natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Finally, the company claimed that it should have received a notification of the consequences of the non-cooperation, as set out in Article 18(1) of the basic Regulation.
Nazadnje je družba trdila, da bi morala prejeti obvestilo o posledicah nesodelovanja, kakor je določeno v členu 18(1) osnovne uredbe.
Concerning the first claim, it is noted that according to Article 17(2) of the basic Regulation, the consent of the parties is not a necessary condition, since that Article provides that the final selection rests with the Commission and that only preference shall be given to choosing a sample in consultation with, and with the consent of the parties concerned.
Glede prvega zahtevka je treba opomniti, da v skladu s členom 17(2) osnovne uredbe soglasje strank ni nujen pogoj, ker je v tem členu določeno, da končni izbor opravi Komisija, čeprav se izbira vzorca po možnosti opravi po posvetovanju z zadevnimi strankami in njihovim soglasjem.
Furthermore, the selection of the sample in this case was made in consultation with the Chinese authorities and, during this process, the company concerned again expressed that it did not wish to be included in the sample, namely on the grounds that it would have difficulties to receive a verification visit.
Poleg tega je bila izbira vzorca v tem primeru opravljena po posvetovanju s kitajskimi organi in med postopkom je zadevna družba ponovno izrazila, da ni želela biti vključena v vzorec, ker bi imela težave pri pripravi na obisk zaradi preveritve.
Finally, it is also noted that the company did not ask for an individual examination, pursuant to Article 17(3) of the basic Regulation.
Nazadnje je treba opomniti, da družba ni zaprosila za individualno preiskavo v skladu s členom 17(3) osnovne uredbe.
The second claim was considered unfounded since, pursuant to Article 18 of the basic Regulation, the refusal to provide access to the necessary information, thus also with respect to MET determination, should be considered as non-cooperation.
Drugi zahtevek se je štel za neutemeljenega, saj se v skladu s členom 18 osnovne uredbe zavrnitev omogočanja dostopa do podatkov, torej tudi v zvezi z določitvijo TGO, šteje za nesodelovanje.
It was made clear to the company that the inclusion in the sample implied replying to a questionnaire and accepting an on-the-spot verification of their response, which was refused by the company.
Družbi je bilo razjasnjeno, da vključitev v vzorec pomeni, da odgovorijo na vprašalnik in sprejmejo preverjanje njihovih odgovorov na kraju samem, kar pa je družba zavrnila.
In any event, it is noted that, even if MET had been granted to the company, by refusing to be included in the sample, not submitting a questionnaire reply pursuant to Article 17(3) of the basic Regulation, and refusing a verification visit, the provisions of Article 18 of the basic Regulation would have had to be used.
V vsakem primeru je treba opomniti, da tudi če bi bil TGO družbi odobren, bi se morale uporabiti v primeru zavrnitve vključitve v vzorec, nepredložitve odgovorov na vprašalnik v skladu s členom 17(3) osnovne uredbe in zavrnitve obiska zaradi preveritve določbe člena 18 osnovne uredbe.
Finally, the last claim made by the company should also be rejected because the consequences of the non-cooperation were made clear by paragraph 8 of the notice of initiation.
Zadnji zahtevek družbe je prav tako treba zavrniti, saj so bile posledice nesodelovanja razjasnjene v odstavku 8 obvestila o začetku.
Determination of normal value for exporting producers granted MET
Določitev normalne vrednosti za proizvajalce izvoznike, ki jim je bil odobren TGO
In the absence of any comments, the general methodology used for the determination of the normal value, as described in the recitals (31) to (40) of the provisional Regulation is confirmed.
Ker ni nobenih pripomb, se potrdi splošna metodologija, uporabljena za določitev normalne vrednosti, kakor je opisano v uvodnih izjavah (31) do (40) začasne uredbe.
The exporting producers granted MET claimed the occurrence of certain clerical errors in the calculation of the normal value or contested the methodology used for assessing the adjustments that were deemed necessary.
Proizvajalci izvozniki, ki jim je bil odobren TGO, so trdili, da je prišlo pri izračunu normalne vrednosti do nekaterih stvarnih napak, ali so izpodbijali metodologijo, uporabljeno za oceno prilagoditev, ki so se zdele potrebne.
Those issues have been re-examined and the necessary amendments have been made where necessary.
Navedena vprašanja so bila ponovno preučena in, kjer je bilo potrebno, so bile narejene ustrezne spremembe.
Determination of normal value for all exporting producers not granted MET
Določitev normalne vrednosti za vse proizvajalce izvoznike, ki jim TGO ni bil odobren
Certain interested parties claimed a breach of Article 2(7) of the basic Regulation because, prior to the imposition of provisional measures, they were not informed of the choice of an analogue country other than that proposed in the notice of initiation.
