World Trade Organization Organisation Mondiale du Commerce Organización Mundial del Comercio

Reply: Second hand capital goods are clearly defined and their imports are therefore freely allowed. However, there is no agreed definition of remanufactured goods in the WTO and different members have different criteria. Hence the import of such goods have to be considered on merits to safeguard public interest.

US 46:

Report by the Secretariat (WT/TPR/S/249): III. TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE: (2) Measures Directly Affecting Imports: (vi) Import prohibitions, restrictions, and licensing: Page 54, paragraph 55:

According to the Secretariat: "The Import Policy Schedule lists the items that are restricted and items that are restricted with a condition. Restricted items require a specific import licence issued by the Directorate General of Foreign Trade (DGFT). Restricted items subject to conditions, require import permits (e.g. sanitary and phytosanitary permits), in addition to the specific import licence. It is not clear to the Secretariat which products require an automatic licence and which require a non automatic licence [emphasis added]." Additionally, we understand that India's ITC (HS) Classification website at www.dgft.gov.in does not indicate which procedures are automatic or non automatic. Please explain India's automatic and non automatic licensing system in light of its obligations under the WTO Agreement on Import Licensing. For example, please provide a list that specifies which products are subject to automatic license requirements, and which are subject to non automatic import license requirements. What is the rationale for requiring a non automatic import license in respect of each of the identified products? What is India's plan to increase the transparency of its licensing regime by making information publicly available and accessible?

Reply: India will be notifying the same shortly.

US 47:

Report by the Secretariat (WT/TPR/S/249): III. TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE: (2) Measures Directly Affecting Imports: (vi) Import prohibitions, restrictions, and licensing: Page 55, paragraph 58:

Please explain in greater detail what the actual user condition is that is associated with import licenses.

Reply: This has been described under para 9.4, 9.5 and 9.6 of the Foreign Trade Policy (2009 2014) which is available at website http://dgft.gov.in. The Foreign Trade Policy has been notified to WTO.

US 48:

Report by the Secretariat (WT/TPR/S/249): III. TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE: (2) Measures Directly Affecting Imports: (vi) Import prohibitions, restrictions, and licensing: Page 56, paragraph 59:

Please explain the rationale for assessing application fees on the basis of the c.i.f. value of imports instead of the cost of services rendered as prescribed in GATT Article VIII.

Reply: The actual cost of services rendered is much higher than the present application fee, however, the application fees is being reviewed.

US 49:

Report by the Secretariat (WT/TPR/S/249):III. TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE: (2) Measures Directly Affecting Imports: (vi) Import prohibitions, restrictions, and licensing: Page 57, paragraph 62:

Please explain the rationale for imposing restrictions on imports that do not meet a "minimum price." How does India assess the "quality" of a product that is so restricted? Does India impose a corresponding "minimum price" requirement on the sale of domestic products?

Reply: Minimum import price is one of the criteria to determine quality. Several factors are kept in mind while determining the minimum price.

US 50:

Report by the Secretariat (WT/TPR/S/249): III. TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE: (2) Measures Directly Affecting Imports: (vi) Import prohibitions, restrictions, and licensing: Page 58, paragraph 66:

Please explain the rationale for restricting imports including motor vehicles to the three identified ports.

Reply: Imports of vehicles are allowed at specified ports for better monitoring of imports.

US 51:

Report by the Secretariat (WT/TPR/S/249): III. TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE: (2) Measures Directly Affecting Imports: (vi) Import prohibitions, restrictions, and licensing: Page 58, Section III(2)(vi)(d):

The United States understands that India offers subsidized rates (i.e., above market) when purchasing solar power generated by projects under the Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission (JNNSM). A developer may only get these subsidized rates, however, if it complies with what the JNNSM guidelines call "domestic content requirements," which require that certain solar equipment used by developers in such projects be manufactured in India, i.e., of domestic (Indian) origin. How does India view these requirements in light of its obligation under Article 3.1(b) of the SCM Agreement?

Reply: In India's views, the power purchase arrangements under the India's Jawaharlal Nehru National Solar Mission (JNNSM) do not involve subsidies which are prohibited under Article 3.1 (b) of ASCM.

US 52:

Report by the Secretariat (WT/TPR/S/249): III. TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE: (2) Measures Directly Affecting Imports: (vii) State trading: Page 58, paragraph 70:

The Secretariat says that "India last filed its STE notification in 2010; however, the statistics were on STEs imports up to 2006." When will India bring its STE import notification up to date?

Reply:_It_would_notify_it_shortly.___US_53'>Reply: It would notify it shortly.

