natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Jinan Meide reiterated its claim that the Commission should treat product types for which the analogue country's sales volume was below 200 kg as quasi-matching or non-matching product types and that it cannot rely on unreliable costs to exclude sales from the normal value determination.
Družba Jinan Meide je ponovila trditev, da bi morala Komisija vrste izdelkov, pri katerih je bil obseg prodaje v primerljivi državi manjši od 200 kg, obravnavati kot navidezno enake ali drugačne vrste izdelka in da prodaje ne more izključiti iz določitve normalne vrednosti na podlagi nezanesljivih stroškov.
Jinan Meide challenged the Commission's decision to reject its adjustments requests with regard to level of trade, packing expenses, credit costs, domestic insurance costs and differences in raw materials and productivity.
Nasprotovala je odločitvi Komisije, da zavrne njene zahteve glede prilagoditve v zvezi z ravnjo trgovanja, stroški pakiranja, stroški kredita, stroški domačega zavarovanja ter razlikami v surovinah in produktivnosti dela.
Jinan Meide claimed that no duty should be imposed on it as a result of alleged procedural violations and other irregularities in these proceedings.
Trdila je, da se zaradi domnevnih postopkovnih kršitev in drugih nezakonitosti v teh postopkih zanjo ne bi smela uvesti nobena dajatev.
In this context, the company claimed that an error in the disclosure of 23 December 2016 put into question whether the Commission disclosed the confidential version of the calculation made at definitive stage of the original investigation, and that the disclosure did not explain the alleged differences with the calculation made in the original investigation.
V zvezi s tem je družba trdila, da se zaradi napake pri razkritju z dne 23. decembra 2016 pojavljajo pomisleki, ali je Komisija razkrila zaupno različico izračuna, ki se je izvedel v končni fazi prvotne preiskave, in da se z razkritjem niso pojasnile domnevne razlike v primerjavi z izračunom, ki se je izvedel v prvotni preiskavi.
It further claimed that the Commission refused to disclose certain elements despite Jinan Meide's repeated requests.
Trdila je tudi, da je Komisija zavrnila razkritje nekaterih elementov kljub večkratnim zahtevam družbe Jinan Meide.
It also submitted that the claims made in Case T-424/13, but not address by the General Court, remained valid and would continue to vitiate the measures in case they would be re-imposed.
Poleg tega je menila, da trditve, ki so bile podane v zadevi T-424/13, a jih Splošno sodišče ni obravnavalo, ostajajo veljavne in da bodo zaradi njih ukrepi, če bodo znova uvedeni, še naprej neveljavni.
The Commission recalls that during the preparation of the final disclosure for Jinan Meide, it spotted a clerical error concerning the adjustment for indirect taxes in the dumping calculation for Jinan Meide.
Komisija opozarja, da je med pripravo končnega razkritja za družbo Jinan Meide ugotovila stvarno napako v zvezi s prilagoditvijo posrednih davkov v izračunu dampinga za družbo Jinan Meide.
For reasons of good administration, the Commission proposed to correct this error at that stage and properly disclosed this proposal to all interested parties.
Zaradi dobrega upravljanja je Komisija predlagala, da se ta napaka takrat popravi, ta predlog pa je ustrezno predstavila vsem zainteresiranim stranem.
Having considered all arguments put forward, the Commission decided to accept Jinan Meide's claim and not to correct the clerical error.
Ko je proučila vse predložene trditve, se je odločila, da sprejme trditev družbe Jinan Meide in ne popravi stvarne napake.
The Commission, following the opinion of the Hearing Officer, considered that there is no general prohibition of a reformatio in peius in reopening of trade defence cases — that is to say that an interested party subject to a reopening in trade defence cases may be put in a position less favourable than what it was in before that reopening took place.
Komisija je na podlagi mnenja pooblaščenca za zaslišanje menila, da pri obnovitvi primerov trgovinske zaščite ne velja splošna prepoved reformatio in peius, tj. da se lahko zainteresirana stran, v zvezi s katero se obnovi primer trgovinske zaščite, postavi v položaj, ki je slabši od njenega položaja pred obnovitvijo postopka.
However, the Commission concluded that, in this specific case, the scope of reopening should be limited to the disclosure of the data from the analogue country, receiving comments from interested parties, and, if necessary, revising the duty accordingly.
Vendar je v tem specifičnem primeru sklenila, da bi moral biti obseg obnovitve omejen na razkritje podatkov iz primerljive države, prejetje pripomb zainteresiranih strani in po potrebi ustrezno spremembo dajatve.