Nekatere zainteresirane stranke so trdile, da se krši člen 2(7) osnovne uredbe, ker pred uvedbo začasnih ukrepov niso bile obveščene o izbiri primerljive države, razen o državi, predlagani v obvestilu o začetku.
They further claimed that by not being aware of the absence of cooperation by any producer in Mexico, the analogue country proposed at initiation stage, they were not able to provide assistance to the Commission for the choice of an alternative country.
Nadalje so trdile, da niso bile obveščene o pomanjkanju sodelovanja proizvajalcev v Mehiki, tj. primerljivi državi v začetni fazi, in tako niso mogle zagotoviti pomoči Komisiji pri izbiri druge možne primerljive države.
In that respect, it should be noted first of all that Article 2(7)(a) of the basic Regulation provides that the parties should be informed shortly after the initiation of the market economy third country envisaged.
V zvezi s tem je treba najprej opomniti, da člen 2(7)(a) osnovne uredbe določa, da morajo biti stranke obveščene kmalu potem, ko je predvidena tretja država s tržnim gospodarstvom.
In the present case, Mexico was still envisaged as an analogue country shortly after the initiation and the parties were invited to comment on this choice.
V tem primeru je bila kmalu po začetku preiskave Mehika še vedno predvidena za primerljivo državo in stranke so bile pozvane, da podajo pripombe v zvezi s to izbiro.
At the early stage of the investigation there was indeed no indication that no cooperation from any Mexican producer would be obtained.
V začetni fazi preiskave v resnici ni bilo nobenih kazalcev, ki bi pokazali, da mehiški proizvajalci niso sodelovali.
It is only at a later stage that it became clear that another country had to be selected in the absence of cooperation.
Šele v poznejši fazi je postalo jasno, da je zaradi nesodelovanja morala biti izbrana druga primerljiva država.
In addition, Article 2(7)(a) of the basic Regulation does not provide that the parties should assist the Commission in its choice of an appropriate analogue country.
Poleg tega člen 2(7)(a) osnovne uredbe ne določa, da morajo stranke pomagati Komisiji pri izbiri ustrezne primerljive države.
Finally, the interested parties were informed of the provisional findings including the provisionally selected analogue country, i.e. Turkey, and were given the opportunity to comment.
Zainteresirane stranke so bile obveščene o začasnih ugotovitvah, vključno z začasno izbrano primerljivo državo, tj. Turčijo, in jim je bila dana možnost, da podajo pripombe.
No comment was received that Turkey could not be considered an appropriate analogue country in this case.
Komisija ni prejela pripomb, da se v tem primeru Turčija ne sme šteti za ustrezno primerljivo državo.
It is therefore considered that there was no breach of Article 2(7)(a) of the basic Regulation, and the findings laid down in recitals (44) to (48) of the provisional Regulation are hereby confirmed.
Zato se šteje, da člen 2(7)(a) osnovne uredbe ni bil kršen in ugotovitve iz uvodnih izjav (44) do (48) začasne uredbe se potrdijo.
In the absence of any comments, the general methodology used for the determination of the normal value, as described in the recitals (49) and (50) of the provisional Regulation is confirmed.
Ker ni nobenih pripomb, se potrdi splošna metodologija, uporabljena za določitev normalne vrednosti, kakor je opisano v uvodnih izjavah (49) in (50) začasne uredbe.
Two exporting producers claimed that the requirements for the construction of the export price, as laid down in Article 2(9) of the basic Regulation, had not been fulfilled and that any adjustment of the export price when sales were made to the Community via related companies established in a third country should rather be addressed by applying the provisions of Article 2(10) of the basic Regulation.
Dva proizvajalca izvoznika sta trdila, da zahteve za konstruiranje izvozne cene, kot je določeno v členu 2(9) osnovne uredbe, niso bile izpolnjene in da bi se vsakršne prilagoditve izvozne cene, ko je prišlo do prodaje v Skupnost preko povezanih družb, ustanovljenih v tretji državi, prej obravnavale z uporabo določb člena 2(10) osnovne uredbe.
In this respect, it is confirmed that the provisions of Article 2(10) of the basic Regulation, and more specifically of subparagraph (i) of that paragraph, have indeed been applied, as mentioned under recital (53) of the provisional Regulation.
V zvezi s tem je potrjeno, da so bile določbe člena 2(10) osnovne uredbe, in natančneje pododstavka (i) omenjenega odstavka, res uporabljene, kakor je omenjeno v uvodni izjavi (53) začasne uredbe.
