natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
In Commission Decision 2003/382/EC (the competition Decision) [6], several Community producers were fined for involvement in two cases of infringement of Article 81(1) of the EC Treaty.
Z Odločbo Komisije 2003/382/ES [6] („Odločba o konkurenci“), je bilo več proizvajalcev iz Skupnosti zaradi vpletenosti v dva primera kršitev člena 81(1) Pogodbe ES kaznovanih z denarno kaznijo.
Following the adoption of the competition Decision, it was initially considered that the potential link with Regulation (EC) No 2320/97, if any, was not such as to require a re-examination of the findings of that Regulation.
Po sprejetju Odločbe o konkurenci je sprva veljalo, da morebitna povezava z Uredbo Sveta (ES) št. 2320/97, če je sploh obstajala, ni bila takšna, da bi bilo treba predvideti ponovno preučitev ugotovitev te uredbe.
However, following the publication of the competition Decision, one of the interested parties has raised the issue of a possible impact of the anti-competitive conduct on the anti-dumping measures in force, and has provided further information regarding issues related to the injury and causation findings of Regulation (EC) No 2320/97.
Vendar pa je po objavi Odločbe o konkurenci ena od zainteresiranih strank sprožila vprašanje možnega učinka protikonkurenčnega ravnanja na veljavne protidampinške ukrepe in predložila dodatne informacije glede vprašanj v zvezi z ugotovitvami Uredbe (ES) št. 2320/97 o škodi in povzročitvi škode.
This Regulation aims at examining whether the competition Decision should have any consequences for the anti-dumping measures currently in force.
Namen te uredbe je preučitev morebitnih posledic Odločbe o konkurenci za trenutno veljavne protidampinške ukrepe.
Product concerned by the competition Decision
Zadevni proizvod, ki je predmet Odločbe o konkurenci
The products concerned by the competition Decision are seamless carbon-steel pipes and tubes, in particular those used by the oil and gas industry.
Proizvodi iz Odločbe o konkurenci, so brezšivne cevi iz ogljikovega jekla, zlasti tisti, ki se uporabljajo v naftni in plinski industriji.
They include two major categories, i.e. project line pipes for carrying oil and gas over medium and short distances (LP) on the one hand and borehole pipes and tubes, commonly called oil country tubular goods (OCTG pipes and tubes) on the other hand.
Delijo se na dve skupini, in sicer na cevi za cevovode (line pipes) za prenos nafte in plina na srednje in kratke razdalje („LP“) in na vrtalne cevi, znane kot cevi OCTG (oil country tubular goods).
Whereas LP are classifiable within CN code ex730410 the OCTG pipes and tubes are classifiable within CN code 730421.
Cevi tipa LP so uvrščene pod oznako KN ex730410, cevi tipa OCTG pa pod oznako KN 730421.
The product scope of the anti-dumping investigation is wider than the products concerned by the competition Decision.
Število proizvodov, ki so predmet protidampinške preiskave, zajema več proizvodov, kot jih obravnava Odločba o konkurenci.
However, a comparison shows that product categories falling under CN code ex73041010 and CN code ex73041030, i.e. line pipe of a kind used for oil or gas pipelines of an external diameter not exceeding 406,4 mm, appear to be affected by both the anti-dumping investigation and the competition infringement, even if this is only for a limited part of the Community market of the product concerned.
Primerjava pa je pokazala, da so skupine proizvodov, ki sodijo pod oznaki KN ex73041010 in ex73041030, to so cevi za plinovode in naftovode z zunanjim premerom do vključno 406,4 mm, predmet protidampinške preiskave in kršitve konkurence, čeprav gre le za omejen del trga Skupnosti, kjer se zadevni proizvod pojavlja.
Producers concerned
Zadevni proizvajalci
In the anti-dumping investigation 10 Community producers cooperated, representing more than 90 % of the total Community production of the product subject to investigation.
V protidampinški preiskavi je sodelovalo deset proizvajalcev iz Skupnosti, ki v njej pokrivajo več kot 90 % skupne proizvodnje proizvoda, ki je predmet preiskave.