Since the calculation error with regard to the reimbursement of VAT for export sales, and in particular the rate of VAT reimbursement, is not related to the data obtained from the analogue country producer, such correction is considered to be outside the scope of the reopened investigation.
Ker napaka pri izračunu v zvezi s povračilom DDV za izvoz in zlasti stopnjo povračila DDV ni povezana s podatki, ki jih je predložil proizvajalec iz primerljive države, se za tak popravek šteje, da ne spada v obseg obnovljene preiskave.
On 29 May 2017, the Commission sent the Additional Disclosure Document informing interested parties of its decision not to correct the clerical error referred to in recital 34.
Komisija je 29. maja 2017 zainteresiranim stranem poslala dodatni dokument o razkritju, s katerim jih je obvestila o svoji odločitvi, da ne popravi stvarne napake iz uvodne izjave (34).
The Commission received comments from one importer only, which restated that due to the limited disclosure to importers it is not in a position to comment on adjustments.
Pripombe je prejela le od enega uvoznika, ki je znova navedel, da zaradi omejenega razkritja uvoznikom ne more predložiti pripomb glede prilagoditev.
Accordingly, in the absence of arguments to the contrary, the findings on adjustments are confirmed.
V skladu s tem in v odsotnosti trditev o nasprotnem se ugotovitve o prilagoditvah potrdijo.
With regard to the product types sold in quantities below 200 kg, Jinan Meide referred to the Advocate General's opinion in the Goldstar case [11] that ‘for domestic prices to be comparable there must be a sufficient volume of sales in absolute terms on the domestic market stems from the fact that domestic prices may differ from one sales outlet to another.
Kar zadeva vrste izdelkov, ki se prodajajo v količinah, manjših od 200 kg, je družba Jinan Meide navedla mnenje generalnega pravobranilca v zadevi Goldstar [11], v skladu s katerim trditev, „da so domače cene primerljive, če je na domačem trgu zadosten obseg prodaje v absolutnem smislu, izvira iz dejstva, da so lahko domače cene med prodajnimi mesti različne.
Furthermore, prices may fluctuate in the course of a single reference period’, and ‘[i]n order to be representative that weighted average must be based on a minimum number of sales’.
Poleg tega lahko cene v enem referenčnem obdobju nihajo“ in „[d]a bi bilo to tehtano povprečje reprezentativno, mora temeljiti na najmanjšem številu prodanih izdelkov“.
In this respect it is noted that the Advocate General continued his opinion in the following subparagraph that this ‘does not mean, however, that the Community institutions should, in addition to the aforesaid relative threshold below which sales should be disregarded, fixed at 5 % and calculated for each model, still be required to apply an absolute threshold as well.
V zvezi s tem je treba opozoriti, da je generalni pravobranilec v naslednjem pododstavku še menil, da pa „to ne pomeni, da bi morale institucije Skupnosti poleg navedenega relativnega praga, pod katerim se prodaja ne bi smela upoštevati ter je določen na 5 % in se izračuna za vsak posamezni model, uporabiti tudi absolutni prag.
It makes little sense to establish an absolute minimum threshold in general since the value of an absolute figure depends too closely on the nature of the product.’
Ni smiselno, da se določi absolutni najnižji prag na splošno, saj je vrednost absolutne številke preveč odvisna od narave izdelka“.
Thus, the opinion of the Advocate General in fact confirms that it is indeed not necessary to apply an absolute minimum threshold such as the absolute threshold of 200 kg claimed by Jinan Meide.
Mnenje generalnega pravobranilca zato dejansko potrjuje, da ni treba uporabiti absolutnega najnižjega praga, kot je absolutni prag v višini 200 kg, ki ga navaja družba Jinan Meide.
As regards the issue of price fluctuations, as indicated in recital 28 above, this affected all product types and not only product types in quantities sold below 200 kg.
Kar zadeva vprašanje nihanja cen, kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi (28), je to vplivalo na vse vrste izdelka, in ne le vrste izdelka, ki se prodajajo v količinah, manjših od 200 kg.
One unrelated importer supported Jinan Meide's claim concerning representativity of low turnover products and reiterated its comments in that regard.
En nepovezani uvoznik je podprl trditev družbe Jinan Meide glede reprezentativnosti izdelkov z majhnim prometom in v zvezi s tem ponovil svoje pripombe.
It provided a general statement that Commission's position contradicts general market experience.
Navedel je splošno trditev, da je stališče Komisije v nasprotju s splošnimi izkušnjami na trgu.
The Commission's statement is based on data obtained from the analogue country producer.
Trditev Komisije temelji na podatkih, ki jih je predložil proizvajalec iz primerljive države.
