies  not  selected  in  the  sample.  However,  in  view  of  the  large  number  of 
requests  and  the  volume  of  information  to  be  examined  (because  of,  inter  alia,  the 
large  number  of  product  types  under  consideration),  it  was  considered  that  such 
individual  examinations  would be unduly burdensome  within  the  meaning  of  Article 
17(3)  of  the  basic  Regulation  and  would  have  prevented  completion  of  the 
investigation  in  good  time.  The  claims  for  determination  of  individual  margins  were 
therefore not considered.  

5. 

Investigation 

(14)  The  Commission  sent  questionnaires  to  the  companies  selected  in  the  sample. 
Questionnaire  replies  were  received  from  all  the  eight  exporting  producers  in  the 
sample. The Commission sought and verified all the information it deemed necessary 
for the purpose of its investigation. However, due to particular security constraints, it 
was decided not to carry out the verification visits at the premises of the companies. 
Instead,  the  verification  of  the  submitted  data  took  place  in  a  third  country,  in  this 
particular case the United Arab Emirates (‘UAE’), by using systems of communication 
with the headquarters of the companies investigated. This allowed receiving, without 
delay  transmission,  of  any  document  requested.  Data  provided  by  the  following 
companies was verified: 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

– 

Gul Ahmed Textile Mills Ltd, Karachi, 

Al-Abid Silk Mills Ltd, Karachi, 

Yunus Textile Mills, Karachi, 

Chenab Limited, Faisalabad, 

Nishat Mills Limited, Faisalabad, 

Fairdeal Textiles (Pvt) Ltd, Karachi, 

EN 

6 

   EN 

 
– 

Lucky Textile Mills, Karachi, 

–  M. Farooq Textile Mills Ltd, Karachi. 

(15)  The Community industry observed that the investigation should have been terminated 
as  no  change  has  taken  place  in  the  security  situation  in  Pakistan.  Therefore,  the 
verification visit in the UAE should not have taken place. In this respect, it should be 
noted that the information provided in the course of these verifications was sufficient 
to  establish  the  level  of  dumping.  However,  the  comments  made  by  the  Community 
industry  have  been  taken  into  account  in  assessing  the  lasting  nature  of  the  changed 
circumstances, as indicated in recital (64) below. 

(16)  The investigation period (‘IP’) covered the period between 1 April 2003 and 31 March 

2004. 

B. 

PRODUCT CONCERNED AND LIKE PRODUCT 

1. 

Product concerned 

(17)  The product under review is the same as in the original investigation, i.e. bed linen of 
cotton fibres, pure or mixed with man-made fibres or flax (flax not being the dominant 
fibre), bleached, dyed or printed, originating in Pakistan, currently classifiable within 
CN codes ex 6302 21 00 (Taric codes 6302 21 00 81, 6302 21 00 89), ex 6302 22 90 
(Taric code 6302 22 90 19), 6302 31 00 (Taric code 6302 31 00 90) and ex 6302 32 90 
(Taric code 6302 32 90 19) (‘the product concerned’). Bed linen includes bed sheets 
(fitted or flat), duvet covers and pillow covers, packaged for sale either separately or in 
sets. 

(18)  The fabrics made of cotton-type fibres used to produce bed linen are identified by two 
pairs  of  numbers.  The  first  one  indicates  the  count  (or  weight)  of  yarns  employed 
respectively  for  the  warp  and  for  the  weft.  The  second  one  indicates  the  number  of 
threads per centimetre or per inch respectively of the warp and of the weft.  

(19)  The fabrics are bleached, dyed or printed. Then they are cut and stitched into different 
size  flat  sheets,  fitted  sheets,  duvet  covers  and  pillow  cases.  The  final  product  is 
packed for sale either separately or in sets. 

(20)  Notwithstanding  the  different  possible  product  types  due  to  different  weaving 
construction,  finish  of  the  fabric,  presentation  and  size,  packing,  etc.,  all  of  them 
constitute one product for the purpose of this review investigation because they have 
the same physical characteristics and essentially the same use. 

(21)  This  definition  was  contested  by  several  cooperating  exporters  which,  however,  did 

not substantiate in any way their claims, which were therefore rejected. 

2. 

Like product 

(22)  As in the original investigation, it was found that the product concerned and the bed 
linen  produced  and  sold  on  the  domestic  market  of  Pakistan  have  the  same  basic 
physical, technical characteristics and uses. They are therefore considered to be alike 
within the meaning of Article 1(4) of the basic Regulation. 

EN 

7 

   EN 

 
(23)  Several  cooperating  exporters  claimed  that  the  product  concerned  and  the  bed  linen 
sold  on  the  domestic  market  of  Pakistan  were  different  products  since  they  did  not 
have the same basic physical, technical characteristics and uses. However, no evidence 
was submitted to support these claims, which were therefore rejected. 

C. 

DUMPING 

1.  Normal value 

(24)  Normal value was calculated according to Article 2 of the basic Regulation. Therefore, 
it was first established for each sampled exporting producer, whether its total domestic 
sales of the like product were representative in comparison with its total export sales 
of  the  product  concerned  to  the  Community.  In  accordance  with  Article  2(2),  first 
sentence, of the basic Regulation, the domestic sales of the like product were found to 
be representative for one of the sampled companies since the domestic sales volume of 
this company exceeded 5% of its total export sales volume to the Community. 

