[Federal Register: November 17, 2004 (Volume 69, Number 221)]
[Notices]
[Page 67321-67322]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr17no04-34]
[[Page 67321]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration
[C-533-839]
Final Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination: Carbazole
Violet Pigment 23 From India
AGENCY: Import Administration, International Trade Administration,
Department of Commerce.
SUMMARY: The Department of Commerce (the Department) has reached a
final determination that countervailable subsidies are being provided
to producers/exporters of carbazole violet pigment 23 (CVP-23) from
India. For information on the estimated countervailable subsidy rates,
please see the ``Suspension of Liquidation'' section of this notice.
EFFECTIVE DATE: November 17, 2004.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean Carey or Addilyn Chams-Eddine,
Office of AD/CVD Operations, Office VI, Import Administration, U.S.
Department of Commerce, Room 7866, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue,
NW., Washington, DC 20230; telephone (202) 482-3964 and (202) 482-0648
respectively.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Case History
The petition in this investigation was filed November 21, 2003, by
Nation Ford Chemical and Sun Chemical Company (collectively, the
petitioners). On December 11, 2003, we initiated the investigation. See
Notice of Initiation of Countervailing Duty Investigation: Carbazole
Violet Pigment 23 (CVP-23) from India, 68 FR 70778 (December 19, 2003).
On April 27, 2004, the Department published its affirmative preliminary
determination and, in accordance with section 705(a)(1) of the Tariff
Act of 1930, as amended (the Act), we aligned the final determination
in this countervailing duty investigation with the final determination
in the antidumping duty investigation of CVP-23 from India. See Notice
of Preliminary Affirmative Countervailing Duty Determination and
Alignment with Final Antidumping Duty Determination: Carbazole Violet
Pigment 23 from India, 69 FR 22763 (April 27, 2004) (Preliminary
Determination).
Since the Preliminary Determination, the following events have
occurred. Alpanil Industries Ltd. (Alpanil) provided a response on
April 30, 2004, for its trading company, Meghmani Organics Ltd.
(Meghmani), and its use of the subsidy programs under investigation. We
issued supplemental questionnaires to the Government of India (GOI) on
May 11, 2004, and to Alpanil and Pidilite Industries Ltd. (Pidilite) on
May 18, 2004. The GOI filed its response on May 25, 2004, and Alpanil
and Pidilite filed their responses on June 7, 2004. On June 14, 2004,
Alpanil submitted additional information that was inadvertently omitted
from its June 7, 2004, response. In the Department's June 23, 2004,
memorandum to the file, we noted our request to Alpanil to provide
Meghmani's tax return filed during the POI. Alpanil provided this
information in its June 30, 2004, submission.
From July 12 through July 31, 2004, the Department conducted
verification of the questionnaire responses provided by the GOI,
Alpanil and Pidilite. The Department issued the GOI and Pidilite
verification reports on September 29, 2004. See Memorandum to the File
from Sean M. Carey to Dana Mermelstein, Countervailing Duty
Investigation of Carbazole Violet Pigment 23 (CVP-23) from India:
Verification of the Government of India's (GOI) Subsidy Programs;
Memorandum to the File from Addilyn P. Chams-Eddine to Barbara E.
Tillman, Countervailing Duty Investigation of Carbazole Violet Pigment
23 from India: Verification of the Pidilite Industries Ltd., located in
Mumbai, India. The Alpanil verification report was issued on October 8,
2004. See Memorandum to the File from Sean M. Carey and Addilyn Chams-
Eddine to Dana Mermelstein, Countervailing Duty Investigation of
Carbazole Violet Pigment 23 from India: Verification of Alpanil
Industries Ltd. In addition, on October 8, 2004, we issued a memorandum
containing our preliminary analysis of the Central Value Added Tax
Program (CENVAT) which we had listed in the Preliminary Determination
as a program for which additional information was needed. See
Memorandum to the File from Barbara E. Tillman, Director, Office of AD/
CVD Enforcement VI, to Jeffrey A. May, Deputy Assistant Secretary,
Import Administration, Countervailing Duty Investigation of Carbazole
Violet Pigment-23 from India: Preliminary Analysis of the Central Value
Added Tax (CENVAT) Program, (CENVAT Memorandum).