US 53:

Report by the Secretariat (WT/TPR/S/249): III. TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE: (2) Measures Directly Affecting Imports: (viii) Contingency measures: Page 61, paragraph 78:

The Secretariat reports that India's sunset reviews of its antidumping measures may be initiated either upon petition by the domestic industry or self initiated by India's Directorate General of Antidumping and Allied Duties (DGAD), and, further, that India's rules to initiate sunset reviews are contained in Trade Notice No. 1/2008 of 10 March 2008. However, in its recent initiations of sunset reviews, India cites the "order of the Hon'ble Delhi High court in the matter of Indian Metal and Ferro Alloys Ltd V/s Designated Authority, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 16893 of 2006 and in accordance with Section 9 A (5) of the Act, read with Rule 23 of the AD Rules." (DGAD Initiation Notification, Sunset Review of Certain Rubber Chemicals, May 12, 2010). This order notes that sunset reviews are mandatory under Indian law and must be conducted prior to the expiration of any antidumping measure. The Secretariat report does not note that under its current laws and regulations, India is obliged to undertake a sunset review of every antidumping measure prior to its expiration. Could India please explain how the "order of the Hon'ble Delhi High court in the matter of Indian Metal and Ferro Alloys Ltd V/s Designated Authority, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 16893 of 2006 and in accordance with Section 9 A (5) of the Act, read with Rule 23 of the AD Rules" relates to Indian trade remedy law and the extent to which this order affects or otherwise modifies the practice of automatic sunset reviews?

Reply: The Customs Tariff Act 1975 (as amended from time to time) and Anti Dumping Rules require the Authority to conduct review of anti dumping duties. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court has held in Writ Petition No. 16893 of 2006 that sunset review is mandatory in order to determine whether cessation of the existing duty is likely to lead to the continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury. Therefore the Authority, in terms of said order, initiates a sunset review investigation in accordance with Section 9A(5) of the Act read with Rule 23 of Antidumping Rules to review the need for continued imposition of duty and to examine whether the cessation of such duty is likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury.

US 54:

Report by the Secretariat (WT/TPR/S/249): III. TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE: (2) Measures Directly Affecting Imports: (viii) Contingency measures: Page 62, paragraph 79:

The Secretariat report, in the discussion of mid term reviews of antidumping duty measures, states that requests for mid term reviews of antidumping measures may be made to DGAD "provided that a reasonable period of time, i.e. at least one year, has elapsed since the imposition of the definitive anti dumping duty by the Central Government." However, DGAD's handling of the recent mid term review of the antidumping measures on imports of Cold Rolled Steel Products from the United States seems inconsistent with the Secretariat's report. Could India please clarify the timeframe for requests for mid term reviews and explain whether exceptions exist with respect to any requirement for a reasonable period of time to elapse before a mid year review will be conducted?

Reply: The request for mid term review of anti dumping measures may be made to DGAD provided that a reasonable period of time, i.e. at least one year, has elapsed since the imposition of the definitive anti dumping duty by the Central Government. The mid term review of anti dumping measures on imports of cold rolled steel products from the United States is consistent with the above guidelines as in this case the definitive anti dumping duty was imposed from 20 February 2009 and mid term review of the anti dumping duty imposed was initiated on 23 June 2010.

US 55:

Report by the Secretariat (WT/TPR/S/249): III. TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE: (2) Measures Directly Affecting Imports: (viii) Contingency measures: Page 65 paragraph 92:

The Secretariat report indicates that safeguard decisions are made by the Standing Board on Safeguards ("the Board"). However, very little is known about this body. Could India please provide further information about this Board including timetables for decision making, structural composition of the Board and the policies under which the Board operates?

Reply: Standing Board on safeguards was constituted by the Government of India with Secretary, Department of Commerce as Chairman. Other Members of the Board are Secretaries from Department of Revenue, Department of Agriculture and Cooperation, Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion and Secretary (ER) in Ministry of External Affairs Secretaries of any other ministry/department concerned with the safeguard measure may also be co opted to attend the meeting of the Standing Board on Safeguards (Board).

The Board considers the recommendations made by the Director General Safeguards (the investigating authority) and conveys its recommendation to the Central Government after deliberation in the meeting of the Board. The Board will also consider recommendations relating to safeguard measures in the form of quantitative restrictions and convey its recommendation to the Central Government.

US 56:

Report by the Secretariat (WT/TPR/S/249): III. TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE: (2) Measures Directly Affecting Imports: (viii) Contingency measures: Page 66, paragraph 95:

The Report by the Secretariat states that recent legislation "amended India's safeguard legislation to allow for the use of quantitative restrictions as remedy measures." This amendment has not been notified to the WTO Safeguards Committee. When does India plan to notify this amendment to the appropriate WTO Committee?