(25) 

In addition to the above exporter with representative domestic sales exceeding 5% of 
its  exports  sales  volume  to  the  Community,  three  other  sampled  exporters  had  some 
domestic  sales  of  the  product  concerned,  which,  however,  only  represented  2,2%, 
0,5% and 0,2% respectively of the sales volume of the product concerned exported to 
the  Community.  After  having  duly  examined  the  characteristics  of  the  domestic 
market  and  of  the  sales  organisation  of  the  companies  in  question,  it  was  finally 
concluded  that  these  sales  were  negligible  and  could  not  be  considered  as 
representative pursuant to Article 2(2) of the basic Regulation. 

(26)  For the exporting producer having overall representative domestic sales, it was further 
examined whether the types of bed linen sold domestically were identical or directly 
comparable  to  the  types  sold  for  export  to  the  Community.  Domestic  sales  of  a 
particular product type were considered as sufficiently representative when the volume 
of that product type sold on the domestic market to independent customers during the 
IP represented 5% or more of the total volume of the identical and directly comparable 
product type sold for export to the Community. 

(27) 

It  was  subsequently  examined  whether  the  domestic  sales  of  the  company  could  be 
considered  as  being  made  in  the  ordinary  course  of  trade.  For  those  product  types 
where  the  weighted  average  price  of  that  type  was  equal  to  or  above  the  cost  of 
production, normal value was established on the basis of the weighted average price 
actually  paid  for  all  domestic  sales  of  that  type,  irrespective  of  whether  these  sales 
were  profitable  or  not.  For  those  product  types  where  the  weighted  average  price  of 
that type was below the cost of production, it was considered that normal value had to 
be constructed in accordance with Article 2(3) of the basic Regulation. 

(28)  The company had contested that its sales were in the ordinary course of trade, claiming 
that remnants sold on the domestic market were not comparable with the products sold 
for export. In the course of the investigation, it was established that the remnants were 
surplus quantities of bed linen produced for export, and as a consequence the products 
sold  domestically  and  for  export  are  comparable.  It  is  therefore  considered  that  the 
company’s domestic sales are representative and being made in the ordinary course of 
trade. 

EN 

8 

   EN 

 
(29)  Normal  value  was  constructed  by  adding  to  the  manufacturing  costs  of  the  exported 
types  a  reasonable  amount  for  selling,  general  and  administrative  expenses  (SG&A) 
and for profit, in accordance with Article 2(6) of the basic Regulation. 

(30) 

In this respect, the company claimed that SG&A and profit should be established on 
the basis of all transactions, as due to the large diversity of the product (the company 
has submitted information regarding more than 500 different product types) it cannot 
reliably  be  established  whether  a  certain  transaction  is  profitable  or  not.  It  is  indeed 
true  that  the  product  concerned  consists  of  a  vast  array  of  types  with  different  sizes, 
designs, colours, fabrics etc. In establishing the cost of manufacturing for the different 
types of the product, the general cost allocation methods used by the company entailed 
a lack of precision which goes clearly beyond the difficulties normally encountered in 
cases with complex products. It was therefore considered that SG&A and profit used 
to construct normal value should be established on the basis of all transactions for all 
domestic sales of the product concerned. 

(31)  The Community industry challenged the approach adopted in respect of this company, 
claiming  that  only  profitable  transactions  should  have  been  used  to  determine  the 
percentage  of  profit  realized  by  the  company  in  the  ordinary  course  of  trade.  This 
claim  was  rejected,  since  for  the  reasons  given  in  recital  (30)  above,  it  cannot  be 
established reliably whether a certain transaction is profitable or not. Moreover, it was 
established that overall the transactions were in the ordinary course of trade. 

(32)  For the other seven sampled exporting producers, normal values had to be constructed 
in  accordance  with  Article  2(3)  of  the  basic  Regulation  since  none  of  them  had 
representative  domestic  sales.  For  all  these  exporters,  therefore,  normal  value  was 
constructed  by  adding  to  the  cost  of  manufacturing  of  each  type  exported  to  the 
Community, corrected where appropriate as further explained in recital (36) below, a 
reasonable amount for SG&A expenses and for profit. The SG&A expenses and profit 
could not be established on the basis of Article 2(6)(a) of the basic Regulation since 
only one company had representative domestic sales. Neither could they be established 
under Article 2(6)(b) as the exporters concerned did not have representative sales, in 
the ordinary course of trade, of the same general category of products.  

(33)  The  SG&A  expenses  and  profit  were  accordingly  determined  in  accordance  with 
Article  2(6)(c)  of  the  basic  Regulation,  on  the  basis  of  the  weighted  average  of  the 
SG&A expenses incurred and profit realised by the sole company with representative 
domestic  sales  and of the two  companies  with  domestic sales representing 2,2% and 
0,2% respectively. In fact, it was considered that the domestic sales of these latter two 
companies,  although  not  representative  for  the  purpose  of  using  domestic  prices  to 
calculate their own normal value, were sufficient to ensure that the related SG&A and 
profit could be considered as reliable for the purpose of applying Article 2(6)(c) of the 
basic  Regulation.  The  SG&A  and  profit  of  the  third  company  having  non-
representative sales on the domestic market, referred to at recital (25) above, were not 
taken into consideration since this company had reported a severe loss on those sales. 

(34)  One company claimed that the Commission should apply Article 2(6)(b) of the basic 
Regulation when determining the SG&A for this company. The company claimed that 
the SG&A for all the products sold on the domestic market by the company should be 
used  since  those  products  are  similar  to  the  product  concerned,  being  of  the  same 
general  category  of  products.  This  claim  was  rejected  since  it  was  found  that  the 

EN 

9 

   EN 

 
products claimed to be of the same general category of products as bed linen, were in 
fact mostly grey cloth, i.e. an intermediary product sold to industrial users and not a 
consumer product as bed linen. 