Three out of the 10 companies were also involved in the infringement of Article 81(1) of the EC Treaty.
Tri od desetih podjetij so bila tudi vpletena v kršitev določb člena 81(1) Pogodbe ES.
Infringement during investigation period and period considered
Kršitve v času preiskave in zadevno obdobje
The period for the examination of dumping and injury lasted from 1 September 1995 to 31 August 1996 (investigation period) whereas the examination of trends relevant for the injury assessment in the anti-dumping investigation covered the period from January 1992 to the end of the investigation period, i.e. 31 August 1996 (period considered).
Obdobje, v katerem se je izvajala preiskava v zvezi z dampingom in kršitvami, je trajalo od 1. septembra 1995 do 31. avgusta 1996 („obdobje preiskave“), obravnavanje trendov, ki so pomembni za presojo kršitev v protidampinški preiskavi, pa se je izvajalo od januarja leta 1992 do zaključka obdobja preiskave, 31. avgusta 1996 („zadevno obdobje“).
Two infringements have taken place within the investigation period and the period considered:
Med obdobjem preiskave in zadevnim obdobjem je prišlo do dveh kršitev:
in the EU-Japan cartel, the producers concerned have infringed Article 81(1) of the EC Treaty by participating, together with other producers, in an agreement providing, inter alia, for the observance of their respective domestic markets for seamless standard threaded OCTG pipes and tubes and LP.
V kartelu EU-Japonska so zadevni proizvajalci kršili člen 81(1) Pogodbe ES, saj so skupaj z drugimi proizvajalci sodelovali v dogovoru, ki jim je med drugim omogočil upoštevanje njihovih domačih trgov standardnih brezšivnih navojnih cevi tipa OCTG in LP.
The infringement lasted from 1990 to 1995, although it could not be clearly proven when in 1995 the operations actually stopped;
Kršitev je trajala od 1990 do 1995, čeprav ni bilo mogoče jasno dokazati, kdaj je leta 1995 tovrstno poslovanje prenehalo.
in a parallel European cartel the producers infringed Article 81(1) of the EC Treaty by concluding, in the context of the anti-competitive conduct mentioned under (a), contracts which resulted in a sharing of the supplies of plain end OCTG pipes and tubes.
V vzporednem evropskem kartelu so proizvajalci kršili določbe člena 81(1) Pogodbe ES, saj so v smislu protikonkurenčnega ravnanja, omenjenega v točki (a), sklepali pogodbe, v skladu s katerimi so skupaj uporabljali zaloge cevi tipa OCTG brez navojev.
The infringement lasted from 1991 to 1999 and from 1993 to 1997 for one of the producers concerned in the anti-dumping investigation.
Pri enem od zadevnih proizvajalcev, ki je bil obravnavan med protidampinško preiskavo, je kršitev trajala od 1991 do 1999 in od 1993 do 1997.
The infringement mentioned under recital 15(b) does not directly affect the anti-dumping investigation since the product concerned falls under CN code 730421, i.e. outside the scope of the anti-dumping investigation.
Kršitev, omenjena v uvodni navedbi 15(b), neposredno ne vpliva na protidampinško preiskavo, ker zadevni proizvod sodi pod oznako KN 730421, ki pa ni predmet protidampinške preiskave.
With regard to the infringement mentioned under recital 15(a) the overlap in time between the investigation period of the anti-dumping proceeding and the operation of the EU-Japan cartel runs from 1 September 1995 until 31 December 1995.
Upoštevajoč kršitev, omenjeno v uvodni navedbi 15(a), je obdobje protidampinške preiskave sovpadalo z obdobjem poslovanja kartela EU–Japonska, in sicer od 1. septembra 1995 do 31. decembra 1995.
With regard to the period considered, the overlap is from January 1992 to 31 December 1995.
Upoštevajoč zadevno obdobje sta obdobji sovpadali od januarja 1992 do 31. decembra 1995.
As stated above, there is a partial overlap between the anti-dumping proceeding and the occurrence of the anti-competitive conduct.
Kot je navedeno zgoraj, je prihajalo do delnega prekrivanja med protidampinškim postopkom in pojavom protikonkurenčnega ravnanja.