The exporting producers granted MET claimed the occurrence of certain clerical errors in the calculation of the export price or contested the methodology used for assessing certain adjustments that were deemed necessary.
Proizvajalci izvozniki, ki jim je bil TGO odobren, so trdili, da je prišlo pri izračunu izvozne cene do nekaterih stvarnih napak, ali so izpodbijali metodologijo, uporabljeno za oceno nekaterih prilagoditev, ki so se zdele potrebne.
Those issues have been re-examined and the necessary amendments have been made where applicable.
Navedena vprašanja so bila ponovno preučena in, kjer je bilo potrebno, so bile narejene ustrezne spremembe.
One sampled exporting producer which was granted MET claimed that the adjustments made pursuant to Article 2(10)(i) of the basic Regulation with respect to its sales to the Community via its subsidiary established in a third country was not warranted since the subsidiary in question merely performed the functions of an export sales department.
En vzorčen proizvajalec izvoznik, ki mu je bil TGO odobren, je trdil, da prilagoditve, ki so bile narejene v skladu s členom 2(10)(i) osnovne uredbe v zvezi z njegovo prodajo v Skupnost preko njegove odvisne družbe, ustanovljene v tretji državi, niso bile utemeljene, saj je zadevna odvisna družba opravljala le naloge oddelka za izvozno prodajo.
It further claimed that if nevertheless an adjustment is made, it should in any event be limited to a normal commission rate paid to unrelated agents.
Nadalje je trdil, da se morajo prilagoditve, če bi bile vendarle narejene, v vsakem primeru omejiti na normalno stopnjo provizije, plačane nepovezanemu zastopniku.
Two other exporting producers also claimed that the adjustment should be limited to direct selling expenses.
Dva druga proizvajalca izvoznika sta tudi trdila, da morajo biti prilagoditve omejene na neposredne prodajne stroške.
In this respect, the investigation revealed that the functions discharged by the sales subsidiary concerned were going beyond those typically assumed by an exporter’s export sales department, and should rather be compared to those left to an agent working on a commission basis, in accordance with Article 2(10)(i) of the basic Regulation.
V zvezi s tem je preiskava pokazala, da naloge, ki jih je opravljal zadevni izvozni oddelek, presegajo tiste, ki jih običajno prevzame izvozni oddelek izvoznika, in jih je treba v skladu s členom 2(10)(i) osnovne uredbe primerjati s tistimi, ki jih je opravljal zastopnik, ki je delal na podlagi provizije.
It is therefore considered that the related party incurred costs which effectively reduce the amounts received by the exporters, and which should thus be deducted from the price paid by the first independent buyer in the Community.
Zato se šteje, da so za povezano stranko nastali stroški, ki so učinkovito zmanjšali zneske, prejete od izvoznikov, in ki jih je treba zato odšteti od cene, ki jo je plačal prvi neodvisni kupec v Skupnosti.
It is noted that the two other exporting producers who are in the same situation as the exporting producer above shared the Commission’s view that an adjustment should be made pursuant to Article 2(10)(i) of the basic Regulation for the purpose of a fair comparison (see recital (51) above).
Treba je opomniti, da sta se dva druga proizvajalca izvoznika, ki sta v istem položaju kot zgoraj omenjeni proizvajalec izvoznik, strinjala s stališčem Komisije, da mora biti prilagoditev narejena v skladu s členom 2(10)(i) osnovne uredbe z namenom poštene primerjave (glej uvodno izjavo (51) zgoraj).
Finally, it is considered that the amount of the adjustment was duly calculated in conformity with the provisions of Article 2(10)(i) of the basic Regulation, i.e. on the basis of the mark-up received by the related company.
Šteje se, da je bil znesek prilagoditve ustrezno izračunan v skladu z določbami člena 2(10)(i) osnovne uredbe, tj. na podlagi pribitka, ki ga je prejela povezana družba.
The mark-up in this case was calculated as being the actual selling, general and administrative costs of the related companies and a reasonable amount of profit, and should not be limited to only direct selling expenses.
Pribitek je bil v tem primeru izračunan kot dejanski prodajni, splošni in administrativni stroški povezanih družb in razumni znesek dobička in ne sme biti omejen le na neposredne prodajne stroške.
The claims made by the exporting producers concerned were therefore rejected.
Zahtevki zadevnih proizvajalcev izvoznikov družb so bili zato zavrnjeni.
Various interested parties claimed that the adjustment related to the non-refunded VAT was unwarranted and based on an erroneous understanding of the system.