(35)  The  company  further  argued  that  even  if  Article  2(6)(c)  of  the  basic  Regulation  is 
applied,  at  least  the  SG&A  and  the  profit  of  the  company  itself  should  be  used.  It 
added that the SG&A and profit used for constructing normal value is taken to a great 
extent  from  a  company  with  a  different  structure,  arguably  comparable  with  a 
department store. However, it must be noted the applicant company’s sales consist of 
products which do not even belong to the same general category of products and are 
also  fairly  small  in  volume.  Therefore,  it  is  not  reasonable  to  use  SG&A  and  profit 
established on such inappropriate data. 

(36)  A number of sampled companies had included different items in their SG&A, which 
should have been reported in the cost of  manufacturing. Therefore, these items  were 
re-allocated to the cost of manufacturing. Furthermore, pursuant to Article 2(5) of the 
basic Regulation, costs shall normally be calculated on the basis of records kept by the 
party  under  investigation,  provided  that  such  records  are  in  accordance  with  the 
generally accepted accounting principles of the country concerned and that it is shown 
that the records reasonably reflect the costs associated with the production and sale of 
the  product  under  consideration.  Moreover,  consideration  shall  also  be  given  to 
evidence  submitted  on  the  proper  allocation  of  costs,  provided  that  it  is  shown  that 
such allocations have been historically utilized. For five sampled companies, the cost 
allocation in the replies submitted to the questionnaire had been done ad hoc, for the 
purpose of the investigation and could not be considered as reasonable since they were 
not  in  line  with  the  audited  accounts  of  the  companies.  Adjustments  were  therefore 
made to determine the cost of manufacturing in a way more consistent with the audited 
accounts of the companies in question. 

(37)  For these five companies, the various cost items included in the cost of manufacturing 
were identified. The percentage represented by the product concerned out of the total 
company  turnover  was  determined.  Depending  on  the  information  available  and 
verifiable, this percentage was applied either to the value of each of the cost items or 
to the total costs as reported in the audited accounts for the purpose of establishing the 
manufacturing costs of the product concerned. 

(38)  For  one  company,  the  adjustment  referred  to  in  recital  (37)  above  was  made  to  take 
account  of  the  fact  that  there  was  a  very  significant  difference  between  the  cost 
structure  of  bed  linen  and  that  of  the  other  major  product  sold  by  the  company,  i.e. 
yarns.  The  fact  that  this  company  had  reported  in  the  questionnaire,  in  a  way  which 
could  be  verified,  data  permitting  a  clearer  attribution  of  costs  between  these  two 
categories of products made it possible to refine the allocation based on turnover, so as 
to permit a more appropriate attribution of the production costs. 

(39)  The Community industry challenged the approach adopted in respect of this company, 
claiming  that  the  company  does  not  have  a  historically  used  cost  allocation  system. 
However,  this  claim  was  rejected,  since  the  attribution  of  costs  mentioned  in  recital 
(38)  above  was  not  based  on  the  cost  allocation  provided  by  the  company,  but  on 
verified accounting information prepared by the company on a regular basis. 

EN 

10 

   EN 

 
(40)  For one company, a further adjustment has been made. This company has production 
on  two  different  sites,  but  bed  linen  was  manufactured  at  only  one  of  the  sites. 
Therefore,  it  was  considered  that  the  most  appropriate  approach  was  to  rely  on  data 
related to the site where bed linen is manufactured. 

(41)  Several other companies claimed additional adjustments to the cost allocation made by 
the Community institutions. However, the method of allocating costs on the basis of 
turnover  does  not  allow  the  application  of  a  specific,  different  methodology 
exclusively  limited  to  a  few  cost  items,  unless  it  can  be  shown  that  such  different 
specific  methodology  can  exclusively  be  applied  to  those  few  cost  items.  Since  this 
was not the case and, as indicated in recital (32) above, the information and evidence 
provided by these companies concerning their cost of production was not considered 
reliable, the above referred claims were rejected.  

(42)  For another company, the cost of manufacturing was obtained by deducting from the 
turnover the profit and the SG&A expenses, as established during the verification visit. 

(43)  For the two remaining companies, the cost of manufacturing was found to be generally 
reliable,  but  some  corrections  had  to  be  made  on  the  basis  of  information  collected 
during the verification visit. 

(44)  Some of the exporting producers in the sample claimed that the cost of raw material 
(mainly  grey  cloth)  they  had  reported  in  the  cost  of  manufacturing  already  included 
certain  SG&A  costs.  Since  the  companies  were  not  fully  integrated  companies,  as 
some  of  the  processing  steps  were  outsourced,  they  claimed  that  these  SG&A 
expenses  should  be  deducted  from  the  cost  of  production  in  order  to  avoid  a  double 
counting  of  the  SG&A  expenses.  However,  it  should  be  noted  that  the  normal  value 
had  to  be  constructed  by  using  the  SG&A  and  profit  of  the  sole  company  with 
representative  domestic  sales  and  those  of  the  two  companies  with  domestic  sales 
representing  2,2%  and  0,2%  respectively  and  that  these  three  exporters  were 
purchasing the vast majority of the grey cloth themselves. It should also be noted that 
every purchase of raw material includes some SG&A costs in the price paid, but these 
are costs of the supplier, and not the SG&A of the exporter in question. The claim was 
therefore rejected.  

2. 

