## Policy Analysis Report: Termination of Anti-Dumping Investigation on Solar Cells
**1. Executive Summary:**
This report analyzes a notification regarding the termination of an anti-dumping investigation concerning imports of solar cells (whether or not assembled into modules or panels) originating in or exported from China PR, Thailand, and Vietnam. The termination was initiated based on a request from the domestic industry (Indian Solar Manufacturers Association - ISMA) due to the imposition of basic customs duties (BCD) on solar cells, which alleviated the price pressure caused by the alleged dumping. The report details the background, legal procedures, and rationale behind this termination, as well as its likely impact.
**2. Introduction:**
The purpose of this report is to provide an informative analysis, based solely on the provided text, of the Directorate General of Trade Remedies (DGTR) notification regarding the termination of an anti-dumping investigation on solar cells originating from China PR, Thailand, and Vietnam. This report outlines the key aspects of the termination and its implications.
**3. Policy Overview:**
* This notification concerns the *termination* of an anti-dumping investigation; thus, the underlying policy is the legal framework for anti-dumping investigations and duties. This includes the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, and the Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of Antidumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995.
* **Core Objective:** The objective of the *termination* is to formally conclude the anti-dumping investigation due to a request from the domestic industry. The underlying policy objective is to protect domestic industries from unfair trade practices like dumping.
**4. Background and Rationale:**
* This action constitutes an *amendment* to the process of application of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, and the Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and Collection of Antidumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995.
* **Rationale for Termination:** The specific reason for *this termination* is that the Indian Solar Manufacturers Association (ISMA), representing the domestic industry, requested the termination of the investigation. This request was prompted by the Government of India's imposition of Basic Customs Duty (BCD) on solar cells, which, according to ISMA, has mitigated the injury caused by the alleged dumping, at least to a considerable extent.
**5. Key Provisions / Changes:**
* **Specific Part of Original Policy Affected:** This notification enacts Rule 14a of the Antidumping Rules, 1995, which allows for the termination of an investigation upon written request from the domestic industry.
* **New Rule/Provision (Effectively):** The primary change is the formal *cessation* of the anti-dumping investigation. The key provision is the *termination* of the investigation initiated on 15th May, 2021, concerning imports of solar cells from China PR, Thailand, and Vietnam.
* **Difference/Effect of the Change:** The termination means that no anti-dumping duties will be imposed as a result of *this specific investigation*. This reverses the potential outcome of the investigation, which could have led to duties being levied. This effectively removes the uncertainty surrounding potential anti-dumping duties for importers of solar cells from the specified countries.
**6. Target Audience and Stakeholders:**
The directly affected stakeholders include:
* **Domestic Solar Cell Manufacturers (represented by ISMA):** They requested the termination due to the BCD implementation.
* **Importers/Users of Solar Cells from China PR, Thailand, and Vietnam:** They are directly affected as they no longer face the potential imposition of anti-dumping duties from this specific investigation.
* **Exporters/Producers of Solar Cells in China PR, Thailand, and Vietnam:** They are affected as they no longer face potential anti-dumping duties in the Indian market.
* **Solar Power Developers Association (SPDA):** They were involved in litigation related to the initial investigation.
**7. Implementation Aspects (Inferred):**
* **Responsible Agency:** The Directorate General of Trade Remedies (DGTR) is the responsible authority for implementing the termination.
* **Procedures:** The process involved a written request from the domestic industry, examination of the request by the DGTR, consultation with the High Court of Delhi due to ongoing litigation, and the issuance of a public notice.
* The notification cites Rule 14a of the Antidumping Rules, 1995, as the basis for the termination, implying adherence to the established legal framework.
**8. Expected Outcomes / Impact of Changes:**
* The *intended outcome* of this termination is to officially conclude the anti-dumping investigation, given the domestic industry's assessment that the BCD implementation has sufficiently addressed the injury caused by the alleged dumping.
* The likely *impact of the change* is reduced uncertainty for importers of solar cells from the specified countries. It also signals a shift in the trade remedy approach, relying on BCD rather than anti-dumping duties in this instance.
* Potential future impact may include a re-evaluation of trade remedies should the BCD prove insufficient in protecting the domestic industry, or if circumstances change.