The product subject to the anti-competitive conduct falls partially within the product scope of the anti-dumping investigation (recital 12).
Proizvod, ki je predmet protikonkurenčnega ravnanja, delno sodi med proizvode, ki so bili predmet protidampinške preiskave (uvodna navedba 12).
The investigation period and the period considered of the anti-dumping proceeding and the period for which the infringement of the competition rules was found, overlap partly (recital 17).
Obdobje preiskave in zadevno obdobje protidampinškega postopka ter obdobje, za katero je bilo ugotovljena kršitev predpisov o konkurenci, delno sovpadajo (uvodna navedba 17).
Finally, a part of the Community producers involved in the anti-competitive conduct were also part of the Community industry as defined in the anti-dumping proceeding (recital 13).
Nekateri proizvajalci iz Skupnosti, ki so bili vpleteni v protikonkurenčno ravnanje, so bili tudi del industrije Skupnosti, kot je bilo ugotovljeno v okviru protidampinškega postopka (uvodna navedba 13).
Given that the overlap in the product scope, the companies involved and the time period of the two proceedings is only partial, it has been found that the impact of this anti-competitive conduct has affected, to a limited extent, the anti-dumping investigation on which the definitive duties imposed in 1997 were based.
Glede na to, da proizvodi, vpletena podjetja in obdobji obeh postopkov sovpadajo le delno, je bilo ugotovljeno, da je imelo to protikonkurenčno ravnanje omejen vpliv na protidampinško preiskavo, na kateri so temeljile dokončne dajatve, uvedene leta 1997.
In addition, when excluding the data of the companies found to have infringed Article 81(1) of the EC Treaty, the results appear to remain comparable to those calculated on the basis of the data of the ten cooperating Community producers, including those participating in the abovementioned anti-competitive conduct, i.e. injurious dumping would still exist.
Poleg tega ob neupoštevanju podatkov o podjetjih, ki so kršila določbe člena 81(1) Pogodbe ES, rezultati ostajajo primerljivi s tistimi, ki so bili izračunani na podlagi podatkov o desetih sodelujočih proizvajalcih iz Skupnosti, vključno s tistimi, ki so sodelovali v zgoraj omenjenem protikonkurenčnem ravnanju, t.j. škodljivi damping je vedno obstajal.
Thus, it is highly unlikely that the anti-competitive behaviour of the Community producers has had a material impact on the original findings of the anti-dumping investigation.
Zato je skrajno neverjetno, da je protikonkurenčno ravnanje proizvajalcev iz Skupnosti znatno vplivalo na prvotne ugotovitve protidampinške preiskave.
However, it cannot be confirmed with certainty that the overall market conditions would have been the same in the absence of this anti-competitive conduct.
Ni pa mogoče z gotovostjo potrditi, da bi bili splošni pogoji na trgu enaki ob odsotnosti tega protikonkurenčnega ravnanja.
In view of the above, it is considered appropriate to no longer apply the measures established by Regulation (EC) No 2320/97.
Glede na zgoraj omenjeno je smiselno ukiniti izvajanje ukrepov, ki jih določa Uredba Sveta (ES) št. 2320/97.
This is in line with the principles of sound administration and good administrative practice.
To je v skladu z načeli dobrega upravljanja in dobre upravne prakse.
Furthermore, it is to be noted that in the context of the ongoing interim and expiry reviews new findings should be available within the near future to permit an assessment for the future on the basis of data clearly not affected by the anti-competitive conduct.
Prav tako je treba omeniti, da bi glede na tekoče začasne preglede in preglede pred morebitno ukinitvijo protidampinških ukrepov morale biti v prihodnosti na voljo nove ugotovitve, ki bi omogočile oblikovanje ocen za prihodnost na podlagi podatkov, za katere je jasno, da niso bili pod vplivom protikonkurenčnega ravnanja.
Until the ongoing reviews are concluded, the duties should no longer be collected.
Do zaključka tekočih pregledov bi bilo treba prekiniti pobiranje dajatev.