Export price 

(45)  Seven  of  the  sampled  exporting  producers  made  all  their  export  sales  to  the 
Community directly to independent customers. In accordance with Article 2(8) of the 
basic  Regulation,  their  export  prices  were  therefore  established  on  the  basis  of  the 
prices actually paid or payable by these independent customers in the Community. 

(46)  The eighth sampled exporting producer had a related importer in the Community. The 
prices  for  these  exports  were  constructed  on  the  basis  of  the  prices  at  which  the 
imported products were first resold to an independent buyer, as set out in Article 2(9) 
of the basic Regulation. 

(47)  However, as requested by a number of companies, export sales of outdated stocks and 
sales  delivered  by  air  freight  (on  a  CIF  or  C&F  basis)  were  excluded  from  the 
dumping  calculations,  as  these  sales  were  not  made  in  the  ordinary  course  of  trade. 
These sales represented a negligible portion (less than 2%) of all export sales reported. 

EN 

11 

   EN 

 
(48)  This  approach  regarding  sales  delivered  by  air  freight  and  outdated  stocks  has  been 
challenged  by  the  Community  industry,  claiming  that  whether  or  not  a  sale  is  in  the 
ordinary  course  of  trade  cannot  be  established  by  the  means  of  conveyance  of  the 
goods and that these sales should be taken into account if they are a relatively common 
occurrence in the sector in question. This claim was rejected because, although most 
companies had sales delivered by air freight and sales of outdated stocks, those sales 
are not a relatively common occurrence in the sector as the volumes delivered by air 
freight and the volumes of outdated stocks are extremely limited as described in recital 
(47) above. 

3.  Comparison 

(49)  For  the  purpose  of  ensuring  a  fair  comparison  between  normal  values  and  export 
prices,  due  allowance  in  the  form  of  adjustments  was  made  for  differences  affecting 
price and price comparability in accordance with Article 2(10) of the basic Regulation. 
Appropriate adjustments concerning import charges and indirect taxes, discounts and 
rebates, 
loading  and  ancillary  costs,  credit, 
commissions,  interest  rates  and  currency  conversions  were  granted  when  reasonable, 
accurate and supported by verified evidence. An adjustment for level of trade was also 
made  in  order  to  reflect  the  fact  that  the  domestic  sales  were  made  directly  to  final 
customers, whereas the exports were made to traders, retailers and distributors. 

insurance,  handling, 

transport, 

(50)  One exporter contested an adjustment for commissions, arguing that the related trader 
which  had  been  found  to  have  functions  similar  to  those  of  an  agent  working  on  a 
commission basis was in reality a mere extension of its own export department and did 
not  carry  out  business  of  its  own.  The  adjustment  was  confirmed  and  the  claim 
rejected,  since  it  was  found  that  the  related  trader  was  indeed  carrying  out  its  own 
sales  activities  (e.g.  the  obtaining  and  managing  of  a  part  of  the  quota  regime)  that 
could not be carried out by the exporter itself and was incurring substantial expenses 
in  doing  so.  Moreover,  the  related  trader  received  a  significant  mark-up  for  its 
activities in relation to sales of the product concerned to the EC, not dissimilar from a 
commission. 

(51)  Several exporters claimed further adjustments for bank charges and credit costs. They 
claimed  that  the  end  users  on  the  domestic  market  commonly  used  credit  cards  as 
payment  form.  However,  for  those  companies  with  domestic  sales  the  investigation 
showed that the sales to end users are on cash basis. This claim was therefore rejected. 

(52)  One  company  claimed  adjustment  for  an  increase  in  the  cotton  prices  during  the  IP. 
However, the increase in cotton prices was due to an increase in world market prices 
and therefore was not an isolated Pakistani phenomenon. The increase in cotton prices 
affected  at  most  3  months  of  the  IP,  while  the  sales  of  the  product  concerned  took 
place  throughout  the  full  IP.  Furthermore,  the  increase  in  prices  was  only  of  a 
temporary character in the sense that the world market prices are volatile, which is a 
normal phenomenon for this type of raw material. Such changes in raw material prices 
must  be  considered  as  a  normal  part  of  the  business  operations.  In  addition,  the 
information  supplied  by  the  company  (cotton  purchase  prices  from  1997  to  2005  in 
PKR) showed a downward trend, with 1997 having seen the highest prices. If there are 
important  fluctuations  of  an  input,  this  could  normally  be  addressed  by  making  a 
monthly  or  quarterly  comparison  of  normal  value  and  export  prices.  However,  that 
was not requested here. This claim was therefore rejected. 

EN 

12 

   EN 

 
(53)  All companies claimed adjustments for duty drawback, pursuant to Article 2(10)(b) of 
the  basic  Regulation.  Claims  for  such  adjustments  were  accepted  in  the  original 
investigation insofar as the amounts claimed were actually borne by the like product 
and by the materials physically incorporated therein, when intended for consumption 
in  the  exporting  country,  and  refunded  in  respect  of  the  product  exported  to  the 
Community. It was found that, in the present investigation, the amounts refunded by 
the Pakistani government exceeded by far the amounts of imports charges or indirect 
taxes  actually  paid  by  the  companies  on  materials  incorporated  in  the  product 
concerned. 

(54)  The sampled exporters argued that the Government of Pakistan had introduced a new 
system  for  the  calculation  of  these  refunds  of  import  duties  paid  by  the  exporting 
producers. This new system uses certain standards for the determination of the amount 
refundable. 