**9. Conclusion:**
The DGTR notification represents the termination of an anti-dumping investigation on solar cells from China PR, Thailand, and Vietnam. This termination was driven by a request from the domestic industry, citing the implementation of Basic Customs Duty as a sufficient measure to alleviate the price pressure from alleged dumping. This decision removes the immediate threat of anti-dumping duties and could impact the dynamics of the solar cell market in India. This notification serves as a notable instance of the application of Rule 14a and highlights the interplay between anti-dumping investigations and other trade policy measures.
Key Entities Referenced
Customs Tariff Act, 1975: Indian law governing customs tariffs, as amended.
Customs Tariff Identification, Assessment and Collection of Antidumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury Rules, 1995: Indian rules related to antidumping duties.
Indian Solar Manufacturers Association: Applicant on behalf of i Ms Mundra Solar PV Limited SEZ unit; ii Ms Jupiter Solar Power Limited DTA unit and iii Ms Jupiter International Limited DTA unit
China PR: Country of origin/export of solar cells subject to antidumping investigation.
Thailand: Country of origin/export of solar cells subject to antidumping investigation.
Vietnam: Country of origin/export of solar cells subject to antidumping investigation.
Directorate General of Trade Remedies: Indian authority responsible for trade remedies.
New Delhi: Location of the notification, New Delhi, Delhi, India.
Solar Cells whether or not assembled into Modules or Panels: Subject of AntiDumping Investigation
Ms Mundra Solar PV Limited SEZ unit: An applicant company (SEZ unit) on whose behalf ISMA has filed application.
Ms Jupiter Solar Power Limited DTA unit: An applicant company (DTA unit) on whose behalf ISMA has filed application.
Ms Jupiter International Limited DTA unit: An applicant company (DTA unit) on whose behalf ISMA has filed application.
Gazette of India: Publication in which the public notice was published.
Embassies of subject countries in India: Embassies of China PR, Thailand and Vietnam in India.
DGTRs website: Website of Directorate General of Trade Remedies
Delhi High Court: Court where the initiation notification was challenged.
W.P.C 58822021: Writ Petition number in Delhi High Court
Solar Power Developers Association SPDA: Filed Writ Petition W.P.C 58822021 in Delhi High Court.
Supreme Court: Court where SLP C 120572021 was filed by the DGTR
SLP C 120572021: SLP filed by the DGTR in the Honble Supreme Court against the High Court Order dated 04.06.2021 in the above petition W.P.C 58822021