Given that the claim has not been further substantiated and in light of recitals 28 and 42 et seq. above, the claim is therefore rejected.
Ker trditev ni bila podrobneje utemeljena, se ob upoštevanju uvodnih izjav(28) in (42) ter naslednjih uvodnih izjav zato zavrne.
With regard to the claim concerning unreliable costs, Jinan Meide claimed that the Commission eventually resorted to the initial set of cost data submitted even though allegedly it had initially considered that this set did not meet the standards.
Kar zadeva trditev v zvezi z nezanesljivimi stroški, je družba Jinan Meide trdila, da je Komisija na koncu uporabila prvotni sklop predloženih podatkov o stroških, čeprav naj bi najprej menila, da ta sklop ne izpolnjuje standardov.
This argument is not supported by the facts of the investigation.
Te trditve dejstva v preiskavi niso potrdila.
Indeed, the Commission has never considered that the initial set of cost data did not meet the standards.
Komisija nikoli ni menila, da prvotni sklop podatkov o stroških ne izpolnjuje standardov.
In such circumstances, it is therefore not appropriate to completely disregard the costs reported by the analogue country producer, as claimed by Jinan Meide.
V takih okoliščinah ni primerno, da se stroški, ki jih je predložil proizvajalec iz primerljive države, sploh ne upoštevajo, kot je trdila družba Jinan Meide.
One unrelated importer reiterated its comment that cost allocation based on turnover assumes that the same profit margin is generated for all product types, which allegedly contradicts observed logic in the market.
En nepovezani uvoznik je ponovil svojo pripombo, da se pri razporeditvi stroškov na podlagi prihodka od prodaje predvideva, da se enaka stopnja dobička ustvari pri vseh vrstah izdelka, kar pa domnevno nasprotuje logiki, ugotovljeni na trgu.
The claim was not further substantiated.
Ta trditev ni bila podrobneje utemeljena.
As stated in recital 26 above, in accordance with the basic Regulation, in the absence of a more appropriate method, preference shall be given to the allocation of costs on the basis of turnover.
Kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi (26), se v skladu z osnovno uredbo, če ni na voljo primernejše metode, prednost da razporeditvi stroškov na podlagi prihodka od prodaje.
The costs were allocated on the basis of turnover and that no other more suitable method was proposed by any interested party.
Stroški so se razporedili na podlagi prihodka od prodaje in nobena zainteresirana stran ni predlagala druge, primernejše metode.
Concerning the level of trade adjustment, Jinan Meide reiterated its claim that when determining whether a level of trade adjustment is warranted, it is sufficient to establish a difference in average prices to different categories of customers.
Kar zadeva prilagoditev ravni trgovanja, je družba Jinan Meide ponovila svojo trditev, da pri ugotavljanju, ali je prilagoditev ravni trgovanja upravičena, zadošča, da se določi razlika med povprečnimi cenami za različne kategorije strank.
Article 2(10)(d)(i) of the basic Regulation however requires that there is a ‘consistent and distinct difference of prices of the seller for the different levels of trade.’
Vendar se v členu 2(10)(d)(i) osnovne uredbe zahteva, da obstaja „dosledn[a] in izrazit[a] razlika[a] v […] cenah prodajalca za različne stopnje trgovine“.
A simple comparison of average prices is therefore not considered sufficient to establish such a consistent and distinct difference of prices.
Zato se za preprosto primerjavo povprečnih cen ne šteje, da zadošča za določitev take dosledne in izrazite razlike v cenah.
To the contrary, an analysis of the information on file shows that all customer types are in all segments of the price range.
Nasprotno, iz analize dokumentacije je razvidno, da so v vseh segmentih razpona cen zajete vse vrste strank.
One unrelated importer claimed that the Commission should carry out a level of trade adjustment, but, because of lack of access to data, could not comment further.
En nepovezani uvoznik je trdil, da bi Komisija morala izvesti prilagoditev ravni trgovanja, vendar zaradi pomanjkanja dostopa do podatkov ni mogel predložiti dodatnih pripomb.
It also claimed that because of lack of access to the calculation of the dumping margin, it could not comment further.
Trdil je tudi, da zaradi pomanjkanja dostopa do izračuna stopnje dampinga ne more predložiti dodatnih pripomb.
In this regard, it is recalled that the Commission is under an obligation to protect confidential information that it has received from interested parties.
V zvezi s tem je treba spomniti, da mora Komisija zaščititi zaupne informacije, ki jih prejme od zainteresiranih strani.
However, all non-confidential submissions are available to interested parties, who are invited to comment.
Vse nezaupne informacije pa so na voljo zainteresiranim stranem, ki so pozvane, naj predložijo pripombe.