(55)  The new regime was investigated in order to clarify if a direct link between the duty 
paid  by  the  exporting  producers  and  the  material  physically  incorporated  in  the  like 
product  intended  for  consumption  in  the  exporting  country  could  be  established. 
Where the sampled exporters could show that import duties had been reimbursed, the 
Community institutions accepted the claim for an adjustment to normal value, where 
appropriate, in so far as the amounts claimed were actually borne by the like product 
and  by  materials  physically  incorporated  therein,  when  intended  for  consumption  in 
the  exporting  country,  and  refunded  in  respect  of  the  product  exported  to  the 
Community. 

4.  Dumping margins 

(56)  For the sampled exporting producers, individual dumping margins were 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. 

(57)  The  dumping  margins,  expressed  as  a  percentage  of  the  net  free-at-Community-

frontier price, before duty, are: 

Yunus Textile Mills, Karachi 

Lucky Textile Mills, Karachi 

Nishat Mills Limited, Faisalabad 

Chenab Limited, Faisalabad 

Gul Ahmed Textile Mills Ltd, Karachi 

Al-Abid Silk Mills Ltd, Karachi 

Mohammad Farooq Textile Mills Ltd, Karachi 

Fairdeal Textiles (Pvt) Ltd, Karachi 

8,5% 

7,2% 

6,1% 

5,7% 

5,6% 

3,9% 

3,5% 

1,3% 

EN 

13 

   EN 

 
(58) 

In  accordance  with  Article  9(3)  of  the  basic  Regulation,  it  is  concluded  that  the 
dumping  margin  for  Fairdeal  Textiles  (Pvt)  Ltd  is  de  minimis,  as  its  margin  of 
dumping is below 2%. 

(59)  For  the  cooperating  companies  not  selected  in  the  sample,  the  dumping  margin  was 
established  on  the  basis  of  the  weighted  average  dumping  margin  of  the  companies 
selected in the sample, pursuant to Article 9(6) of the basic Regulation. This weighted 
average  dumping  margin,  expressed  as  a  percentage  of  the  net  free-at-Community-
frontier price, before duty, was 5,8%. 

(60)  Several  cooperating  exporters  not  selected  in  the  sample  claimed  that  it  was 
discriminatory not to receive the lowest duty instead of the weighted average duty of 
the sampled companies. It is noted that in this case, eight exporters were selected in 
the  sample  in  accordance  with  the  provisions  of  Article  17  of  the  basic  Regulation. 
The  findings  made  as  based  on  data  supplied  by  these  exporters  are  deemed  to  be 
representative  for  the  bed  linen  industry  in  Pakistan.  In  relation  to  the  duty  to  be 
applied to the non-sampled exporters, it would be contrary to the purpose of sampling 
to apply the lowest duty established for one of the sampled exporters rather than the 
weighted average duty which is clearly more representative of the industry as a whole. 
In any event, Article 9(6) of the basic Regulation requires that the anti-dumping duty 
applicable  to  imports  from  exporters  who  have  made  themselves  known,  but  are  not 
included  in  the  sample,  shall  not  exceed  the  weighted  average  margin  of  dumping 
established  for  the  parties  in  the  sample  and  it  is  the  consistent  practice  of  the 
Community institutions to  apply  the weighted average margin. In light of the above, 
this claim was rejected. 

(61) 

In order to determine the residual dumping margin, the level of cooperation was first 
established.  A  comparison  between  Eurostat  data  concerning  imports  originating  in 
Pakistan  and  sampling  replies  showed  that  the  level  of  cooperation  was  high  (more 
than  80%).  Therefore,  and  since  there  were  no  indications  that  the  remaining 
companies  were  dumping  at  a  lower  level,  it  was  considered  appropriate  to  set  the 
dumping  margin  for  the  remaining  companies,  which  had  not  cooperated  in  the 
investigation,  at  the  level  of  the  highest  dumping  margin  found  for  the  companies 
included in the sample. This approach is in accordance with the standing practice of 
the Community institutions and was also considered necessary in order not to provide 
an  incentive  to  non-cooperation.  Therefore,  the  residual  dumping  margin  was 
calculated at the rate of 8,5%. 

(62)  A number of companies which had been considered as non-cooperating claimed that 
they  had  indeed  sent  the  sampling  return  within  the  time  limits  either  through  their 
respective association or directly to the Commission. These companies were requested 
to provide evidence that the replies indeed had been transmitted within the requested 
deadlines. None of these companies could submit sufficient evidence to support such 
claims which were therefore rejected. 

EN 

14 

   EN 

 
5. 

Lasting nature of the changed circumstances 

(63) 

In the present investigation, the aim of the review was to base the conclusion on the 
findings  of  verified  data,  which  had,  in  principle,  become  possible  following  the 
change in circumstances regarding the security situation. There are no indications that 
the new verified findings would not be of a lasting nature. 

(64)  However,  it  should  be  recalled  that  due  to  some  remaining  security  concerns,  the 
verifications took place in the United Arab Emirates. Despite the efforts made by the 
cooperating  exporting  producers,  a  verification  in  a  third  country  does  not  comply 
with the normal practice as the Commission investigators did not have unlimited direct 
access  to  the  accounting  registers  and  the  accounting  systems  of  the  exporters. 
Therefore,  albeit  the  findings  are  sufficiently  reliable  to  justify  a  modification  in  the 
level  of  the  anti-dumping  duties,  on  its  own  initiative  or  at  the  request  of  interested 
parties  the  Community  institutions  might  carry  out  a  review  of  the  modified  anti-
dumping  duties  should  available  information  sources  point  out  to  a  change  or 
otherwise inaccuracy of the findings verified in the third country.  

6.  Conclusion 

(65) 

In  view  of  the  above,  the  present  anti-dumping  measures  on  imports  of  the  product 
concerned  originating  in  Pakistan  should  be  amended  to  reflect  the  new  dumping 
margins found. 