Armed Forces Battle Casualties Welfare Fund: Fund to which Honble Court directed that the responses filed by the petitioners between 25 June, 2021 and 31 July 2021 to be taken on record subject to the payment of costs of Rs.1,00,000 by each of the petitioners
Government of India: The government of india.
Basic customs duty: A basic customs duty of 25 and 40 on tariff headings 8541.40.11 and 8541.40.12 respectively with effect from 1st April 2022.
Rule 14a of the Antidumping Rules, 1995: Termination of investigation
CM. Appl. 465672022: Application filed by the Authority before the Honble High Court of Delhi seeking its permission to publish the termination notification.
रजजस्ट्री स.ं डी.एल.- 33004/99 REGD. No. D. L.-33004/99
सी.जी.-डी.एल.-अ.-10112022-240185
xxxGIDHxxx
CG-DL-E-10112022-240185
xxxGIDExxx
असाधारण
EXTRAORDINARY
भाग I—खण्ड 1
PART I—Section 1
प्राजधकार स ेप्रकाजित
PUBLISHED BY AUTHORITY
स.ं 283] नई ददल्ली, बृहस्ट्प जतवार, नवम्ब र 10, 2022/कार्ततक 19, 1944
No. 283] NEW DELHI, THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2022/KARTIKA 19, 1944
वाजणज्य एव ंउद्योग मत्रं ालय
(वाजणज्य जवभाग)
(व्यापार उपचार महाजनदेिालय)
अजधसचू ना
जाचं समाजि
नई ददल् ली, 9 नवम् बर, 2021
मामला स.ं एडी (ओआई) 48/2020
जवषय : चीन जन.गण., थाइलडैं और जवयतनाम के मलू के अथवा वहा ं स े जनयााजतत सोलर सलै चाह े मॉड्यलू या पनै ल म ें
सयं ोजजत हों अथवा नहीं, के आयातों स ेसबं ंजधत पाटनरोधी जाचं समाजि ।
क. प्रस्ट्त ावना
फा. स.ं 6/56/2020-डीजीटीआर.—1. समय-समय पर यथासंिोजधत सीमािुल्क टैररफ अजधजनयम, 1975 (जजसे
आगे अजधजनयम भी कहा गया ह)ै और समय-समय पर यथा-संिोजधत सीमािुल्क टैररफ (पारटत वस्ट्तुओं की पहचान, उन
पर पाटनरोधी िल्ु क का आकलन और संग्रहण तथा क्षजतजनधाारण) जनयमावली, 1995 (जजसे आग े जनयमावली भी
कहा गया ह)ै को ध् यान में रखतें ए ए म.ै इंजडयन सोलर मै युफैच रसा एसोजसएिन (जजसे यहां आग े ‘‘आईएसएमए’’ अथवा
‘आवेदक’ भी कहा गया ह)ै ने (i) मै. मुर ा सोलर पीवी जलजमटेड (एसईजडै यूजनट); (ii) मै. जुजपटर सोलर पावर जलजमटेड
(डीटीए यूजनट) और (iii) मै. जुजपटर इंटरनिे नल जलजमटेड (डीटीए यूजनट) की ओर चीन जन.गण., थाइलैंड और जवयतनाम
(जज ह ें आग े संब द दिे भी कहा गया ह)ै के मलू के अथवा वहां स े जनयााजतत ‘सोलर सलै ’ चाह े मॉड्यलू या पैनल म ें
संयोजजत हों अथवा नहीं, के आयातों से संबंजधत पाटनरोधी जांच की िरूु आत करन े और उन पर पाटनरोधी िलु क लगान े
के जलए जनर्ददष्ट प्राजधकारी (जज ह ें आग ेप्राजधकारी भी कहा गया ह)ै के समक्ष एक आवेदन प्रस्ट्त ुत दकया ह।ै
7472 GI/2022 (1)2 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
2. प्राजधकारी न े संब द देिों से सबं द वस्ट् तु के पाटन, घरेल ू उद्योग को क्षजत और पाटन तथा क्षजत के बीच कारणात् मक
संबंध के आवेदक द्वारा प्रस्ट् तुत प्रथम दष्ृ ट या सा्य के आधार पर जनयमावली के जनयम 5 के अनुसार कजथत पाटन
और घरेल ूउद्योग को पररणामी क्षजत के संबंध म ेंपाटनरोधी जांच की िुरूआत की थी ।
3. तद्नुसार, प्राजधकारी न े चीन जन.गण., थाइलडैं और जवयतनाम के मूल की अथवा वहा ं स े जनयााजतत संब द वस्ट् तु के
आयातों से संबंजधत पाटनरोधी जांच की िुरूआत करते ए ए राजपत्र में प्रकाजित अजधसूचना सं. 6/56/2020-