Reply: Amendment to the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act (FTDR Act) was made through an Amendment Act of 2010 in August 2010. This inter alia, included insertion of Section 9 A giving powers to the Central Government to impose Quantitative restrictions as safeguard measures. Framing of Rules to implement these provisions is under consideration of the Central Government. As the Rules to implement these provisions were not framed, the above amendment to the FTDR Act could not be notified to the WTO Safeguard Committee earlier. However, India is taking steps to notify the above amendments to the FTDR Act to the Safeguard Committee. As and when the implementing Rules will be notified, the same will also be informed by India to the Safeguard Committee.

US 57:

Report by the Secretariat (WT/TPR/S/249): III. TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE: (2) Measures Directly Affecting Imports: (ix) Technical regulations and standards: Page 67, paragraph 99 115:

Although not specifically mentioned in the "technical regulations and standards" section of the Secretariat report, we would appreciate an update on the following outstanding trade concerns that were raised at the WTO TBT Committee during 2011:

• 
  E Waste Rules
  

• 
  Labelling Requirements for Processed Products
  
• 
  Drugs and Cosmetics Rules 2007
  

Reply:

E Waste Rules

E waste is one of the fastest growing waste streams across the globe and the need to have a separate regulation for E waste was felt. The Ministry of Environment and Forests has notified the E Waste (Management and Handling) Rules, 2011 on 12 May 2011, which shall come in to force from 1 May 2012. Copy of the Rules is available on Ministry of Environment and Forests website: www.envfor.nic.in. This was notified to the TBT Committee on 4 October 2010 with a 60 days comment period. The reduction in the use of hazardous substances (RoHS) shall be implemented w.e.f. 01.01.2014.

These Rules lay down responsibilities of Producers, Collection Centres, Dismantlers and Recyclers. The definition of Producer is given in these rules, which inter alia includes the person, who offers to sell imported electrical and electronic equipment.

The concept of extended producer responsibility (EPR) has been enshrined in these Rules. As per these Rules, producers of the Electrical and Electronic Equipment listed in Schedule I, i.e. IT and telecommunication equipment and Consumer electrical and electronics (television sets, refrigerator, washing machine, air conditioners), are required to finance, and organize a system to meet the costs involved in the environmentally sound management of e waste generated from the "end of life" of their own products and the historical waste available on the date from which these rules come in to force. Producers are also required to set up collection centres/ effective take back system for their 'end of life' electrical and electronic equipment.

The threshold limits prescribed in EU RoHS Directive, which is globally accepted standard for the hazardous substance used in manufacture of electrical and electronics components have been adopted.

Producers are expected to achieve reduction in use of six hazardous substances to the prescribed limit within a period of two years from the date of commencement of these Rules.

Labelling requirements for processed products

Food labeling

The draft Food Safety and Standards Authority of India Regulations, 2010 were notified in the Gazette of India (the Gazette No. 2 15015/30/2010 FSSAI) on 20 October, 2010. The same were also available on the website of the FSSAI (www.fssai.gov.in). These draft regulations were notified to the WTO in SPS format under reference G/SPS/N//IND69 dated 7 July 2010. Chapter 4 of these regulations are relating to packaging and labelling Regulations. India has not contemplated any new regulations. These measures are already enforced under the existing Indian Legislation (PFA Rules, 1995).

Eco Labelling Scheme

To increase consumer awareness, the MoEF, Government of India launched the eco labelling scheme known as "Ecomark" in 1991 vide Notification No. GSR 85(E) dated 20^th February, 2011 for easy identification of environment friendly products. Any product which is made, used or disposed of in a way that significantly reduces the harm it would otherwise cause the environment could be considered as environment friendly product. The specific objectives of the scheme are as follows:

• 
  To provide an incentive for manufacturers and importers to reduce adverse environmental impact of products.
  
• 
  To reward genuine initiatives by companies to reduce adverse environmental impact of their products.
  
• 
  To assist consumers to become environmentally responsible in their daily lives by providing information to take account of environmental factors in their purchase decisions.
  
• 
  To encourage citizens to purchase products which have less harmful environmental impacts.
  
• 
  Ultimately to improve the quality of the environment and to encourage the sustainable management of resources.
  