(66)  According  to  Article  9(4)  of  the  basic  Regulation,  the  duties  should  not  exceed  the 
margin of dumping established but it should be less than the margin if such lesser duty 
would  be  adequate  to  remove  the  injury  of  the  Community  industry.  Given  the  fact 
that the present interim review is limited to the examination of the dumping aspects, 
the  level  of  duties  imposed  should  not  be  higher  than  the  injury  levels  found  in  the 
original investigation. 

(67)  As  mentioned  in  recital  (134)  of  the  definitive  Regulation,  the  original  dumping 
margin was lower than the injury elimination level definitely determined and therefore 
the  definitive  anti-dumping  duty  was  based  on  the  lower  dumping  margin,  namely 
13,1%. Since the dumping margins found in the present interim review are still lower 
than  the  injury  margin,  the  amended  anti-dumping  duties  should  be  based  on  these 
lower dumping margins. 

(68)  Therefore,  the  level  of  duties  should  be  set  at  that  of  the  dumping  margins  found, 
except for one company, for which a de minimis dumping margin has been found as 
outlined in recital (58) above: 

a) For the exporters in the sample: 

Yunus Textile Mills, Karachi 

Lucky Textile Mills, Karachi 

Nishat Mills Limited, Faisalabad 

Chenab Limited, Faisalabad 

8,5% 

7,2% 

6,1% 

5,7% 

EN 

15 

   EN 

 
 
a) For the exporters in the sample: 

Gul Ahmed Textile Mills Ltd, Karachi 

Al-Abid Silk Mills Ltd, Karachi 

Mohammad Farooq Textile Mills Ltd, Karachi 

Fairdeal Textiles (Pvt) Ltd, Karachi 

b) For the cooperating exporters not included in 
the sample 

c) For all other companies 

5,6% 

3,9% 

3,5% 

0% 

5,8% 

8,5% 

(69)  All parties concerned were informed of the essential facts on the basis of which it was 
intended  to  recommend  the  amendment  of  the  existing  measures  and  were  given  an 
opportunity to comment. Comments were received and taken into consideration where 
appropriate. All parties concerned were also granted a period to make representations 
subsequent to disclosure.  

(70) 

In  order  to  ensure  equal  treatment  between  any  new  exporters  and  the  cooperating 
companies not included in the sample, mentioned in the Annex of this Regulation, it is 
considered that provision should be made for the weighted average duty imposed on 
the  latter  companies  to  be  applied  to  any  new  exporters  which  would  otherwise  be 
entitled to a review pursuant to Article 11(4). 

(71)  One Pakistani exporting producer submitted an offer for a price undertaking. However, 
bed  linen  is  characterised  by  hundreds  of  different  product  types,  with  some 
characteristics  not  easily  discernible  upon  importation.  This  makes  it  virtually 
impossible  to  establish  meaningful  minimum  import  price  for  each  product  type, 
which could be properly monitored by the Commission and controlled by the customs 
authorities of the Member States. Under these circumstances, it was considered that a 
price undertaking was impracticable and could not be accepted. 

D. 

DURATION OF THE MEASURES 

(72)  The  review  carried  out  does  not  affect  the  date  on  which  Regulation  (EC) 

No 397/2004 will expire pursuant to Article 11(2) of the basic Regulation, 

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION: 

Article 1 

In Council Regulation (EC) No 397/2004, Article 1(2) shall be replaced by the following: 

The rate of the definitive anti-dumping duty applicable to the net, free-at-Community-frontier 
price, before duty, of products manufactured by the following companies shall be: 

EN 

16 

   EN 

 
 
Manufacturer 

Yunus Textile Mills 
H-23/1, Landhi Industrial Area, 
Karachi 
Lucky Textile Mills 
L-8, Block 21, F. B Area, 
Karachi 
Nishat Mills Limited 
Nishatabad, 
Faisalabad 
Chenab Limited 
Nishatabad, 
Faisalabad 
Gul Ahmed Textile Mills Ltd 
Plot No. HT/3A, Landhi Industrial Area, 
Landhi, 
Karachi 
Al-Abid Silk Mills Ltd 
A-39, S.I.T.E., Manghopir Road, 
Karachi 
Mohammad Farooq Textile Mills Ltd 
1st floor, Finlay House, I.I Chundrigar Road, 
Karachi 
Fairdeal Textiles (Pvt) Ltd 
A/15-D, Binoria Chowk, S.I.T.E., 
Karachi 

Manufacturers listed in the Annex 

All other companies 

Article 2 

Rate of duty 
% 

TARIC 
additional 
code 

8,5 

7,2 

6,1 

5,7 

5,6 

3,9 

3,5 

0 

5,8 

8,5 

A698 

A699 

A700 

A701 

A702 

A704 

A703 

A705 

A706 

A999 

The  Annex  to  this  Regulation  shall  be  added  as  Annex  1  to  Council  Regulation  (EC) 
No 397/2004. 

Article 3 

This Article shall be added as Article 1(4) in Council Regulation (EC) No 397/2004: 

Where any new exporting producer provides sufficient evidence to the Commission that: 

– 

– 

EN 

it did not export to the Community the product described in Article 1(1) of Council 
Regulation  (EC)  No  397/2004  in  the  period  between  1  April  2003  and  31 March 
2004,  

it is not related to any of the exporters or producers subject to the measures imposed 
by this Regulation and 

17 

   EN 

 
– 

it  has  actually  exported  to  the  Community  the  product  concerned  after  the 
investigation  period  on  which  the  measures  are  based,  or  it  has  entered  into  an 
irrevocable contractual obligation to export a significant quantity to the Community,  

the  Council,  acting  by  simple  majority  on  a  proposal  submitted  by  the  Commission  after 
consulting  the  Advisory  Committee,  may  amend  Article  1(2)  by  adding  the  new  exporting 
producer to the companies subject to the weighted average duty rate of 5,8%. 

