[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 221 (Wednesday, November 17, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67321-67322]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E4-3196]



[[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]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P