Indian Flange Exporter Seeks CIT Reconsideration of Upheld AFA AD Rate
An Indian stainless steel flanges exporter sought Jan. 8 to have the Court of International Trade reconsider part of its opinion upholding the company’s adverse facts available antidumping duty rate from the 2018-19 administrative review on its products (Kisaan Die Tech Private Ltd. v. U.S., CIT Consol. # 21-00512).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
CIT sustained the 146.25% AFA rate for Chandan Steel Limited in December, based on Commerce's finding that Chandran failed to cooperate to the best of its ability (see 2312110043). Commerce said Chandan repeatedly misreported its foreign sales information and the costs of production for those foreign sales. The court said Chandan's responses also “contained additional deficiencies related to its reporting of gross unit price, quantity discounts, other discounts, and duty refunds,” which the company didn't correct when given the opportunity.
Chandan said CIT didn't address its argument that any of its questionnaire errors were “non-existent to inconsequential” and “anyway remedial from the accepted record,” thus not deserving of an AFA rate. It said the “accepted record before Commerce supported calculating Chandan’s dumping margin from Chandan’s questionnaire responses.”
Chandan said it cited several examples of these “inconsequential” errors in its argument that CIT didn't discuss in its opinion. The court’s failure to address these was clear “factual or legal error,” it said.
“The Opinion just cites parts of Commerce’s unsupported conclusory decision itself (and not the accepted record) without anything more, as if a Commerce decision is self-affirming, violating the statutory judicial review requirement,” the exporter said, describing one such alleged oversight. “Respectfully, why even have judicial review? Pointless.”