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

Article 4 

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

Done at Brussels, 

For the Council 
The President 

EN 

18 

   EN 

 
 
 
List of the cooperating manufacturers referred to in Article 1(2) under TARIC additional code 
A706: 

ANNEX  

Name 
A.B. Exports (PVT) LTD. 

A.S.T. (PVT) Limited 

Abdur Rahman Corporation (Pvt) Ltd 

Adil Waheed Garments 

Afroze Textile Industries (Pvt) Ltd. 

Al Musawar Textile (PVT) LTD 

Al-Karam Textile Mills (PVT) LTD 

Al-Latif 

Al-Noor Processing & Textile Mills 

Al-Raheem Textile 

Ameer Enterprises 

Amsons Textile Mills (PVT) LTD. 

Amtex (Private) Limited 

Anjum Textile Mills (PVT) LTD 

Apex Corporation 

Arshad Corporation 

Arzoo Textile Mills Ltd. 

Asia Textile Mills 

Aziz Sons 

Address 
Off. No 6, Ground Floor, 
Business Center, New Civil Lines, 
Faisalabad 
Saba Square 2-C, Saba Commercial Street No. 3,
Phase V Extension, D.H. Authority, 
Karachi 

P-214 Muslim Town #1, 
Sarghoda Road, 
Faisalabad 
66-Zubair Colony, Jaranwala Road, 
Faisalabad 
LA 7/1-7, Block 22 F.B Area, 
Karachi 
Atlas Street, Maqbool Road, 
Faisalabad 
3rd floor, K.D.L.B. Building, 
58-West Wharf Road, 
Karachi 
W,S, 24, Block-2, Azizabad, F.B. Area, 
Karachi-75950 
Sargodha Road, 
Near Bava Chak, 
Faisalabad 
F/40, Block-6, P.E.C.H.S., 
Karachi 
3rd floor, Bismillah Centre, St. No. 2, 
Karkhana Bazar, Yanr Market, 
Faisalabad 
D-14/B, S.I.T.E., 
Karachi 
1-Km, Khurrianwala-Jaranwala Road, 
Faisalabad  
Anjum Street, Nalka Kohala, Sarghoda Road, 
Faisalabad 
1-19, Arkay Square, 
P.O. Box 13373, 
Karachi 
1088/2, Jail Road 
Faisalabad 38000 
2.6 KM, Jaranwala Road, Khurrinwala, 
Faisalabad 
D-156, S.I.T.E. Avenue, 
Karachi 
D21/Karach, S.I.T.E., 
Karachi-75700 

EN 

19 

   EN 

 
Name 
B.I.L. Exporters 

Baak Industries  

Be Be Jan Pakistan Limited 

Bela Textiles Ltd 

Bismillah Fabrics (PVT) LTD. 

Bismillah Textiles (PVT) LTD. 

Classic Enterprises 

Cotton Arts (PVT) Ltd 

D.L. Nash (Private) Ltd. 

Dawood Exports PVT LTD. 

Decent Textiles 

En Em Fabrics (Pvt) Ltd. 

En Em Industries Ltd. 

Enn Eff Exports 

Faisal Industries 

Fashion Knit Industries 

Fateh Textile Mills Limited 

Gerpak Textile (PVT) LTD 

Gohar Textile mills 

H.A. Industries (PVT) LTD 

Haroon Fabrics (Private) Limited 

Hay's (PVT) Limited 

Homecare Textiles  

Address 
15/5, Sector 12/C, North Karachi Industrial Area,
Karachi 
P-107, Akbarabad, Near Allied Hospital, 
Faisalabad 
Square No. 7, Chak No. 204/R.B., 
Faisalabad 
A-29/A, S.I.T.E., 
Karachi 
3 Km, Jhumbra Road, Khurrianwala, 
Faisalabad 
1. KM, Jaranwala Road, Khurrianwala, 
Faisalabad 
B-1/1, Sector 15, Korangi Industrial Area, 
Karachi 
613/1, Dagrawaan Road, 
Faisalabad 
11, Timber Pond, Keamari Road, 
Karachi-75620 
P.O. Box 532, Sarghoda Road, 
Faisalabad 
P-1271, Abdullahpur, West Canal Road, 
Faisalabad 
10th Km, Sarghoda Road, 
Faisalabad 

10th Km, Sargodha Road, 
Faisalabad 
4th floor, Business Centre, New Civil Lines, 
Faisalabad 
Office 205, Madina City Mall, 
Abdullah Haroon Road, Saddar, 
Karachi 
5-Business Centre, Ground Floor, 
Mumtaz Hassan Road, 
Karachi 
P.O. Box No 69, Hali Road, S.I.T.E., 
Hyderabad 
317 Clifton Centre, Schon Circle, 
Kehkashan Clifton, 
Karachi 
208 Chak Road, Zia Town, 
Faisalabad 

10 KM, Jaranwala Road, 
Faisalabad 
P-121, Rafique Colony, Jail Road, 
Faisalabad 
A-33, (C), Textile Avenue, S.I.T.E., 
Karachi-75700 
D-115, S.I.T.E., 
Karachi 

EN 

20 

   EN 

 
Name 
Husein Industries Ltd. 