Različne zainteresirane stranke so trdile, da so bile prilagoditve, povezane z nevračljivim DDV, neupravičene in so temeljile na nepravilnem razumevanju sistema.
Some other exporting producers, including one which agreed with the principle of the adjustment, contested the methodology used to compute the adjustment and requested that the adjustment be based on the actual amount of non-refundable VAT.
Nekateri drugi proizvajalci izvozniki, vključno s tistim, ki se je strinjal z načelom prilagoditve, so izpodbijali metodologijo, uporabljeno za izračun prilagoditve, in zahtevali, da prilagoditev temelji na dejanskem znesku nevračljivega DDV.
The first claim was rejected because it was not substantiated and no further elements were provided that would confirm the fact that the adjustment is based on an erroneous understanding.
Prvi zahtevek je bil zavrnjen, ker ni bil ustrezno utemeljen in ni bilo zagotovljenih dodatnih dokazov, ki bi potrdili dejstvo, da prilagoditev temelji na nepravilnem razumevanju.
As regards the claim that the actual amounts should be used, those were in many instances either not submitted by the exporting producers concerned or not adequately supported by evidence and could therefore not be taken into consideration.
Kar zadeva zahtevek, da je treba uporabiti dejanske zneske, je treba opozoriti, da jih zadevni proizvajalci izvozniki v mnogih primerih niso predložili ali ustrezno podprli z dokazi in zato niso bili upoštevani.
Following comments made by several parties, it is hereby clarified that, where necessary, the prices for the like product types sold on the domestic market in Turkey, which were used for the determination of the normal value, were adjusted so as to ensure a fair comparison with those product types exported to the Community by the Chinese producers concerned, in accordance with Article 2(10)(a) of the basic Regulation.
Glede na pripombe, ki so jih podale različne stranke, se razjasni, da so bile po potrebi cene za vrste podobnega izdelka, prodane na domačem trgu v Turčiji, in uporabljene za določitev normalne vrednosti, prilagojene v skladu s členom 2(10)(a) osnovne uredbe, da se zagotovi poštena primerjava s tistimi vrstami izdelka, ki ga zadevni kitajski proizvajalci izvažajo v Skupnost.
Those adjustments were made on the basis of a reasonable estimate of the market value of the differences.
Te prilagoditve so bile narejene na podlagi razumne ocene tržne vrednosti razlik.
In the case of two companies, the adjustment made at provisional stage had to be revised so as to better reflect their individual situation and the relevant margins were revised accordingly.
V primeru dveh družb je morala biti prilagoditev, narejena v predhodni fazi, spremenjena, da bi bolje odražala njun položaj, stopnje pa so bile ustrezno spremenjene.
Two of the three companies which were granted MET claimed that their established relationship during the IP no longer reflects reality, on the grounds that, shortly after the IP, the shareholders link between all three companies has been removed since all shares concerned have been sold to independent persons.
Dve od treh družb, ki jim je bil TGO odobren, sta trdili, da v OP vzpostavljena povezava ne odraža več resničnosti, ker je bila kmalu po OP povezava delničarjev med vsemi tremi družbami opuščena, saj so bili vsi zadevni deleži prodani neodvisnim osebam.
The companies therefore claimed that this new situation should be taken into consideration and that, since they can no longer be considered as related, each company should be attributed an individual dumping margin reflecting its own situation.
Družbi sta zato trdili, da je treba upoštevati ta novi položaj, in ker se več ne morejo šteti za povezane, je treba vsaki družbi pripisati individualno stopnjo dampinga, ki odraža položaj, značilen za posamezno družbo.
The investigation revealed, however, that the relationship between the companies concerned during the IP actually consisted of more than just a shareholding link.
Vendar je preiskava pokazala, da je bila povezava med zadevnimi družbami v OP dejansko več kot le povezava med delničarji.
It was indeed established that in addition to that link, the three companies also shared members of their respective board of directors.
V resnici je bilo ugotovljeno, da so poleg tega imele te tri družbe tudi iste člane v svojih upravnih odborih.
The presence of shared directors between the companies therefore reinforced the relationship that existed through the shareholding link.
Ti skupni člani odborov družb so tudi okrepili povezavo, ki je obstajala zaradi povezave med delničarji.
For those reasons, it was found that the companies had to be considered as being related during the IP.
Iz teh razlogov je bilo ugotovljeno, da je bilo treba te družbe v OP šteti kot povezane.
Even if the situation has allegedly changed shortly after the IP, it would in any event be too early to conclude that these changes are of a lasting nature.
Čeprav se je domnevno položaj kmalu po OP spremenil, bi bilo v vsakem primeru prehitro sklepati, da so te spremembe trajne.
