natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Following the publication of a notice of impending expiry [3] of the definitive measures in force, the Commission received a request for the initiation of a combined expiry and interim review of Regulation (EC) No 2164/98 pursuant to Articles 18(2) and 19(2) of the basic Regulation, from related Community producers of the like product, Sandoz GmbH, Austria, and Sandoz Industrial Products SA, Spain, (the applicants).
Po objavi obvestila o bližnjem izteku [3] veljavnih dokončnih ukrepov, sta povezana proizvajalca podobnega izdelka, Sandoz GmbH, Avstrija, in Sandoz Industrial Products S.A., Španija, („vlagatelja“) Komisiji poslala zahtevo za začetek skupnega pregleda zaradi izteka ukrepa in vmesnega pregleda Uredbe (ES) št. 2164/98 v skladu s členoma 18(2) in 19(2) osnovne uredbe.
The applicants represent a major proportion, in this case over 40 %, of the total Community production of certain broad spectrum antibiotics.
Vlagatelja predstavljata večji delež, v tem primeru čez 40 %, skupne proizvodnje Skupnosti določenih antibiotikov širokega spektra.
The request was based on the grounds that the expiry of the measures would be likely to result in the continuation or recurrence of subsidisation and injury to the Community industry and that the level of the measures in force was allegedly inappropriate to counteract the subsidisation which was causing the injury.
Zahteva je temeljila na dejstvu, da bi iztek ukrepov utegnil povzročiti nadaljevanje ali ponovitev subvencioniranja in škode industriji Skupnosti, ter da naj bi bila raven veljavnih ukrepov domnevno neustrezna za preprečitev subvencioniranja, ki je povzročalo škodo.
Prior to the initiation of the combined expiry and interim review, and in accordance with Articles 22(1) and 10(9) of the basic Regulation, the Commission notified the Government of India (the GOI) that it had received a properly documented review request.
Pred začetkom skupnega pregleda zaradi izteka ukrepa in vmesnega pregleda ter v skladu s členi 22(1) in 10(9) osnovne uredbe je Komisija obvestila indijsko vlado („IV“), da je prejela ustrezno dokumentirano zahtevo za pregled.
The GOI was invited for consultations with the aim of clarifying the situation as regards the contents of the request and arriving at a mutually agreed solution.
IV je bila povabljena na posvet, da se razjasni vsebina zahteve in doseže sporazumna rešitev.
The GOI declined the Commission's invitation to have consultations.
IV je zavrnila vabilo Komisije na posvet.
Initiation of a combined expiry and interim review
Začetek skupnega pregleda zaradi izteka ukrepa in vmesnega pregleda
The Commission examined the evidence submitted by the applicants and considered it sufficient to justify the initiation of a review in accordance with the provisions of Articles 18(2) and 19(2) of the basic Regulation.
Komisija je preučila dokaze, ki sta jih predložila vlagatelja, in ugotovila, da upravičujejo začetek pregleda v skladu s členoma 18(2) in 19(2) osnovne uredbe.
After consultation of the Advisory Committee, the Commission initiated, by a notice published in the Official Journal of the European Union [4], a combined expiry and interim review of Council Regulation (EC) No 2164/98.
Po posvetovanju s svetovalnim odborom je Komisija z obvestilom, objavljenim v Uradnem listu Evropske Unije [4], začela skupni pregled zaradi izteka ukrepa in vmesni pregled Uredbe (ES) št. 2164/98.
The investigation covered the period from 1 April 2002 to 31 March 2003 (the review investigation period or IP).
Preiskava je potekala od 1. aprila 2002 do 31. marca 2003 („obdobje preiskave v zvezi s pregledom“ ali „OP“).
The examination of trends in the context of injury covered the period from 1 January 1999 up to the end of the review investigation period (the period considered).
Preučevanje trendov, povezanih s škodo, je potekalo od 1. januarja 1999 do konca obdobja preiskave v zvezi s pregledom („obravnavano obdobje“).
V. Parties concerned by the investigation
V. Stranke, ki jih preiskava zadeva
The Commission officially informed the applicants, other known Community producers, exporting producers, importers, upstream suppliers, users and the GOI of the initiation of the investigation.