डीजीटीआर ददनांक 15 मई, 2021 के माध् यम स ेएक सावाजजनक सूचना जारी की थी ।
ख. प्रदिया
4. प्राजधकारी ने जनयमावली के जनयम 5(5) के अनुसार जांच की िुरूआत की कारावाई से पहले वतामान पाटनरोधी
आवेदन की प्राजि के बारे में भारत म ेंसंब द देिों के दतू ावासों को अजधसूजचत दकया ।
5. प्राजधकारी न े जांच िुरूआत के बाद जांच िुरूआत संबंधी अजधसूचना की प्रजतया ं भारत म ें संब द देिों के दतू ावासों,
संब द देिों के ज्ञात उत् पादकों/जनयाातकों, ज्ञात आयातकों/प्रयोत ाओं और घरेल ू उद्योग को आवेदक द्वारा उपलध
कराए गए पतों के अनुसार भेजी थी और उनसे जनयमावली के जनयम 6(2) के अनुसार जांच िुरूआत अजधसूचना के
30 ददनों के भीतर जलजखत म ेंअपन ेजवचारों से अवगत कराने का अनुरोध दकया था ।
6. प्राजधकारी ने जनयमावली के जनयम 6(3) के अनुसार ज्ञात उत् पादकों/जनयाातकों तथा भारत में संब द देिों के
दतू ावासों को आवेदन के अगोपनीय अंि की एक-एक प्रजत उपल ध कराई थी ।
7. भारत म ें संब द देिों के दतू ावासों से जवजहत समय सीमा के भीतर प्रश् नावली का उत् तर दने े के जलए अपन-े अपन े देिों
के जनयाातकों/उत् पादकों को सलाह दने े का अनरु ोध भी दकया गया था । उत् पादकों/जनयाातकों को भेजे गए पत्र और
प्रश् नावली की एक प्रजत संब द देिों से ज्ञात उत् पादकों/जनयाातकों के नाम और पतों के साथ दतू ावास को भी भेजी गई
थी ।
8. जांच िुरूआत अजधसूचना और सूचना के रूप में संब द देिों से जनयाातकों/उत् पादकों और आयातकों/प्रयोत ाओं न े
जनयाातक प्रश् नावली के उत् तर और कानूनी अनुरोध प्रस्ट्त ुत करके प्राजधकारी को उत् तर ददया था ।
9. सभी जहतब द पक्षकारों की एक सूची उन सभी से इस अनरु ोध के साथ डी जी टी आर की वैबसाइट पर अपलोड की
गई थी दक व े अपने अनरु ोधों का अगोपनीय अिं अ य सभी जहतब द पक्षकारों को ई-मेल कर द ें य ोंदक वतामान
वैजिक महामारी के कारण सावाजजनक फाइल भौजतक रूप में उपल ध नहीं थी ।
10. प्राजधकारी ने जनयम 6(6) के अनुसार जहतब द पक्षकारों को मौजखक रूप से सगं त सूचना प्रस्ट्त ुत करन े का अवसर देन े
के जलए ददनांक 17 नवंबर, 2021 को एक मौजखक सुनवाई आयोजजत की थी ।
11. घरेलू उद्योग द्वारा दायर वापसी आवेदन को सभी इच्छुक पक्षों को पररचाजलत दकया गया था।
ग. मकु दमा
12. पूवोत जांच िुरूआत अजधसचू ना को सोलर पावर डेवलपस ा एसोजसएिन (एसपीडीए) न े घरेलू उद्योग को क्षजत के
अभाव, याजचकाकताा की अपयााप् त यो् यता, अ य प्रयोत ा उद्योग के जहत पर जवचार न करने, जवचाराधीन उत् पाद
और समान वस्ट् तु का गलत गंग से पररभाजषत दायरा जैसे मदों ु ों का आरोप लगाते ए ए दायर की गई ररट याजचका
(डल् य.ूपी. (सी)5882/2021) के माध् यम से माननीय ददल् ली उच् च यायालय के समक्ष चनु ौती दी गई ह ै । ददल्ल ी
उच् च यायालय ने ददनांक 04.06.2021 के अपने आदेि के माध् यम से याजचकाकताा (एस पी डी ए) को यह जवजिष्ट
राहत प्रदान की ह ै दक डी जी टी आर के समक्ष उत् तर प्रस्ट् ततु करन े की समय सीमा सुनवाई की अगली तारीख
(19.7.2021) से आगे दकसी तारीख तक बढा दी जाएगी । यह मामला इस समय उच् च यायालय समक्ष लंजबतह ै।
13. उत याजचका (ड ल् य.ू पी. (सी)5882/2021) के संबंध में ददनांक 04.06.2021 के उच् च य ायालय के आदेि के
जवरू द डी जी टीआर द्वारा माननीय उच् चतम यायालय में एसएलपी (सी) 12057/2021 दायर की गई थी जजसे