It also follows from the above that undertakings currently in force are no longer applied pending the outcome of the ongoing reviews.
Iz zgoraj omenjenega tudi sledi, da se trenutno veljavne zaveze ne upoštevajo do zaključka tekočih pregledov pred morebitno ukinitvijo protidampinških ukrepov in vmesnih pregledov.
Interested parties have been informed of the intention to no longer apply the measures established by Regulation (EC) No 2320/97.
Zainteresirane stranke so bile obveščene o nameri, da se ne uporabljajo ukrepi, določeni z Uredbo Sveta (ES) št. 2320/97.
They were also granted a period within which they could make representations subsequent to this disclosure.
Po tem obvestilu jim je bil dan tudi rok za podajo stališč.
The oral and written arguments submitted by the parties were considered and, where appropriate, were taken into account,
Argumenti, ki so jih stranke podale ustno in pisno, so bili obravnavani in, če so bili ustrezni, tudi upoštevani –
In Regulation (EC) No 2320/97, the following Article shall be added:
Uredbi (ES) št. 2320/97 se doda naslednji člen:
Articles 1, 2 and 3 shall not be applied as from 21 July 2004’
Členi 1, 2 in 3 se prenehajo uporabljati od 21. julija 2004.“
OJ L 322, 25.11.1997, p. 1 Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 235/2004 (OJ L 40, 12.2.2004, p. 11).
UL L 322, 25.11.1997, str. 1. Uredba, nazadnje spremenjena z Uredbo (ES) št. 235/2004 (UL L 40, 12.2.2004. str. 11).
OJ L 322, 25.11.1997, p. 63.
UL L 322, 25.11.1997, str. 63.
OJ L 23, 28.1.2000, p. 78.
UL L 23, 28.1.2000, str. 78.
OJ C 288, 23.11.2002, p. 2.
UL C 288, 23.11.2002, str. 2.
OJ L 140, 6.6.2003, p. 1.
UL L 140, 6.6.2003, str. 1.
Council Regulation (EC) No 1323/2004
Uredba Sveta (ES) št. 1323/2004
amending Regulation (EC) No 1601/1999 imposing a definitive countervailing duty on imports of stainless steel wire with a diameter of less than 1 mm originating in India
o spremembah Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 1601/1999 o uvedbi dokončne izravnalne dajatve na uvoz žice iz nerjavnega jekla premera manj kot 1 mm s poreklom iz Indije
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] (‘the basic Regulation’), and in particular Article 20 thereof,
ob upoštevanju Uredbe Sveta (ES) št. 2026/97 z dne 6. oktobra 1997 o zaščiti pred subvencioniranim uvozom iz držav, ki niso članice Evropske skupnosti [1] (v nadaljnjem besedilu „osnovna uredba“), in zlasti člena 20 Uredbe,
The Council, by Regulation (EC) No 1601/1999 [2], imposed a definitive countervailing duty on imports of stainless steel wire having a diameter of less than 1 mm (‘the product concerned’), falling within CN code ex72230019 and originating in India.
Svet je z Uredbo (ES) št. 1601/1999 [2] uvedel dokončno izravnalno dajatev na uvoz žice iz nerjavnega jekla premera manj kot 1 mm („zadevni izdelek“), ki se uvršča pod oznako KN ex72230019, s poreklom iz Indije.
The measures took the form of an ad valorem duty ranging between 0 % and 42,9 % for individual exporters, with a rate of 44,4 % for non-cooperating exporters.
Ukrepi so bili sprejeti kot dajatev ad valorem v obsegu od 0 % do 42,9 % za posamezne izvoznike, s stopnjo 44,4 % za nesodelujoče izvoznike.
CURRENT PROCEDURE
SEDANJI POSTOPEK
Subsequent to the imposition of definitive measures, the Commission received a request for the initiation of an accelerated review of Regulation (EC) No 1601/1999, pursuant to Article 20 of the basic Regulation, from one Indian producer, VSL Wires Limited (‘the applicant’).
Komisija je po uvedbi dokončnih ukrepov od enega indijskega proizvajalca, VSL Wires Limited („vlagatelj“), prejela zahtevo za uvedbo pospešene revizije Uredbe (ES) št. 1601/1999 na podlagi člena 20 osnovne uredbe.