On October 7, 2004, case briefs were filed by Alpanil and Pidilite,
by the petitioners, and by Clariant, a domestic producer which supports
the petition. On October 12, 2004, these parties filed rebuttal briefs.
We allowed parties a separate opportunity to file comments and rebuttal
comments on our CENVAT Memorandum. No parties provided direct comments,
however, the GOI provided rebuttal comments on October 18, 2004. The
Department allowed parties an opportunity to respond to the GOI's
rebuttal brief. No parties provided comments.
Period of Investigation
The investigation covers all producers/exporters of subject
merchandise in India for the period April 1, 2002, through March 31,
2003.
Scope of the Investigation
The merchandise covered by this investigation is CVP-23 identified
as Color Index No. 51319 and Chemical Abstract No. 6358-30-1, with the
chemical name of diindolo [3,2-b:3',2'-m] triphenodioxazine, 8,18-
dichloro-5,15-diethy-5,15-dihydro-, and molecular formula of
C34H22Cl2N4O2.\1\
The subject merchandise includes the crude pigment in any form (e.g.,
dry powder, paste, wetcake) and finished pigment in the form of
presscake and dry color. Pigment dispersions in any form (e.g.,
pigments dispersed in oleoresins, flammable solvents, water) are not
included within the scope of the investigation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The bracketed section of the product description, [3,2-
b:3',2'-m], is not business propietary information. In this cae, the
brackets are simply part of the chemical nomenclature. See December
4, 2003, amendment to petition (supplementary petition) at 8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Analysis of Comments Received
All issues raised by the interested parties in their case and
rebuttal briefs, and comments on our CENVAT Memorandum are addressed in
the ``Issues and Decision Memorandum'' (Decision Memorandum) dated
November 8, 2004, which is hereby adopted by this notice. A list of the
issues which parties have raised is attached to this notice as Appendix
I. Parties can find a complete discussion of all issues raised in this
investigation and the corresponding recommendations in this public
memorandum, which is on file in the Central Records Unit (CRU). This
public memorandum also contains the recommended adverse facts available
program rates and the total countervailable subsidy rate for the non-
responding company, AMI. A complete version of the Decision Memorandum
is available at http://www.ia.ita.doc.gov under the heading Federal
Register Notices. The paper copy and the electronic version of the
Decision Memorandum are identical in content.
Suspension of Liquidation
In accordance with section 705(c)(1)(B)(i) of the Act, we have
[[Page 67322]]
determined individual rates for Alpanil, Pidilite and AMI Pigments Pvt.
Ltd. (AMI). Because AMI's rate is based on partial facts available
rather than on total facts available, we are including its rate in the
calculation of the ``all others'' rate in accordance with section
705(c)(5)(A)(i) of the Act. To calculate the ``all others'' rate, we
weight-averaged the individual company rates by each company's
respective sales of subject merchandise made to the United States
during the POI. These rates are summarized in the table below:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Net subsidy
Producer/ exporter rate (percent
ad valorem)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alpanil Industries Ltd.................................. 17.57
Pidilite Industries Ltd................................. 17.33
AMI Pigments Pvt. Ltd................................... 33.61
All Others.............................................. 20.55
------------------------------------------------------------------------
In accordance with our preliminary affirmative determination, we
instructed U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) to suspend
liquidation of all entries of CVP-23 from India, which were entered or
withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on or after April 27, 2004,
the date of the publication of our preliminary determination in the
Federal Register. In accordance with section 703(d) of the Act, we
instructed CBP to discontinue the suspension of liquidation for
merchandise entered on or after August 26, 2004, but to continue the
suspension of liquidation of entries made between April 27, 2004,
through August 25, 2004.