Komisija je uradno obvestila vlagatelja, ostale znane proizvajalce Skupnosti, proizvajalce izvoznike, uvoznike, dobavitelje, uporabnike in IV o začetku preiskave.
Interested parties had the opportunity to make their views known in writing and to request a hearing.
Zainteresiranim strankam je bilo omogočeno, da pisno predložijo svoja mnenja in zahtevajo zaslišanje.
The written and oral comments submitted by the parties were considered and, where appropriate, taken into account.
Predložene pisne in ustne pripombe strank so bile obravnavane in, kjer je bilo to primerno, upoštevane.
In view of the apparently large number of exporting producers of the product concerned in India which were named in the request, the use of sampling techniques for the investigation of subsidisation was envisaged in accordance with Article 27 of the basic Regulation.
Zaradi navidezno velikega števila proizvajalcev izvoznikov zadevnega izdelka iz Indije, ki so bili imenovani v zahtevi, je bila za ugotovitev subvencioniranja predvidena uporaba tehnik vzorčenja v skladu s členom 27 osnovne uredbe.
However, only a limited number of exporting producers made themselves known and provided the information requested for sampling.
Toda le omejeno število proizvajalcev izvoznikov se je odzvalo in predložilo zahtevane podatke za vzorčenje.
Therefore, the use of sampling techniques was not considered necessary.
Zato uporaba tehnik vzorčenja ni bila potrebna.
The Commission sent questionnaires to all parties known to be concerned who made themselves known within the deadlines set in the notice of initiation.
Komisija je poslala vprašalnike vsem zainteresiranim strankam, ki so se odzvale v rokih, določenih v obvestilu o začetku.
Replies were received from five Community producers, seven exporting producers, one importer, two up-stream suppliers and the GOI.
Odgovorilo je pet proizvajalcev Skupnosti, sedem proizvajalcev izvoznikov, dva dobavitelja in IV.
The Commission sought and verified all information it deemed necessary for the determination of subsidisation and injury as well as to determine whether there is a likelihood of continuation or recurrence of subsidisation and injury and whether maintaining or amending the measures would not be against the Community interest.
Komisija je zahtevala in preverila vse podatke, ki so bili po njenem mnenju potrebni za ugotovitev subvencioniranja in škode, pa tudi za ugotovitev, ali obstaja verjetnost nadaljevanja ali ponovitve subvencioniranja in škode, in ali ohranjanje ali sprememba ukrepov ne bi bila v nasprotju z interesom Skupnosti.
Verification visits were carried out at the premises of the following interested parties:
Preveritveni obiski so bili opravljeni v prostorih naslednjih zainteresiranih strank:
DSM Anti-Infectives BV, Delft (The Netherlands), which also replied to the Commission’s questionnaire on behalf of DSM Anti-Infectives Deretil SA, Almeria, (Spain) and DSM Anti-Infectives Chemferm SA, Santa Perpetua de Mogoda, (Spain).
DSM Anti-Infectives B.V., Delft (Nizozemska), ki je tudi odgovoril na vprašalnik Komisije v imenu DSM Anti-Infectives Deretil S.A., Almeria, (Španija) in DSM Anti-Infectives Chemferm S.A., Santa Perpetua de Mogoda, (Španija).
These three companies are hereafter jointly referred to as ‘DSM’.
V nadaljnjem besedilu so ta tri podjetja skupno imenovana „DSM“.
Sandoz GmbH (formerly Biochemie GmbH), Kundl (Austria), which also replied to the Commission's questionnaire on behalf of Sandoz Industrial Products SA (formerly Biochemie SA), Barcelona (Spain).
Sandoz GmbH (prej Biochemie GmbH), Kundl (Avstrija), ki je tudi odgovoril na vprašalnik Komisije v imenu Sandoz Industrial Products S.A. (prej Biochemie S.A.), Barcelona (Španija).
Both companies are hereafter jointly referred to as ‘Sandoz’.
V nadaljnjem besedilu sta ti dve podjetji skupno imenovani „Sandoz“.