The Commission notes, however, that, as stated in recital 49 above, the information on file showed that in this case there were no consistent and distinct differences in the prices charged to different customer types.
Vendar Komisija opozarja, da je iz dokumentacije razvidno, kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi (49), da v tem primeru ni bilo doslednih in izrazitih razlik v cenah, ki so se zaračunavale različnim vrstam strank.
Therefore, a level of trade adjustment would not be appropriate.
Zato prilagoditev ravni trgovanja ne bi bila primerna.
Concerning the allowance for credit costs, an allowance was deducted on the basis of the information on the sales documentation, both on the export price and normal value side.
Kar zadeva popravek za stroške kredita, se je popravek odštel na podlagi prodajne dokumentacije, in sicer pri izvozni ceni in normalni vrednosti.
Jinan Meide argued that the allowance for credit costs on the normal value side should be made on the basis of the actual number of days between the invoice and the payment, since the Commission allegedly deducted an allowance for credit cost on export sales even though no payment term was made on the sales documentation.
Družba Jinan Meide je trdila, da bi bilo treba popravek za stroške kredita pri normalni vrednosti izvesti na podlagi dejanskega števila dni med izstavitvijo računa in plačilom, saj naj bi Komisija odbila popravek za stroške kredita pri izvoznih cenah, čeprav v prodajni dokumentaciji ni bil naveden rok za plačilo.
This claim was found not to be supported by the evidence on file of the investigation.
Ugotovilo se je, da dokazila iz dokumentacije te trditve niso potrdila.
Nor was Jinan Meide able to provide any evidence to support its claim.
Niti družba Jinan Meide ni mogla predložiti nobenih dokazov v podporo tej trditvi.
In addition, it was established that both on the normal value side and on the export price side, the actual payment was often made after the payment term on the sales documentation.
Poleg tega se je ugotovilo, da se je pri normalni vrednosti in izvozni ceni dejansko plačilo pogosto izvedlo po roku za plačilo, navedenem v prodajni dokumentaciji.
Calculating the allowance on credit cost on the basis of the actual payment date on the normal value side and on the basis of the information contained in the sales documentation of the export price side would therefore not result in a fair comparison.
Izračun popravka za stroške kredita na podlagi datuma dejanskega plačila pri normalni vrednosti in na podlagi informacij iz prodajne dokumentacije pri izvozni ceni zato ne bi prinesel poštene primerjave.
The Commission therefore maintained its approach to establish the allowance for credit costs on the basis of the information on the sales documentation for both the normal value and the export price.
Komisija je zato ohranila svoj pristop, da popravek za stroške kredita določi na podlagi informacij iz prodajne dokumentacije za normalno vrednost in izvozno ceno.
As regards the allowance for packing costs, Jinan Meide reiterated their claims that the allocation of packing costs was incorrect, and the resulting allowance for packing costs was very low and not reasonable.
Kar zadeva popravek za stroške pakiranja, je družba Jinan Meide ponovila svoje trditve, da razporeditev stroškov pakiranja ni bila pravilna, posledični popravek za stroške pakiranja pa je bil zelo majhen in nerazumen.
It did however not further substantiate its argument, in particular why the resulting allowance was unreasonably low.
Vendar te trditve ni podrobneje utemeljila, zlasti tega, zakaj je bil posledični popravek nerazumno majhen.
The Commission therefore maintained its methodology concerning the allowance for packing costs.
Komisija je zato ohranila svojo metodologijo v zvezi s popravkom za stroške pakiranja.
Lastly, the Commission rejects Jinan Meide's allegations of procedural violations and other irregularities in these proceedings.
Nazadnje Komisija zavrača trditve družbe Jinan Meide glede postopkovnih kršitev in drugih nezakonitosti v teh postopkih.
The Commission observed all principles and respected all procedural steps.
Komisija je spoštovala vsa načela in upoštevala vse postopkovne korake.
The Commission reopened the investigation, disclosed the data from the analogue country as required to implement the judgement of the Court, and revised Jinan Meide's duty rate accordingly.
Obnovila je preiskavo, razkrila podatke iz primerljive države, kot je bilo potrebno zaradi izvrševanja sodbe Sodišča, in ustrezno spremenila stopnjo dajatve za družbo Jinan Meide.
In fact, during the whole proceedings, the Commission was transparent and engaging, accommodating meetings at Jinan Meide's request for clarifications and hearings.
Pravzaprav je Komisija v celotnem postopku delovala pregledno in sodelovala ter urejala srečanja na zahtevo družbe Jinan Meide po pojasnilih in zaslišanja.