माननीय उच् चतम यायालय न े ददनांक 09.08.2021 के अपने आदेि के जररए खाररज कर ददया था ।
14. मौजखक सुनवाई के बाद कुछ जनयाातकों/उत् पादकों न े प्राजधकारी द्वारा जनधााररत समय के बाद दायर अपन े प्रश् नावली
के उत् तर को स्ट् वीकार करन े की प्राथाना करते ए ए ददल् ली उच् च य ायालय से अनुरोध दकया था दक जवलंजबत उत् तरों को
स्ट् वीकार करने के संबंध म ें 19.04.2022 को अंजतम सुनवाई में माननीय उच् च यायालय न े डी जी टी आर के इस
दजृ िकोण का समथान करत े ए ए अपना जनणाय ददया दक ‘’ ददनांक 4.06.2021 का उच् च य ायालय का आदेि एक
जनजी आदेि ह ै और यायालय द्वारा राहत को इसजलए बढाया गया था तादक संबंजधत याजचकाकताा (आयातक)
जनर्ददष् ट प्राजधकारी के समक्ष सूचना देने म ें सक्षम हों और न दक संबंजधत याजचकाकताा (जनयाात) सक्षम हों ।’’ तथाजप,[भाग I—खण् ड 1] भारत का राजपत्र : असाधारण 3
माननीय यायालय ने यह भी जनदेि ददया दक ददनांक 25 जून, 2021 से 31 जुलाई, 2021 तक याजचकाकतााओं
द्वारा दायर उत् तरों को प्रत् येक याजचकाकताा द्वारा आम्ड ा फोसजे बैटल कैजुअल् टी वले फेयर फंड म ें 1,00,000/- रूपए
की लागत के भगु तान के अधीन ररकॉडा म ेंजलया जाएगा ।
घ. घरेल ूउद्योग स ेप्राप्त अनरु ोध
15. आवेदक ने ददनांक 14 जुलाई, 2022 के एक पत्र/ई-मेल के माध् यम से यह बताते ए ए इस जवषय पर अपने आवेदन को
वापस ले जलया ह ैदक:
‘’आई एस एम ए अनुरोध करता ह ै दक जांच िुरूआत के बाद भारत सरकार ने 1 अप्रैल, 2022 से टैररफ िीषों
8541.40.11 और 8541.40.12 पर िमि: 25 प्रजतित और 40 प्रजतित का मूल सीमािुल् क िुरू दकया ह ै ।
जवचाराधीन उत् पाद के संपूणा दायरे को िाजमल करने वाली उत लेवी न े यद्यजप, पूणा रूप स े नहीं तथाजप, पयााप् त
रूप से संब द देिों से पाटन के कारण घरेलू उद्योग द्वारा झले े जा रह ेकीमत दबाव को कम कर ददया ह।ै ’’
ङ. घरेल ूउद्योग की वापसी के आवदे न पर रटप्पजणया ं
16. घरेलू उद्योग द्वारा दायर उपयक्तुा जनकासी आवेदन अय इच्छुक पार्टटयों को पररचाजलत दकया गया था। अजधकांि
जहतब द पक्षकारों ने घरेल ू उद्योग के वापसी आवेदन का समथना दकया और जांच को समाि करने का अनरु ोध दकया।
कुछ जहतब द पक्षकारों न े जांच को समाि करन े का अनरु ोध करत े ए ए यह भी अनरु ोध दकया दक प्राजधकारी को पाटन
और क्षजत के दावों को सत्याजपत करने के जलए सै दांजतक रूप से जांच करनी चाजहए ।
च. प्राजधकारी द्वारा जाचं
17. घरेल ू उद्योग द्वारा ददनांक 14 जलु ाई, 2022 के उनके पत्र के माध् यम स े दकए गए अनुरोध की जांच की गई ह ै ।
प्राजधकारी नोट करत े ह ैंदक जनयमावली का जनयम 14(क) जनम्न ानुसार उल्ल ेख करता ह ै:
‘’जांच की समाजि – जनर्ददष् ट प्राजधकारी एक सावाजजनक सूचना जारी करके दकसी जांच को तत् काल समाप् त कर दगें े
यदद-
(क) उ ह ेंपीजऺडत घरेलू उद्योग जजसके अनुरोध पर जांच की िुरूआत की गई थी, से या उसकी ओर से जलजखत म ें
ऐसा करने का अनरुोध प्राप् त होता ह ै।’’
18. यह नोट दकया गया ह ै दक जनयमावली का जनयम 14 कजतपय जस्ट्थजतयों म ें पाटनरोधी जांच की समाजि का प्रावधान
करता ह ैजजनमें ऐसी जस्ट्थजत िाजमल है, जबदक उस पीजऺडत घरेलू उद्योग जजसके कहने पर जाचं िुरू की गई थी, द्वारा
आवेदन वापस ल े जलया जाता ह ै । जनयमावली का जनयम 14(क) म ें यह प्रावधान ह ै दक प्राजधकारी एक सावाजजनक