Government of India
Indijska vlada
Ministry of Commerce, New Delhi.
Ministrstvo za trgovino, New Delhi
Exporting producers in India
Proizvajalci izvozniki v Indiji
KDL Biotech Ltd (formerly Kopran Ltd), Mumbai,
KDL Biotech Ltd. (prej Kopran Ltd.), Bombaj,
Orchid Pharmaceuticals and Chemicals Ltd, Chennai,
Orchid Pharmaceuticals in Chemicals Ltd., Čenaj,
Disclosure and comments on procedure
Razkritje in pripombe na postopek
The GOI and the other interested parties were informed of the essential facts and considerations upon which it was intended to propose the continuation of measures.
IV in ostale zainteresirane stranke so bile seznanjene z bistvenimi dejstvi in preudarki, na osnovi katerih naj bi se predlagala nadaljnja uporaba ukrepov.
They were also given a reasonable time to comment.
Določen je bil tudi razumen rok za pripombe.
Certain parties presented their comments in writing.
Določene stranke so predložile svoje pisne pripombe.
In addition, the GOI and three exporting producers presented their positions in post-disclosure hearings followed up by post-hearing submissions summarizing their positions.
Poleg tega so IV in trije proizvajalci izvozniki na zaslišanjih po razkritju predstavili svoja stališča in po zaslišanju predložili povzetke svojih stališč.
All submissions and comments were taken duly into consideration as set out below.
Vsi predlogi in pripombe so bili ustrezno upoštevani, kot je opisano v nadaljevanju.
The GOI and one exporting producer pointed out during a post-disclosure hearing that the applicants did not produce one type of the like product, i.e. cefalexin, and claim that therefore in respect of this type the initiation of the investigation should be made void.
IV in en proizvajalec izvoznik sta med zaslišanjem po razkritju opozorila, da vlagatelja ne izdelujeta ene vrste podobnega izdelka, tj. cefaleksina, in trdila, da je treba začetek preiskave glede te vrste podobnega izdelka razveljaviti.
In response to this submission, it should be recalled that already in the original investigation it was established that all types of the product under investigation (see below under Section B) constitute one single category of product [5].
V odgovor na ta predlog je treba poudariti, da je bilo že v prvotni preiskavi ugotovljeno, da vse vrste izdelka, ki so bile predmet preiskave (glej v nadaljevanju oddelek B), tvorijo eno kategorijo izdelka [5].
All types belong to the same category, i.e. bulk semisynthetic broad spectrum antibiotics, and have the same use, that of being incorporated into finished dosage forms which are effective in treating a variety of infectious diseases.
Vse vrste spadajo v isto kategorijo, tj. nepakirani semi-sintetični antibiotiki širokega spektra, in imajo enako uporabo, to je vključitev v končne dozirane oblike, ki so učinkovite za zdravljenje številnih nalezljivih bolezni.
Thus, since all types form one product for the purpose of this proceeding, which is produced by the applicants, this argument has to be refuted.
Ker torej za namene tega postopka vse vrste tvorijo en izdelek, ki ga proizvajata vlagatelja, se ta argument zavrne.
The GOI and one exporting producer contended that the non-confidential questionnaire replies of the Community producers were not sufficiently detailed and not filed in accordance with Article 29 of the basic Regulation.
IV in en proizvajalec izvoznik sta ugovarjala, da odgovori na vprašalnik proizvajalcev Skupnosti, ki niso zaupni, niso bili dovolj podrobni in niso bili izpolnjeni v skladu s členom 29 osnovne uredbe.
It was alleged, that a lack of information in the non-confidential questionnaire replies denied cooperating exporters an effective opportunity to defend their interests in relation to the injury and causal link analysis.
Trdila sta, da zaradi pomanjkanja informacij v odgovorih, ki niso zaupni, sodelujoči proizvajalci izvozniki niso imeli priložnosti učinkovito braniti svojih interesov glede analize škode in vzročne zveze.
In this context, it should be noted that, as set out in section E, the Community industry in the present investigation consists of only two parties, i.e. Sandoz and DSM.