So far, the Government of India has notified the final criteria for the following 16 product categories which also include processed fruits and vegetable under food items:

1. Soaps and detergents	2. Paper
3. Food items	4. Lubricating oils
5. Packaging material/package	6. Architectural paints and powder
7. Batteries	8. Electrical/electronic goods
9. Food additives	10. Wood substitutes
11. Cosmetics	12. Aerosol propellants
13. Plastic products	14. Textiles
15. Fire extinguishers	16. Leather

Drugs and Cosmetic Rules 2007

The amendment to the Drugs and Cosmetic Rules for introducing a system of registration of imports of cosmetics into the country was published as a Gazette notice dated 2.2.2007. It was subsequently notified to the WTO on 15.4.2008 vide notification no G/TBT/N/IND/33. A subsequent Gazette notice was made on 19.5.2010 with a later amendment dated 19.7.2010 indicating the specific date of entry into force. Based on an extension granted, these rules are now to come into effect on 1.10.2011. Therefore, the transparency obligations under the TBT Agreement namely the reasonable time period for other members to make comments and providing a reasonable interval between its publications and entry into force have been met.

This notification is based purely on public health concerns of the consumers. The provisions of the amendment do not discriminate between the exporters to India as similar provisions are already in existence for domestic manufactures. A system of registration of imports of Drugs was already in practice since 2003.

The amended rules also take on board the concerns of some Members with the deletion of the clause related to inspection or visit of the manufacturer premises by the licensing authority in India or by any other person to whom the power has been delegated.

US 58:

Report by the Secretariat (WT/TPR/S/249):III. TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE: (2) Measures Directly Affecting Imports: (ix) Technical regulations and standards: Page 68, paragraph 103:

Since August 2007, India has notified a total of nine (9) new measures to the WTO TBT Committee plus one (1) supplemental notice, for a total of ten (10) notifications over the course of four years. During the same period, China notified a total of 561 measures; Brazil: 185 measures; and Kenya: 178 measures. How does India explain its extremely low relative number of TBT notifications?

Reply: Regulations, standards and conformity assessment procedures thereof are formed or changes are made therein according to the need of domestic industry, consumer safety and socio economic developments. As and when changes are made in existing regulations or standards and conformity assessment procedures thereof or new regulation or standard and conformity assessment procedures are drafted, this is duly notified to the WTO as per transparency obligations prescribed in the SPS and TBT Agreements.

US 59:

Report by the Secretariat (WT/TPR/S/249): III. TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE: (2) Measures Directly Affecting Imports: (ix) Technical regulations and standards: Page 68, paragraph 104:

According to the Secretariat: "A draft technical regulation is sent out for comments prior to its adoption by the concerned ministry/department/organization and publication in the Official Gazette. Comments must be provided within 60 days of the publication of the notice. The draft technical regulations are also notified to WTO Members for comments." Since August 2007, India's Ministry of Health sent 121 notices to the Official Gazette; India Ministry of Environment and Forests: 69 notices; India Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food, and Public Distribution: 59 notices. In sum, just these three individual ministries sent 249 notices to the Official Gazette. Please describe in detail the process by which India notifies measures to the WTO Secretariat. What actions is India taking (or planning to take) to improve the regulatory coordination required to notify the WTO of its many technical regulations and conformity assessment procedures?

Reply: During 2007 to 2011 India has notified 40 SPS and TBT notifications to the WTO. Whenever any department/ministry or regulatory body makes any changes in the existing regulation or standard and conformity assessment procedures thereof or drafts a new regulation or standard and conformity assessment procedures, they are notified to the WTO.

US 60:

Report by the Secretariat (WT/TPR/S/249): III. TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE: (2) Measures Directly Affecting Imports: (ix) Technical regulations and standards: Pages 68 69, paragraphs 103 105:

We understood that India would ensure that import licenses will be issued at the same time that the medical devices registrations are approved. India seems to have a three month processing lag. How does India plan to address these issues expeditiously, which may include providing adequate staff in the Drugs Controller General of India's office to implement the registration requirements?

Reply: Grant of registration certificate and grant of import license are separate exercises under the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules. Applications for grant of import license have to be processed subsequent to the approval of registration certificate as one of the pre condition of application is the grant of registration certificate. Many times authorised importer different from the registration certificate holder. To expedite the processing of applications the office of DCGI is being strengthened.

US 61:

Report by the Secretariat (WT/TPR/S/249): III. TRADE POLICIES AND PRACTICES BY MEASURE: (2) Measures Directly Affecting Imports: (ix) Technical regulations and standards: Pages 68 69, paragraphs 103 105:

When does India plan to establish a regime that distinguishes between medical technologies and pharmaceuticals; and, how will India provide the time required for both industry and India's regulators to prepare for compliance with and implementation of any new rules?