If the International Trade Commission (ITC) issues a final
affirmative injury determination, we will issue a countervailing duty
order, reinstate suspension of liquidation under section 706(a) of the
Act for all entries, and require a cash deposit of estimated
countervailing duties for such entries of merchandise at the rates
indicated above. If the ITC determines that material injury, or threat
of material injury, does not exist, this proceeding will be terminated
and all estimated duties deposited or securities posted as a result of
the suspension of liquidation will be refunded or canceled.
ITC Notification
In accordance with section 705(d) of the Act, we will notify the
ITC of our determination. In addition, we are making available to the
ITC all non-privileged and non-proprietary information related to this
investigation. We will allow the ITC access to all privileged and
business proprietary information in our files, provided that the ITC
confirms that it will not disclose such information, either publicly or
under an administrative protective order (APO), without the written
consent of the Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Return or Destruction of Proprietary Information
In the event that the ITC issues a final negative injury
determination, this notice will serve as the only reminder to parties
subject to APO of their responsibility concerning the destruction of
proprietary information disclosed under APO in accordance with 19 CFR
351.305(a)(3). Failure to comply is a violation of the APO.
This determination is issued and published pursuant to sections
705(d) and 777(i) of the Act.
November 8, 2004.
James J. Jochum,
Assistant Secretary for Import Administration.
Appendix I: Issues and Decision Memorandum
Summary
I. List of Issues
Comment 1: Alpanil and Meghmani are Affiliated Parties.
Comment 2: The Department Should Continue to Determine that the
Following Programs are Countervailable: Pre-Shipment Export
Financing Program, Duty Entitlement Passbook Scheme (DEPS), Section
80HHC Income Tax Exemption Scheme, and the State of Gujarat Sales
Tax Incentive Scheme.
Comment 3: Alpanil Did Not Use the Pre-Shipment Export Financing
Loans Program for U.S. Exports of CVP-23.
Comment 4: Alpanil Did Not Receive Any Benefits from the State
of Gujarat Sales Tax Incentive Scheme.
Comment 5: Pidilite's State Sales Tax Deferrals are
Countervailable.
Comment 6: CENVAT Credits are Countervailable.
Comment 7: The Department Should Use Adverse Facts Available to
Calculate the Subsidy Rates for AMI under Additional Programs.
Comment 8: The Estimated Countervailing Duty Cash Deposit Rates
Should be Adjusted to Account for Program-Wide Changes in the DEPS
and Section 80HHC Programs
II. Subsidies Valuation Information
A. Loan Benchmarks
B. Cross-Ownership and Attribution of Subsidies
III. Use of Adverse Facts Available
IV. Analysis of Programs
A. Programs Determined To Confer Subsidies
1. GOI Programs
a. Pre-Shipment Export Financing
b. Duty Entitlement Passbook Scheme (DEPS)
c. Income Tax Exemption Scheme, Section 80 HHC
d. Export Promotion Capital Goods Scheme (EPCGS)
2. State Programs
a. State of Gujarat (SOG) Sales Tax Incentive Scheme
b. State of Maharashtra (SOM) Sales Tax Incentive Scheme
B. Programs Determined Not To Confer Subsidies
GOI Program: Central Value Added Tax (CENVAT) Credits
C. Programs Determined Not To Be Used
GOI Programs
a. Export Processing Zones (EPZs)/Export Oriented Units (EOUs)
Programs
b. Income Tax Exemption Scheme (Sections 10A and 10B)
c. Market Development Assistance
d. Special Imprest Licenses
e. Duty Free Replenishment Certificate
f. Advance License Scheme
D. Program Determined To Be Terminated
GOI Program: Exemption of Export Credit From Interest Taxes
V. Analysis of Comments
VI. Recommendation
[FR Doc. E4-3196 Filed 11-16-04; 8:45 am]