V tej zvezi je treba omeniti, da industrijo Skupnosti, kot je opredeljena v oddelku E spodaj, v tej preiskavi sestavljata le dve stranki, tj. Sandoz in DSM.
In addition, one party produced only amoxicillin trihydrate and ampicillin trihydrate, whereas the other produced cefalexin as well.
Poleg tega je ena stranka izdelovala samo amoksicilin trihidrat, medtem ko je druga izdelovala tudi cefaleksin.
These particular circumstances with regard to the Community industry increased the confidential nature of certain data provided during the investigation.
Zaradi teh posebnih okoliščin glede industrije Skupnosti je bila povečana zaupnost določenih podatkov, ki so bili predloženi med preiskavo.
In any event, the file available for inspection by interested parties contains the non-confidential replies to the questionnaire of both cooperating Community producers, where confidential data have been provided in index form in order to permit a reasonable understanding of the substance of the information submitted in confidence.
V vsakem primeru dokument, ki je na voljo za pregled s strani zainteresiranih strank, vsebuje odgovore obeh sodelujočih proizvajalcev Skupnosti na vprašalnik, ki niso zaupni, zaupni podatki pa so vključeni v obliki indeksa, kar omogoča ustrezno razumevanje vsebine zaupno posredovanih podatkov.
Therefore, the non-confidential questionnaire replies of the Community producers are still considered in line with the provisions of Article 29 of the basic Regulation.
Zato se še vedno šteje, da so odgovori proizvajalcev Skupnosti na vprašalnik, ki niso zaupni, v skladu z določbami člena 29 osnovne uredbe.
In addition, it is pertinent to note, that the indexed injury data as disclosed and set out in section F of this Regulation provided all interested parties with a sufficiently precise picture on the injury and causality situation, so as to be able to assess the analysis and defend their interests.
Poleg tega je potrebno poudariti, da so indeksirani podatki o škodi, kot so navedeni v oddelku F te uredbe, vsem zainteresiranim strankami nudili dovolj natančno sliko stanja škode in vzročnosti, da so lahko ocenili analizo in branili svoje interese.
I. Product concerned
I. Zadevni izdelek
The product covered by this review is the same product as the one concerned by Council Regulation (EC) No 2164/98, namely amoxicillin trihydrate, ampicillin trihydrate and cefalexin not put up in measured doses or in forms or packings for retail sale falling within CN codes ex29411010, ex29411020 and ex29419000 originating in India (the product concerned).
Izdelek, ki je predmet tega pregleda, je isti kot izdelek, ki ga obravnava Uredba (ES) št. 2164/98, in sicer amoksicilin trihidrat, ampicilin trihidrat in cefaleksin, ki niso predloženi v odmerkih ali v pakiranjih za prodajo na drobno in sodijo pod oznake KN ex29411010, ex29411020 in ex29419000 in imajo poreklo iz Indije („zadevni izdelek“).
However, both the product concerned and the like product have to correspond to the same international pharmacopoeias with certain specifications.
Vendar pa morata zadevni in podobni izdelek ustrezati istim mednarodnim farmakopejam z določenimi specifikacijami.
Thus, though not alike in all respects, they closely resemble each other as required by Article 1(5) of the basic Regulation.
Zato sta si, četudi nista enaka v vseh pogledih, zelo podobna, kot to zahteva člen 1(5) osnovne uredbe.
Consequently, the investigation confirmed that the amoxicillin trihydrate, ampicillin trihydrate and cefalexin produced and sold in the Community by the Community producers had identical or closely resembling physical characteristics and uses to the product concerned and were thus a like product within the meaning of Article 1(5) of the basic Regulation.
Posledično je preiskava potrdila, da imajo amoksicilin trihidrat, ampicilin trihidrat in cefaleksin, ki jih proizvajalci Skupnosti izdelujejo in prodajajo v Skupnosti, identične ali zelo podobne fizične značilnosti in uporabe kot zadevni izdelek in so torej podobni izdelek v smislu člena 1(5) osnovne uredbe.
