World Trade Organization Organisation Mondiale du Commerce Organización Mundial del Comercio

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