Council Regulation (EC) No 813/2008 of 11 August 2008 amending Regulation (EC) No 74/2004 imposing a definitive countervailing duty on imports of cotton-type bedlinen originating in India
Date: 2008-08-11
Institutions: Council of the European Union
Subjects: India, anti-subsidy proceeding, import, originating product, textile product

L 220/6

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

15.8.2008

COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 813/2008

of 11 August 2008

amending Regulation (EC) No 74/2004 imposing a definitive countervailing duty on imports of
cotton-type bedlinen originating in India

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty
Community,

establishing the European

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 2026/97 of
6 October 1997 on protection against subsidised imports
from countries not members of the European Community (1),

Having regard to Article 2 of Council Regulation (EC) No
74/2004 of 13 January 2004 imposing a definitive counter­
vailing duty on imports of cotton-type bed linen originating
in India (2),

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

Whereas:

A. PREVIOUS PROCEDURE

(1)

By Regulation (EC) No 74/2004 (the original Regulation),
the Council imposed a definitive countervailing duty on
imports into the Community of cotton-type bedlinen
falling within CN codes ex 6302 21 00 (TARIC codes
6302 21 00 81,
ex 6302 22 90
6302 21 00 89),
(TARIC code 6302 22 90 19), ex 6302 31 00 (TARIC
code 6302 31 00 90) and ex 6302 32 90 (TARIC code
6302 32 90 19), originating in India. Given the large
the
number of cooperating exporting producers of
product
Indian
exporting producers was selected in accordance with
Article 27 of Regulation (EC) No 2026/97 (the basic
ranging from
Regulation) and individual duty rates
4,4 % to 10,4 % were imposed on the companies
included in the
cooperating
companies not included in the sample were attributed a
duty rate of 7,6 %. A residual duty rate of 10,4 % was
imposed on all other companies.

sample, while other

concerned in India,

sample of

a

(2)

Article 2 of the original Regulation stipulates that where
any new exporting producer in India provides sufficient

evidence to the Commission that it did not export to the
Community the products described in Article 1(1) of that
Regulation during the investigation period (1 October
2001 to 30 September 2002) (the first criterion), that
it is not related to any of the exporters or producers in
India which are subject
to the anti-subsidy measures
imposed by that Regulation (the second criterion) and
it has actually exported to the Community the
that
products concerned after the investigation period on
which the measures are based, or that it has entered
into an irrevocable contractual obligation to export a
the product concerned to the
significant quantity of
Community (the third criterion),
then Article 1(3) of
that Regulation may be amended by granting the new
exporting producers the duty rate applicable to the coop­
erating companies not included in the sample, i.e. 7,6 %.

The original Regulation has been amended three times,
by Council Regulation (EC) No 2143/2004 (3), Council
Regulation (EC) No 122/2006 (4) and Council Regulation
(EC) No 1840/2006. All three Regulations have added to
the Annex the names of companies exporting the
product concerned, which met the criteria set out in
the original Regulation.

B. NEW EXPORTER/PRODUCER REQUESTS

Twenty Indian companies applied to be granted the same
status as the companies cooperating in the original inves­
tigation not included in the sample (newcomer status)
since the publication of the previous amending Regu­
lation.

(3)

(4)

(5)

The 20 applicants were:

Applicant company

City

K.K.P. Textiles Limited

Tamil Nadu

Kashmiri Lal Tarun Khanna PVT Ltd Amritsar

Premier Polyweaves Private Limited

Coimbatore

Home Fashions International

Kerala

Y.J. Enterprises

KaLaM Designs

Himatsingka Linens

S.K.T. Textile Mills

Mumbai

Ahmedabad

Bangalore

Coimbatore

(1) OJ L 288, 21.10.1997, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Regu­

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

(2) OJ L 12, 17.1.2004, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Regulation

(EC) No 1840/2006 (OJ L 355, 15.12.2006, p. 4).

(3) OJ L 370, 17.12.2004, p. 1.
(4) OJ L 22, 26.1.2006, p. 3.

15.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 220/7

Applicant company

City

Shetty Garments Private Ltd

TAVOY Workwear

Orient Craft Limited

GHCL Limited

Mumbai

Mumbai

Haryana

Gujarat

Indo Count Industries Limited

Mumbai

Vijayeswari Textiles Limited

Coimbatore

Nest Exim

Prakash Textiles

Mumbai

Coimbatore

Prakash Woven Private Limited

Coimbatore

Sotexpa Qualidis Textiles India Private
Ltd

Coimbatore

BKS Textiles Pvt. Ltd

JDA Textiles

Coimbatore

Chennai

Eleven companies did not reply to the questionnaire
intended to verify whether they met the conditions set
out in Article 2 of the original Regulation and their
requests therefore had to be rejected.

The remaining nine companies
questionnaire
replies
considered for newcomer status.

the

to

submitted complete
therefore

and were

The evidence provided by two of the abovementioned
Indian exporting/producers is considered sufficient
to
show that they fulfil the criteria set out in the original
Regulation and therefore to grant them the rate of duty
applicable to the cooperating companies not included in
the sample (i.e. 7,6 %) and consequently to add them to
the list of exporting producers in the Annex to the
original Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC) No
2143/2004, Regulation (EC) No 122/2006 and Regu­
lation (EC) No 1840/2006.

The remaining seven companies had their applications
for new exporting producer
the
following reasons.

rejected for

status

(6)

(7)

(8)

(9)

they had irrevocable
the investigation period or that
contractual obligations to export the product concerned
in significant quantities to the Community. Thus they did
not fulfil the third criterion.

(11) One company failed to provide the sales ledger for the
period considered and was thus unable to show that it
had not exported the product concerned during the
investigation period. Another company was found to
have exported the product concerned during the investi­
gation period. These companies therefore did not fulfil
the first criterion.

(12) One company sent the reply to the questionnaire after
the deadline and crucial documents were missing from
the application. One other company did not reply to a
deficiency letter requesting more information. These two
companies had thus not provided sufficient evidence to
show that they fulfilled the criteria set out in the original
Regulation.

(13)

Finally, one company was found to be related to one that
was named in the original Regulation and its application
for newcomer status was therefore rejected as it failed the
second criterion.

(14)

Companies for which newcomer status was not granted
were informed of the reasons for this decision and given
an opportunity to make their views known in writing.

(15) All arguments and submissions made by interested
parties were analysed and duly taken into account
where warranted,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The following companies shall be added to the list of producers
from India listed in the Annex to Regulation (EC) No 74/2004:

Company

City

Home Fashions International

GHCL Ltd

Kerala

Gujarat

Article 2

(10)

Two companies failed to provide evidence that they had
exported the product concerned to the Community after

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

L 220/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

15.8.2008

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

Done at Brussels, 11 August 2008.

For the Council
The President

B. KOUCHNER