SUBSIDIES
SUBVENCIJE
On the basis of the information contained in the review request and the replies to the Commission's questionnaire, the following schemes, which allegedly involve the granting of subsidies, were investigated:
Na podlagi podatkov, vsebovanih v zahtevi za pregled, in odgovorov na vprašalnik Komisije so bile preiskane naslednje sheme, ki domnevno vključujejo dodeljevanje subvencij:
Nationwide schemes
Državne sheme
Advance licence scheme,
Shema vnaprejšnjih dovoljenj,
Duty entitlement passbook scheme,
Shema Duty Entitlement Passbook,
Special economic zones/Export oriented units scheme,
Shema posebnih ekonomskih con/izvozno usmerjeni obrati,
Export promotion capital goods scheme,
Shema spodbujanja izvoza investicijskega blaga,
Income tax schemes,
Sheme davkov na dohodek,
Export income tax exemption scheme,
Shema oprostitve davka na dohodek od izvoza,
Income tax incentive for research and development,
Spodbuda za raziskave in razvoj v okviru davka na dohodek,
Export credit scheme.
Shema izvoznih kreditov.
The schemes (a) to (d) specified above are based on the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act 1992 (No 22 of 1992) which entered into force on 7 August 1992 (Foreign Trade Act).
Zgoraj naštete sheme (a) do (d) temeljijo na Zakonu o zunanjetrgovinskem poslovanju (razvoj in ureditev) 1992 (št. 22 iz 1992), ki je stopil v veljavo 7. avgusta 1992 („Zakon o zunanjetrgovinskem poslovanju“).
The Foreign Trade Act authorises the GOI to issue notifications regarding the export and import policy.
Zakon o zunanjetrgovinskem poslovanju dovoljuje IV izdajanje uradnih obvestil glede izvozne in uvozne politike.
These are summarised in ‘Export and Import Policy’ documents, which are issued by the Ministry of Commerce every five years and updated regularly.
Ta so povzeta v dokumentih „Izvozna in uvozna politika“, ki jih vsakih pet let izda Ministrstvo za trgovino in jih redno posodablja.
One Export and Import Policy document is relevant to the review investigation period of this case; i.e. the five-year plan relating to the period 1 April 2002 to 31 March 2007 (EXIM-policy 02-07).
Za obdobje preiskave tega primera je pomemben en dokument Izvozne in uvozne politike, tj. petletni načrt za obdobje od 1. aprila 2002 do 31. marca 2007 („EXIM-politika 02-07“).
In addition, the GOI also sets out the procedures governing the EXIM-policy 02-07 in a ‘Handbook of Procedures – 1 April 2002 to 31 March 2007, Volume I’ (HOP I 02-07) [6].
Poleg tega IV določa postopke, ki urejajo EXIM-politiko 02-07, v „Priročniku o postopkih – 1. april 2002 do 31. marec 2007, I Del“ („HOP I 02-07“) [6].
The Handbook of Procedures is also updated on a regular basis.
Tudi Priročnik o postopkih se redno posodablja.
The income tax schemes specified above under (e) are based on the Income Tax Act of 1961, which is amended yearly by the Finance Act.
Sheme davkov na dohodek, navedene zgoraj pod točko (e), temeljijo na Zakonu o davku na dohodek iz leta 1961, ki ga letno spreminja Zakon o javnih financah.
The Export credit scheme specified above under (f) is based on sections 21 and 35A of the Banking Regulation Act 1949, which allow the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) to direct commercial banks in the field of export credits.
Shema izvoznih kreditov, navedena zgoraj pod točko (f), temelji na členih 21 in 35A Zakona o bančništvu iz leta 1949, ki Indijski centralni banki („ICB“) dovoljuje usmerjanje komercialnih bank na področju izvoznih kreditov.
Regional Schemes
Regionalne sheme
On the basis of the information contained in the review request and the replies to the Commission's questionnaire, the Commission also investigated a number of schemes which allegedly are granted by regional governments or authorities in certain Indian states.
Na podlagi podatkov, vsebovanih v zahtevi za pregled, in odgovorov na vprašalnik Komisije je Komisija preučila tudi številne sheme, ki jih domnevno dodeljujejo regionalne vlade ali organi v nekaterih indijskih državah.