Ideal International 

Jaquard Weavers 

Kam International 

Kamal Spinning Mills 

Kausar Processing Industries (PVT) Ltd. 

Kausar Textile Industries (PVT) LTD. 

Khizra Textiles International 

Kohinoor Textile Mills Limited 

Latif International (PVT) LTD 

Liberty Mills Limited 

M/s M.K. SONS Pvt Limited 

M/S Al-Ghani International  

M/S Home Furnishings Limited  

MSC Textiles (PVT) Ltd 

Mughanum (PVT) LTD. 

Address 
HT-8 Landhi Industrial & Trading Estate, 
Landhi, 
Karachi 
A-63/A, SIND Industrial Trading Estate, 
Karachi-75700 
811 Mahmoodabad Colony, 
Multan 
F-152, S.I.T.E., 
Karachi 
4th KM, Jranwala Road, Khurrianwala, 
Faisalabad 
P-61 Gole Chiniot Bazar, 
Faisalabad 
Maqbool Road, 
Faisalabad 
P-68, First Floor, Tawakal Cloth Market, 
Gol Chiniot Bazar, 
Faisalabad-38000 

Peshawar Road, 
Rawalpindi 
St. No. 1, Abdullahpur, 
Faisalabad 
A/51-A, S.I.T.E., 
Karachi 
2 KM, Khurrianwala, Jarranwala Road, 
Faisalabad 
202 Bhaiwala, Ghona Road, 
Faisalabad 
Plot No 1,2,10,11, Sector IX-B., 
Karachi Export Processing Zone, 
Karachi 
P-19, 1st floor, Montgomery Bazar, 
Faisalabad 
P-162, Circular Road, 
Faisalabad 

Mustaqim Dyeing & Printing Industries (Pvt) Ltd.  D-14/A, Bada Board, S.I.T.E., 

Naseem Fabrics 

Nawaz Associates 

Nazir Industries 

Niagara Mills (PVT) LTD 

Nina Industries Limited 

Karachi 
Suite #404, 4th floor, Faisalcomplex, 
Bilal Road, Civil Lines, 
Faisalabad 
87 D/1 Main Boulevard Gulberg III, 
Lahore 
Suit 3, 7th floor, Textile Plaza, 
M.A. Jinnah Road, 
Karachi-74000 
Kashmir Road, Nishatabad, 
Faisalabad 
A-29/A, S.I.T.E., 
Karachi 

EN 

21 

   EN 

 
Name 
Nishitex Enterprises 

Parsons Industries (PVT) LTD 

Popular Fabrics (PVT) Limited 

Rainbow Industries 

Rehman International 

Sadaqat Textile Mills Pvt Ltd 

Sadiq Siddique Co. 

Sakina Exports International 

Samira Fabrics (PVT) Ltd 

Sapphire Textile Mills Limited 

Shahzad Siddique (PVT) LTD. 

Shalimar Cotton Export (PVT) LTD 

Sharif Textiles Industries (PVT) LTD 

Shercotex 

Sitara Textile Industries Limited 

South Asian Textile Inds. 

Sweety Textiles Pvt Ltd 

Tex-Arts 

The Crescent Textile Mills Ltd. 

Towellers Limited 

Union Exports (PVT) Limited 

United Finishing Mills Ltd. 

United Textile Printing Industries (Pvt) Ltd. 

Address 
P-224, Tikka Gali No 2, Y.Y. Plaza., 
1st floor, Montgomery Bazar, 
Faisalabad 
E-53 S.I.T.E., 
Karachi 
Plot 115, Landhi Industrial Area, 
Karachi 
810/A, Khanewal Road, 
Multan 
P-2, Al Rehman House, 
Ghulam Rasool Nagar Main Road, 
Sarfraz Colony, 
Faisalabad 
Sadaqat Street, Sarghoda Road, 
Faisalabad 
170-A, Latif Cloth Market, M.A. Jinnah Road, 
Karachi 
#313, Dada Chambers, M.A. Jinnan Road, 
Karachi-74000 
401-403, Chapal Plaza, Hasrat Mohani Road, 
Karach 
313, 3rd floor, Cotton exchange Bldg. I.I., 
Chundrigar Road, 
Karachi 
4,5 KM, Khurrainwala Jaranwala Road, 
Faisalabad 
Yousaf Chowk, Sarghoda Road, 
Faisalabad 
P.O. Box 265, Satiana Road, 
Faisalabad 
39/c, Peoples Colony, 
Faisalabad 
6- K.M., Sargodha Road, 
Faisalabad 
St. No. 3, Hamedabad Colony, Vehari Road, 
Multan 
P-237, 2nd floor, Hassan Arcade 
Montgomery Bazar, 
Faisalabad 

P-22, 1st floor, Montgomery Bazar, 
Faisalabad 
Sargodha Road, 
Faisalabad 
WSA 30-31, Block 1, Federal B, 
Karachi 
D-204/A, S.I.T.E., 
Karachi-75700 
2nd floor, Regency Arcade, The Mall, 
Faisalabad  
P.O. Box 194, Maqbool Road, 
Faisalabad 

EN 

22 

   EN 

 
Name 
Wintex Exports PVT Ltd. 

Zafar Fabrics (PVT) Limited  

Zamzam Weaving and Processing Mills 

Address 
P-17/A, Main Road, Sarfaraz Colony, 
Faisalabad 
Chak No 119, J.B. (Samana), Sarghoda Road, 
Faisalabad 
Bazar 1, Razabad, 
Faisalabad 

EN 

23 

   EN