सूचना जारी करके जांच समाप्त कर दगें े यदद उ ह ें उस पीजऺडत घरेलू उद्योग, जजसके कहने पर जांच िुरू की गई थी,
से या उसकी ओर से जलजखत में ऐसा करने का अनरु ोध प्राप् त होता ह ै।
19. वतामान जांच डीटीए इकाइयों अथाात मै. जुजपटर सोलर पावर जलजमटेड और म.ै जुपीटर इंटरनेिनल जलजमटेड के रूप
में घरेलू उद्योग मानत े ए ए आई एस एम ए द्वारा दायर आवेदन के आधार पर िुरू की गई थी। प्राजधकारी नोट करते
ह ैं दक जनयमावली के जनयम 14(क) म ें प्राजधकारी के जलए तब जांच समाप् त करना अपेजक्षत ह ै जबदक उस घरेल ू
उद्योग, जजसके कहने पर जांच िुरू की गई थी, द्वारा जांच की समाजि के जलए जलजखत अनुरोध प्राप् त होता ह ै।
20. मुकदमे के संबंध में प्राजधकारी नोट करत े ह ैं दक माननीय उच् च यायालय ने ररट याजचका (ड ल् य.ू पी.(सी)
5882/2021) में ददनांक 05.10.2021 के अपने आदेि के माध् यम से प्राजधकारी को जांच की कारावाई करने का
जनदेि ददया ह,ै तथाजप,उ होंने प्राजधकारी को यह जनदेि ददया था दक जांच के संचालन से उत्प न कोई आदेि केवल
माननीय उच् च यायालय की अनुमजत से ही पाररत दकया जाना चाजहए ।
21. तदनुसार, घरेल ू उद्योग स े आवेदन वापस लने े के अनुरोध की प्राजि के बाद, प्राजधकारी ने सी.एम. आवेदन.
46567/2022 द्वारा माननीय ददल्ली उच्च यायालय के समक्ष एक आवेदन दायर कर समाजि अजधसूचना प्रकाजित
करन े की अनुमजत मांगी। आवदे न पर माननीय यायालय द्वारा 01.11.2022 को डल् यू.पी.(सी) 5882/2021 के
साथ सुनवाई की गई, माननीय यायालय द्वारा जनम्नजलजखत आदेि पाररत दकया गया:
“… उपरोक्त कथनों के आलोक में, वतामान आवेदन स्ट्वीकार दकया जाता ह ै और वतामान ररट याजचका
आवेदन के साथ संतिु होन े पर जनस्ट्ताररत की जाती ह।ै
अंतररम आदिे , यदद कोई हों, रदों हो जात ेह।ैं“4 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
22. जहां तक पाटन और क्षजत जवश्लषे ण पर जवश्लेषण पूरा करने के संबंध में जहतब द पक्षकारों की रटप्पजणयों का संबंध है,
यह नोट दकया जाता ह ै दक वापसी के अनरु ोध को ध्यान म ें रखते ए ए घरेल ू उद्योग और तत्काल जांच के तथ्यों और
पररजस्ट्थजतयों को सामन ेरखा गया ह,ै इस तरह की कारावाई अयो्य ह।ै
छ. जनष्क ष ा
23. घरेलू उद्योग, आईएसएमए द्वारा जनयमावली का जनयम 14(क) के प्रावधानों के अतं गता दकए गए पूवोत अनुरोध
और सी.एम. आवेदन. 46567/2022 एव ं डल्य.ूपी. (सी) 5882/2021 म ें माननीय उच्च यायालय के आदेि को
मदों ेनजर प्राजधकारी चीन जन.गण., थाइलडैं और जवयतनाम के मूल के अथवा वहा ं से जनयाजा तत सोलर सैलों, चाह े
मॉड्यूल या पनै ल म ें संयोजजत हों अथवा नहीं, के आयातों के जवरू द अजधसूचना सं. 6/56/2020-डी जी टी आर के
माध् यम से ददनाकं 15 मई 2021 को िुरू की गई जांच को एतद्द्वारा समाप् त करते ह ैं।
अन त स्ट् वरूप, जनर्ददि प्राजधकारी
MINISTRY OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY
(Department of Commerce)
(DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF TRADE REMEDIES)
NOTIFICATION
TERMINATION
New Delhi, the 9th November, 2022
Case No. (O.I.) 48/2020
Subject :Termination of Anti-Dumping Investigation concerning imports of Solar Cells whether or
not assembled into Modules or Panels originating in or exported from China PR, Thailand
and Vietnam.