State of Punjab,
Država Pandžab,
Punjab industrial incentive scheme.
Shema industrijskih spodbud države Pandžab.
This scheme is based on the industrial policy and incentives code of the Government of Punjab.
Ta shema temelji na industrijski politiki in kodeksu spodbud vlade Pandžaba.
State of Gujarat,
Država Gudžarat,
Gujarat industrial incentive scheme,
Shema industrijskih spodbud države Gudžarat,
Refund of electricity duty.
Povračilo dajatev za elektriko.
The first scheme is based on Gujarat's industrial incentive policy whereas the second scheme is based on the Bombay Electricity Duty Act of 1958.
Prva shema temelji na politiki industrijskih spodbud Gudžarata, medtem ko druga shema temelji na bombajskem Zakonu o dajatvi za elektriko iz leta 1958.
State of Maharashtra,
Država Maharaštra,
Package scheme of incentives of the Government of Maharashtra (the GOM).
Paketna shema spodbud vlade Maharaštre („VM“).
This scheme is based on resolutions of the GOM Industries, Energy and Labour Department.
Ta shema temelji na resolucijah Ministrstva VM za industrijo, energijo in delo.
One income tax scheme (income tax incentive for research and development) and three regional schemes (Punjab industrial incentives, Gujarat industrial incentives and Gujarat refund of electricity duty) were not mentioned in the review request.
Ena shema davka na dohodek (spodbuda za raziskave in razvoj v okviru davka na dohodek) in tri regionalne sheme (industrijske spodbude države Pandžab, industrijske spodbude države Gudžarat in povračilo dajatev za elektriko države Gudžarat) niso bile omenjene v zahtevi za pregled.
Therefore, in accordance with Articles 22(1) and 11(10) of the basic Regulation, the Commission notified the GOI about a possible extension of the scope of the investigation in order to include these schemes.
Zato je Komisija v skladu s členoma 22(1) in 11(10) osnovne uredbe obvestila IV o možni razširitvi preiskave z namenom, da se vključi te sheme.
The GOI was invited for consultations with the aim of clarifying the factual situation as regards the alleged schemes and arriving at a mutually agreed solution.
IV je bila povabljena na posvet, da se razjasnijo dejanske razmere glede domnevnih shem in doseže sporazumna rešitev.
Following these consultations, and in the absence of a mutually agreed solution in relation to these four schemes, the Commission included these schemes in the investigation of subsidisation.
Po tem posvetu in v odsotnosti sporazumne rešitve glede teh štirih shem je Komisija te sheme vključila v preiskavo subvencioniranja.
General disclosure comments on subsidisation
Splošne pripombe po razkritju o subvencioniranju
Two exporting producers contended that the Advance licence scheme, the Income tax incentive scheme for research and development and the Export credit scheme should be excluded from the scope of the present investigation, because a review should only cover schemes originally investigated.
Dva proizvajalca izvoznika sta nasprotovala vključitvi sheme vnaprejšnjih dovoljenj, sheme spodbud za raziskave in razvoj v okviru davka na dohodek in sheme izvoznih kreditov v to preiskavo, ker naj bi pregled zajemal samo sheme, ki so bile prvotno preučene.
In this case, these three schemes and the regional schemes investigated were not investigated during the original investigation.
V tem primeru te tri sheme in preučene regionalne sheme niso bile preučene v prvotni preiskavi.
However, the relevant provisions of the basic Regulation concerning interim and expiry reviews do not stipulate such a narrow approach in reviews.
Vendar pa ustrezne določbe osnovne uredbe glede vmesnega pregleda in pregleda zaradi izteka ukrepa ne predvidevajo tako ozkega pristopa pri pregledih.
For example, an interim review could lead to an increase of measures, in line with Article 19(2) of the basic Regulation, if the existing ones were insufficient to counteract a countervailable subsidy.
V skladu s členom 19(2) osnovne uredbe bi na primer vmesni pregled lahko okrepil ukrepe, če bi bili obstoječi ukrepi nezadostni za preprečevanje subvencij, ki se izravnavajo.