The Commission clarified the technical problem related to a faulty excel file with calculations which resulted in the inconsistencies referred to by Jinan Meide.
Pojasnila je tehnično težavo, povezano s pomanjkljivo Excelovo datoteko z izračuni, zaradi katerih so se pojavile nedoslednosti, ki jih je navedla družba Jinan Meide.
This error, in any case, had no impact on the dumping margin and was promptly corrected.
Vendar ta napaka ni vplivala na stopnjo dampinga in je bila takoj popravljena.
The Commission disclosed all confidential information to Jinan Meide, including the confidential file with the figures used for the dumping margin in 2013.
Komisija je izpolnila svojo dolžnost, da izvrši sodbo Sodišča, z odpravo nezakonitosti, ki jih je ugotovilo Splošno sodišče.
With regard to the claims that were made before the General Court but not addressed by the judgment, the Commission contests all the alleged illegalities pointed out by Jinan Meide.
V zvezi s tem se ne strinja s postopkovnimi kršitvami, ki jih je navedla družba Jinan Meide, in znova trdi, da je upoštevala vsa načela in postopkovne zahteve ter družbi Jinan Meide (in drugim zainteresiranim stranem) omogočila, da med preiskavo uveljavlja svoje postopkovne pravice.
The Commission has fulfilled its duty to implement the court judgment by addressing the illegalities found by the General Court.
Tudi družba Jinan Meide je ponovila svoje trditve v zvezi z razliko v produktivnosti dela in uporabo drugačnih surovin, pri čemer v zvezi s tem ni navedla dodatnih trditev ali dokazov.
On this basis, the Commission fails to see the procedural violations referred to by Jinan Meide and restates that it complied with all principles and procedural requirements, allowing Jinan Meide (and other interested parties) to exercise its procedural rights throughout the investigation.
To mnenje je podprl en nepovezani uvoznik.
Jinan Meide also reiterated their arguments concerning the difference in labour productivity and the use of different raw materials, without providing further arguments or evidence in this respect.
Te trditve so obravnavane v uvodni izjavi (32).
This position was supported by one unrelated importer.
En nepovezani uvoznik je ponovil svojo trditev, da taka obnovitev postopka ni združljiva z določbami osnovne uredbe.
These arguments are addressed in recital 32 above.
Kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi (17), je iz sodbe v združenih zadevah C-283/14 in C-284/14 [12] jasno, da lahko institucije EU obnovijo protidampinško preiskavo, da bi popravile nezakonitosti, ki so jih ugotovila evropska sodišča, čeprav osnovna uredba tega izrecno ne določa.
One unrelated importer reiterated its claim that the reopening as such was not compatible with the provisions of the basic Regulation.
Institucije Unije pravzaprav morajo sprejeti ukrepe, ki so potrebni za odpravo nezakonitosti.
As stated in recital 17, it is clear from the judgment of joined cases C-283/14 and C-284/14 [12] that the EU Institutions may reopen an anti-dumping investigation to amend irregularities found by the European Courts even though this is not expressly provided for in the basic Regulation.
Drugi nepovezani uvoznik je poudaril negativne učinke protidampinških dajatev (zaradi učinka na dobičkonosnost in prihodek od prodaje ter novih pogojev na trgu, tj. nove cene, novo pridobivanje virov).
The Union's institutions are, in fact, required to take the necessary measures to remedy illegalities.
Kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi (41), je bil obseg te obnovljene preiskave omejen na izvrševanje sodbe Splošnega sodišča v zvezi z družbo Jinan Meide, zlasti na razkritje zaupnih podatkov proizvajalca iz primerljive države družbi Jinan Meide.
Another unrelated importer pointed to negative effects of the anti-dumping duties (due to impact on profitability and turnover as well as new market conditions, i.e. new prices, new sourcing).
En nepovezani uvoznik je trdil, da je treba zaradi spremembe (domnevno zvišanje) stopnje dajatve znova oceniti učinek dajatve na uvoznike in uporabnike.
As set out in recital 41 above, the scope of the present reopening was limited to implementation of the judgment of the General Court with regard to Jinan Meide, notably to disclose to Jianan Meide the confidential data of the analogue country producer.
Vendar, kot je navedeno v uvodni izjavi (41), Komisija ni popravila stvarne napake v zvezi s povračilom DDV, ker se je zanjo štelo, da ne spada v obseg obnovljene preiskave.
One unrelated importer claimed that the change (an alleged increase) of the duty rate necessitated a reassessment of the impact of the duty on importers and users.
Ista stran je trdila tudi, da bi morala Komisija opraviti vmesni pregled, saj je od obdobja prvotne preiskave minilo že več kot pet let.