A. Introduction
F. No. 6/56/2020-DGTR.—1. Having regard to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 as amended from
time to time (hereinafter also referred as the „Act‟) and the Customs Tariff (Identification, Assessment and
Collection of Anti-dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995, as
amended from time to time (hereinafter also referred as the „Rules‟), thereof, M/s Indian Solar
Manufacturers Association (hereinafter also referred to as „ISMA‟ or the „applicant‟), on behalf of (i) M/s
Mundra Solar PV Limited (SEZ unit); (ii) M/s Jupiter Solar Power Limited (DTA unit) and (iii) M/s Jupiter
International Limited (DTA unit) filed an application before the Designated Authority (hereinafter also
referred to as the „Authority‟) for initiation of anti-dumping investigation and imposition of anti-dumping
duties on the imports of Solar Cells whether or not assembled into Modules or Panels originating in or
exported from China PR, Thailand and Vietnam (hereinafter referred as „subject countries‟).
2. The Authority, based on prima facie evidence of dumping of subject goods from the subject countries,
injury to the domestic industry and causal link between the dumping and injury submitted by the
applicant, initiated an anti-dumping investigation into the alleged dumping, and consequential injury
to the domestic industry in terms of Rule 5 of the Rules.
3. The Authority accordingly issued a public notice vide notification no. 6/56/2020-DGTR dated 15th
May, 2021 published in the Gazette of India, initiating an anti-dumping investigation concerning
imports of the subject goods, originating in or exported from China PR, Thailand and Vietnam.
B. Procedure
4. The Authority notified the Embassies of subject countries in India about the receipt of the present
anti-dumping application before proceeding to initiate the investigation in accordance with Rule 5(5)
of the Rules.
5. The Authority post-initiation sent copies of the initiation notification to the Embassies of the subject
countries in India, known producers/exporters from the subject countries, known importers/users and
the domestic industry as per the addresses made available by the applicant and requested them to[भाग I—खण् ड 1] भारत का राजपत्र : असाधारण 5
make their views known in writing within 30 days of the initiation notification as per Rule 6(2) of the
Rules.
6. The Authority provided a copy of the non-confidential version of the application to the known
producers/exporters and to the Embassies of the subject countries in India in accordance with Rule
6(3) of the Rules.
7. The Embassies of the subject countries in India were also requested to advise the exporters/producers
from its countries to respond to the questionnaire within the prescribed time limit. A copy of the letter
and questionnaire sent to the producers/exporters was also sent to them along with the names and
addresses of the known producers/exporters from the subject countries.
8. In response to the initiation notification and intimation, exporters/ producers from the subject
countries and importers/ users responded to the Authority by filing the exporter questionnaire
responses and the legal submissions.
9. A list of all the interested parties was uploaded on the DGTR‟s website along with the request therein
to all of them to email the non-confidential version of their submissions to all other interested parties
since the public file was not accessible physically due to the ongoing global pandemic.
10. The Authority held an oral hearing on 17th November, 2021 to provide an opportunity to the interested
parties to present relevant information orally in accordance with the Rule 6(6).
11. The withdrawal application filed by the domestic industry was circulated to all interested parties.
C. Litigation
12. The aforesaid initiation notification has been challenged before the Hon‟ble Delhi High Court through
a Writ Petition (W.P.(C) 5882/2021) filed by Solar Power Developers Association (SPDA) alleging
issues like absence of injury to the domestic industry, insufficient standing of the petitioner, no
consideration of interest of the other user industry, poorly defined scope of product under
consideration & like article. The High Court of Delhi through its order dated 04.06.2021 granted
specific relief to the petitioner (SPDA) that the time limit for filing the response before DGTR shall
stand extended to a date beyond the next date of hearing i.e 19.07.2021.
13. The SLP (C) 12057/2021 was filed by the DGTR in the Hon‟ble Supreme Court against the High
Court Order dated 04.06.2021 in the above petition (W.P.(C) 5882/2021) which was dismissed by the
Hon‟ble Supreme Court through its order dated 09.08.2021.
14. After the oral hearing, some of the exporters/producers approached the High Court of Delhi praying
for acceptance of their questionnaire responses filed beyond the time stipulated by the Authority. In
last hearing on 19.04.2022 on acceptance of belated responses, the Hon‟ble High Court passed its
judgement upholding DGTR‟s stand that “ the High Court Order dated 4.6.2021 is an order in
personam as the relief had been extended by the court to enable petitioners therein (importers) to
place information before the Designated Authority and not the petitioners herein (exporters) .”