Furthermore, it claimed that it had not exported the product concerned during the original period of investigation (i.e. from l April 1997 to 31 March 1998), but had exported the product concerned to the Community after that period.
Trdil je tudi, da zadevnega izdelka v Skupnost ni izvažal v prvotnem obdobju preiskave (t. j. od 1. aprila 1997 do 31. marca 1998), pač pa šele po tem obdobju.
After consultation of the Advisory Committee and after the Community industry concerned had been given the opportunity to comment, the Commission initiated, by a notice in the Official Journal of the European Union [3], an accelerated review of Regulation (EC) No 1601/1999 with regard to the company concerned and commenced its investigation.
Po tem ko se je Komisija posvetovala s Svetovalnim odborom in je zadevni gospodarski panogi Skupnosti dala možnost za pripombe, je z objavo v Uradnem listu Evropske unije [3] uvedla pospešeno revizijo Uredbe (ES) št. 1601/1999 v zvezi z zadevno družbo in začela preiskavo.
The product covered by the current review is the same product as that under consideration in Regulation (EC) No 1601/1999, namely stainless steel wire having a diameter of less than 1 mm, containing by weight 2,5 % or more of nickel, excluding wire containing by weight 28 % or more but no more than 31 % of nickel and 20 % or more but no more than 22 % of chromium.
Izdelek, ki je predmet sedanje revizije, je isti izdelek, kot ga obravnava Uredba (ES) št. 1601/1999, in sicer žica iz nerjavnega jekla premera manj kot 1 mm, ki vsebuje 2,5 mas. % ali več niklja, razen žice, ki vsebuje 28 mas. % ali več, vendar največ 31 mas. % niklja in 20 mas. % ali več, vendar največ 22 mas. % kroma.
Investigation Period
Obdobje preiskave
The investigation of subsidisation covered the period from 1 April 2002 to 31 March 2003 (‘the review investigation period’).
Preiskava subvencioniranja je zajela obdobje od 1. aprila 2002 do 31. marca 2003 („obdobje preiskave za revizijo“).
The Commission officially advised the applicant and the Government of India (‘GOI’) of the initiation of the procedure.
Komisija je vlagatelja in indijsko vlado („IV“) uradno obvestila o začetku postopka.
As no request for a review of the findings on injury was made by the applicant, the review was limited to subsidisation.
Ker vlagatelj ni vložil nobene zahteve za revizijo ugotovitev o škodi, se je revizija omejila na vprašanje subvencioniranja.
The investigation confirmed that the applicant had not exported the product concerned during the original investigation period, i.e. from 1 April 1997 to 31 March 1998.
Preiskava je potrdila, da vlagatelj ni izvažal zadevnega izdelka v obdobju prvotne preiskave, tj. od 1. aprila 1997 do 31. marca 1998.
It was established that the applicant had only realised one sale to the Community which actually took place in August 2001, i.e. after the original investigation period but well before the review investigation period.
Ugotovljeno je bilo, da je vlagatelj realiziral samo eno prodajo v Skupnost, kar se je v resnici zgodilo avgusta 2001, t. j. po obdobju prvotne preiskave, vendar veliko pred obdobjem preiskave za revizijo.
In reply to the questionnaire, the applicant identified only one contract that had been signed during the review investigation period, but the on-spot verification confirmed that the sale had never been materialized.
V odgovoru na vprašalnik je vlagatelj navedel samo eno pogodbo, ki je bila podpisana v obdobju preiskave za revizijo, vendar je preverjanje na kraju samem potrdilo, da prodaja ni bila nikoli realizirana.
On the basis of the information contained in the applicant's reply to the Commission's questionnaire, the following schemes were investigated:
Na podlagi informacij, pridobljenih iz odgovora vlagatelja na vprašalnik Komisije, je bilo preiskanih naslednjih pet shem:
Duty Entitlement Passbook Scheme (‘DEPB’)
Shema „Duty Entitlement Passbook“ (DEPB)
The detailed description of the scheme is contained in paragraph 4(3) of the Export and Import Policy (Notification No 1/2002-07 of 31 March 2002 of the Ministry of Commerce and Industry of the Government of India).