In view of the nature of the established relationship during the IP, the risk of circumvention through the company with the lowest duty imposed cannot be excluded.
Glede na naravo vzpostavljene povezave med OP tveganje glede izogibanja družbe z najnižjo uvedeno dajatvijo ne more biti izključeno.
Moreover, it is also noted that since this relationship may have affected the findings for the IP, any changes in the relationship after the IP cannot be considered as relevant.
Poleg tega je treba opomniti, da bi povezava lahko vplivala na ugotovitve za OP, zato se kakršne koli spremembe povezave po OP ne morejo šteti za pomembne.
It is therefore concluded that the claims made by the companies should be rejected.
Zato se sklene, da se zahtevki družb zavrnejo.
Furthermore, various interested parties contested the correct use of the provisions on sampling.
Različne zainteresirane stranke so nadalje tudi izpodbijale pravilno uporabo določb za vzorčenje.
Since the three sampled companies granted MET were found to be related, it is claimed that they form one single entity and that therefore their dumping margin cannot constitute a valid average in view of the wording of Article 9(6) of the basic Regulation.
Ker je bilo ugotovljeno, da so tri družbe, ki jim je bil TGO odobren, povezane, se trdi, da predstavljajo en samo družbo in da zato njihova stopnja dampinga ne more predstavljati veljavnega povprečja glede na besedilo člena 9(6) osnovne uredbe.
This is based on the fact that this Article refers to the weighted average margin of dumping established for the parties in the sample, thus the dumping margin should necessarily be based on the findings for more than one company.
To temelji na dejstvu, da se ta člen nanaša na tehtano povprečje stopnje dampinga, določenega za vzorčene stranke, torej mora stopnja dampinga nujno temeljiti na ugotovitvah za več kot eno družbo.
Reference was made to the WTO Appellate Body report, in the framework of the EC-India bed linen case [3], where it was concluded that the weighted average should necessarily refer to more than one company.
Opozorili so tudi na poročilo pritožbenega organa STO v zavezi s sporom med ES in Indijo v zadevi posteljnina [3], kjer je bilo sklenjeno, da se mora tehtano povprečje nujno nanašati na več kot eno družbo.
In this respect, it should be noted that the conclusions of the Appellate Body, which were made in a different context, namely that of Article 2.2.2 (ii) of the Anti-Dumping Agreement, and a different case, are not directly applicable in this specific case.
V zvezi s tem je treba opomniti, da se sklepi pritožnega organa, ki so bili sprejeti v drugem kontekstu, namreč v okviru člena 2.2.2(ii) protidampinškega sporazuma in za drugačno zadevo, ne uporabljajo neposredno v tej določeni zadevi.
Secondly, the argument should be rejected because in the present case, the weighted average of the sample is based on each company’s own normal value and export prices, and those companies do not constitute one single entity.
Drugič, utemeljitev je treba zavrniti, saj temelji v sedanjem primeru tehtano povprečje vzorca na normalni vrednosti posamezne družbe in izvoznih cenah, in te družbe ne predstavljajo ene same enote.
It is only after establishing the three individual margins that a weighted average of those margins was calculated for the related companies in order to avoid that, in view of their relationship, the companies channel all their exports via the company for which the lowest dumping margin was established.
Šele po določitvi treh individualnih stopenj je bilo izračunano tehtano povprečje teh stopenj za povezane družbe, da se izogne poskusu, da družbe, glede na njihovo razmerje, opravijo ves svoj izvoz preko družbe, za katero je bila določena najnižja stopnja dampinga.
It is further noted that Article 9(6) of the basic Regulation does not specifically exclude the use of margins of dumping established for related parties in the sample.
Nadalje je treba opomniti, da člen 9(6) osnovne uredbe izrecno ne izključuje uporabe dampinških stopenj, določenih za povezane vzorčene stranke.
In the absence of comments, the methodology used to establish the dumping margins with respect to the companies that were granted IT, as laid down in recital (57) of the provisional Regulation is hereby confirmed.
Ker ni pripomb, se potrdi metodologija, ki se uporablja za določitev stopenj dampinga glede družb, ki jim je bil odobren IO, kot je določeno v uvodni izjavi (57) začasne uredbe.
On the basis of the above, the definitive dumping margins expressed as a percentage of the CIF Community frontier price, duty unpaid, are:
Na podlagi zgoraj navedenega so dokončne stopnje dampinga, izražene kot odstotek vrednosti CIF na meji Skupnosti, brez plačane dajatve, naslednje:
Definitive dumping margin
Dokončna stopnja dampinga