However, Hon‟ble Court also directed that “the responses filed by the petitioners between 25 June,
2021 and 31 July 2021 to be taken on record subject to the payment of costs of Rs.1,00,000/- by each
of the petitioners to Armed Forces Battle Casualties Welfare Fund”.
D. Request received from the Domestic Industry
15. The applicant through a letter/an email dated 14th July 2022, withdrew the application filed in the
subject matter stating that:
“ISMA submits that post initiation, Government of India has introduced a basic customs duty of 25%
and 40% on tariff headings 8541.40.11 and 8541.40.12 respectively with effect from 1st April 2022.
The said levy covering the entire scope of the product under investigation has alleviated the price
pressure being suffered by the domestic industry due to dumping from the subject countries to a
considerable extent, though not fully.”
E. Comments on the withdrawal application of the domestic industry
16. The abovementioned withdrawal application filed by the domestic industry was circulated to the other
interested parties. Most of the interested parties supported the domestic industry‟s withdrawal
application and requested for termination of the investigation. A few interested parties while6 THE GAZETTE OF INDIA : EXTRAORDINARY [PART I—SEC.1]
requesting for termination of the investigation also requested that the Authority should carry out the
examination in principle to verify the claims of dumping and injury.
F. Examination by the Authority
17. The request made by the domestic industry, vide its letter dated 14.07.2022 has been examined. The
Authority notes that Rule 14(a) of the Anti-dumping Rules, 1995 reads as under:
“Termination of investigation. - The designated authority shall, by issue of a public notice, terminate
an investigation immediately if –
(a) it receives a request in writing for doing so from or on behalf of the domestic industry affected, at
whose instance the investigation was initiated;”
18. It is noted that Rule 14 of the Anti-dumping Rules, 1995 provides for termination of an anti-dumping
investigation in certain situations which includes a situation wherein the application is withdrawn by
the affected domestic industry, at whose instance the investigation was initiated. Rule 14(a) of the
Anti-dumping Rules, 1995 provides that the Authority shall, by issue of a public notice, terminate an
investigation if it receives a request in writing for doing so from or on behalf of the domestic industry
affected, at whose instance the investigation was initiated.
19. The present investigation was initiated based on an application filed by ISMA, considering the
domestic industry as DTA units i.e., M/s Jupiter Solar Power Limited and M/s Jupiter International
Limited. The Authority notes that Rule 14(a) of the Anti-dumping Rules, 1995 requires the Authority
to terminate the investigation, once the domestic industry, at whose instance the investigation was
initiated files a written request for termination of the investigation.
20. With regards to the litigation, the Authority notes that the Hon‟ble High Court vide its order dated
05.10.2021 in Writ Petition (W.P.(C) 5882/2021) has directed the Authority to proceed with the
investigation, however, it had directed the Authority that any order emanating from the conduct of the
investigation needs to passed only with the leave of the Hon‟ble High Court.
21. Accordingly, after the receipt of the request of the withdrawal of the application from the domestic
industry, the Authority filed an application CM. Appl. 46567/2022 before the Hon‟ble High Court of
Delhi seeking its permission to publish the termination notification. The application was heard along
with the W.P. (c) 5882/2021 by the Hon‟ble Court on 01.11.2022. The following order was passed by
the Hon‟ble Court:
“… In view of the aforesaid statements, the present application is allowed and the present writ
petition along with application stands disposed of as satisfied.
The interim orders, if any, stand vacated.”
22. As regard the comments of the interested parties with respect to completion of analysis on dumping
and injury analysis, it is noted that in view of the withdrawal request put forward the domestic
industry and the facts and circumstances of the instant investigation, such an exercise is not
warranted.
G. Conclusion
23. ln view of the aforesaid request made by the domestic industry, ISMA, under the provisions of Rule
14(a) of the Anti-dumping Rules, 1995, and in accordance with the Order of the Hon‟ble High Court
in CM Appl. 46567/2022 and W.P. (C) 5882/2021, the Authority hereby terminates the investigation
initiated on 15th May, 2021 vide notification No. 6/56/2020-DGTR against the imports of Solar Cells
whether or not assembled into Modules or Panels originating in or exported from China PR, Thailand
and Vietnam.
ANANT SWARUP, Designated Authority
Uploaded by Dte. of Printing at Government of India Press, Ring Road, Mayapuri, New Delhi-110064
and Published by the Controller of Publications, Delhi-110054.