1.

Product involved: The product involved in the present petition is Intduction Hardened Forged Steel Rolls, also known as Forged CRM(Cold Rolling Mills Rolls) (above 300 mm size) (hereinafter referred to as subject goods). These are primarily used by steel plants for cold rolling of ferrous and non-ferrous coils obtained from Hot Rolling Mills.

Forged Rolls is classified under Chapter 84 of the Custom Tariff Act, 1975. It is further classified as per Indian Trade Classification (Based on Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System) under the heading 8455.30.00. The classification is, however, indicative only and is in no way binding on the scope of the present investigation.

2.

Domestic Industry standing:The petition has been filed by M/s Gontermann-Piper (India) Ltd., West Bengal and is also supported by M/s Heavy Engineering Corporation, Ranchi. It has been indicated that small scale producers do not produce such large din Rolls and also M/s Tata Yodogawa Ltd. (TAYO), Jamshedpur only does the machining work and not production.

The petitioner in the period 1.4.2001 to 30,6,2002 constitutes more than 50% of the total production of subject goods in India and thus have the standing to file the petition on behalf of the domestic industry as per rule 5(3) (a) and (b) and also represents the Domestic Industry as per Rule 2(b) of Anti-Dumping Rules.

3.

Countries involved: The countries involved in the present investigation are Russia, Ukraine and Korea RP.

4.

Like articles: The petitioner has claimed that the goods produced by them are like article to the goods produced, originating in or exported from the subject countries as both are used interchangeably. The goods produced by the petitioner are being treated as like articles to the goods imported from the subject countries within the meaning of the Rules 2(d).

5.

Normal value: The Authority notes that the petitioner has claimed normal value of subject goods in the subject countries on the basis of the constructed normal value with appropriate adjustments. The petitioners have submitted evidence to the effect that Russia and Ukraine have been treated as non-market economy by other investigating authorities in the preceding three years. The petitioner in view of this amended Anti Dumping Rules have claimed Russia and Ukraine as the non-market economy for the purpose of this investigation. The Authority has prima facie considered the normal value of the subject goods in the subject goods for these countries with appropriate adjustments as per the amended Anti Dumping Rules.

6.

Export Price: The petitioners have considered the export prices of the secondary source viz. Info Drive India Pvt. Ltd. which complies customs imports data and also the export orders placed from Russia and Ukraine to one of the customers of the subject goods in India. The petitioner has indicated that the data published by Directorate General of Commercial Intelligence & Statistics (DGCI&S) may not be relevant in view of the fact that different rolls with different varying weights may be clubbed under one custom head thus not being indicative of the price at which these goods have been imported into India. The ex-factory export price has been evaluated by allowing adjustments on landing charges, ocean freight, marine insurance, inland freight and port and handling charges.

7.

Dumping margin: There .is sufficient prima-facie evidence that the normal value of the subject goods in the subject countries is significantly higher than the price at which it has been exported to India indicating prima-facie that the subject goods are being dumped by the exporters from the subject countries. The prima facie dumping margin from these subject countries viz. Russia, Ukraine and Korea RP Comes to 32.96%, 69.79% and 11.06% respectively.

8.

Injury and Causal Link: The Authority notes that the Domestic Industry has been forced to sell the subject goods which have not permitted them recovery of reasonable cost of production leading to financial losses. The Authority notes that M/s Heavy Engineering Corporation, Ranchi have indicated loss on profitability and lost sales orders on account of alleged dumping from the subject countries, The Authority also notes that in view of demand of subject goods not a constraining factor, the injury caused to the Domestic Industry prima facie has a causal link with the alleged dumping.

9.

Initiation of Anti-Dumping investigation: The authority in view of the foregoing paragraphs initiates anti-dumping investigation into the existence, degree and effect of alleged dumping of the subject goods originating in or exported from the subject countries.

10.

Period of investigation: The period of investigation for the purpose of present investigation is 1st April, 2001 to 30th June, 2002.

11.

Submission of information: The exporters in the said subject countries and the importers in India known to be concerned are being addressed separately to submit relevant information in the form and manner prescribed and make their views known to:-

The Designated Authority
Government of India
Ministry of Commerce & Industry
Department of Commerce
Udyog Bhavan
New Delhi - 110 001,

Any other interested party may also make its submissions relevant to the investigation in theprescribed form and manner within the time limit set out below,

12.

Time limit: Any information relating to the present investigation should be sent in writing so as to reach the Authority at the address mentioned above not later than 40 days from the date of publication of this notification. The known exporters and importers who are being addressed separately are, however, required to submit the information within 40 days from the date of letter addressed to them separately.

13.

All parties must provide a non-confidential summary of any information provided on a confidential basis in terms of anti-Dumping Rule 7(2). However, such information will be subject to acceptance in terms of Anti-Dumping Rule 7(1) and 7(2).

14.

INSPECTION OF PUBLIC FILE:In terms of rule 6(7) any interested party may inspect the public file containing non-confidential versions of the evidence submitted by other interested parties,

15.

In case any interested party refuses access to and otherwise does not provide necessary information within a reasonable period, or significantly impedes the investigation, the Authority may record its findings on the basis of the facts available to it and make such recommendations to the Central Government as deemed fit,

Sd/-
(L. V. Saptharishi)
Designated Authority