Podroben opis sheme je v odstavku 4.3 Izvozne in uvozne politike (Obvestilo št. 1/2002-07 z dne 31. marca 2002 Ministrstva za gospodarstvo in industrijo indijske vlade).
DEPB on post-export basis allows for the use of such credits for any subsequent imports (e.g. raw materials or capital goods) except for goods the importation of which is restricted or prohibited.
Shema DEPB na poizvozni osnovi za uporabo takšnih posojil dovoljuje nadomestitev carin za vsak naslednji uvoz (npr. surovin ali industrijskega blaga), razen za blago, za katerega veljajo uvozne omejitve ali prepovedi.
The DEPB license is valid for a period of 12 months from the date on which the licence is granted.
Dovoljenje DEPB velja 12 mesecev od datuma izdaje.
The scheme is a subsidy contingent in law upon export performance, and it was therefore determined during the original investigation that it is deemed to be specific and countervailable under Article 3(4)(a) of the basic Regulation.
Shema predstavlja subvencijo, v zakonodaji pogojeno z izvozno dejavnostjo, in jo je mogoče pridobiti le z izvažanjem,, in zato je bilo v prvotni preiskavi ugotovljeno, da se v smislu člena 3(4)(a) osnovne uredbe šteje za specifično in se proti njej lahko uvede izravnalni ukrep.
It was established that the applicant transferred all the DEPB credits to its related company Viraj Alloys Ltd. The same practice was also followed by three other related Indian companies of the applicant, i.e. Viraj Forgings Ltd, Viraj Impoexpo Ltd and Viraj Profiles Ltd. The investigation confirmed that Viraj Alloys Ltd is the provider of the raw materials of all the previous mentioned companies and used their transferred DEPB credits to make duty free imports.
Ugotovljeno je bilo, da je vlagatelj vsa posojila DEPB prenesel na svojo povezano družbo Viraj Alloys Ltd. Enake prakse so se držale tudi druge tri povezane indijske družbe vlagatelja, t. j. Viraj Forgings Ltd, Viraj Impoexpo Ltd in Viraj Profiles Ltd. Preiskava je potrdila, da je Viraj Alloys Ltd. dobavitelj surovin za vse prej omenjene družbe in je uporabil njihova prenesena posojila DEPB za dajatev prosti uvoz.
Income Tax Exemption Scheme (‘ITES’)
Shema oprostitve davka na dohodek (ITES)
It was established that the applicant received benefits under this scheme and in particular under Section 80HHC of the Indian Income Act.
Ugotovljeno je bilo, da je vlagatelj imel koristi po tej shemi in zlasti po Oddelku 80HHC indijskega Zakona o davku na dohodek.
Among the exemptions which can be claimed are those covered by Sections 10A (applicable for companies located in Free Trade Zones), 10B (applicable for companies being Export Oriented Units) and 80HHC (applicable for companies which export goods) of the Act.
Med oprostitvami, ki jih družbe lahko zahtevajo, so tiste iz Oddelkov 10A (uporabljajo se za družbe, ki so v conah proste trgovine), 10B (uporabljajo se za družbe, ki so izvozno naravnane enote) in 80HHC (uporabljajo se za družbe, ki izvažajo blago) Zakona.
However, it was found that the ITES under Section 80HHC is gradually being phased out starting from the financial year 2000-2001 until the financial year 2004-2005 when no export profit would be exempted from income tax.
Vendar pa je bilo ugotovljeno, da se ITES po Oddelku 80HHC postopoma odpravlja od finančnega leta 2000–2001 do finančnega leta 2004–2005, ko noben dobiček od izvoza ne bo več oproščen davka na dohodek.
The rate of the income tax, including corporate tax plus surcharge, applicable during this period was 36,75 %.
Stopnja davka na dohodek, vključno z davkom na dohodek pravnih oseb in dodatnimi dajatvami, ki se je uporabljala v tem obdobju, je znašala 36,75 %.