TPM Navigation

As per the rules of the Bar Council of India, lawyers and law firms are not permitted to solicit work or advertise. By clicking on the "I Agree" button, you acknowledge and confirm that you are seeking information relating to TPM Solicitors & Consultants of your own accord and there has been no advertisement, personal communication, solicitation, invitation or any other inducement of any sort whatsoever by or on behalf of TPM or any of its members to solicit any work through this website.

Initiation of anti-subsidy/countervailing duty investigation concerning imports of Internally Grooved Copper Tubes and Pipes origination in or exported from China PR, Thailand and Viet Nam. (29.09.2026)

Product description: The product under consideration is “Internally Grooved Copper Tubes and Pipes”, also referred to as internally grooved tubes or IGT and known in market parlance as microfin tubes.

HS Codes: 7411 10 00, 7411 21 00, 7411 22 00 and 7411 29 00

Uses: The subject goods are principally used in the condensers of air-conditioners on account of their heat transfer properties, and are also used in air-conditioner evaporators, water heaters, automotive air-conditioners, heat pipe radiators of electronic products, solar equipment and water-cooled screw chilled water units.

Countries involved: China PR, Thailand and Viet Nam

Applicant: MetTube Copper India Private Limited

Date of Initiation: 29th September 2026

Period of Investigation: 1st April 2025 to 31st March 2026

Injury Period: 1st April 2022 – 31st March 2023, 1st April 2023 – 31st March 2024, 1st April 2024 – 31st March 2025 and the period of investigation.

Facts of the present case – The present application was filed by MetTube Copper India Private Limited seeking initiation of an anti-subsidy/countervailing duty investigation into imports of the subject goods from China PR, Thailand and Viet Nam. The domestic industry alleged that the subsidized imports of the subject goods from the subject countries are materially retarding the establishment of the domestic industry in India and has furnished prima facie evidence in support thereof. The Authority has noted that the demand for the subject goods in India was met almost entirely through imports until the applicant commenced production, that the subject imports increased over the injury period and continued to account for the predominant share of the demand in India during the period of investigation, and that the domestic industry, in its first full year of production, was able to secure only a marginal share of that demand. The landed price of the subject imports remained below both the cost of sales and the net sales realisation of the domestic industry in each year in which it operated and undercut its prices. The domestic industry was unable to raise its selling price to the level of its cost of sales, its production of the subject goods remained a small proportion of the capacity installed for the grooving operation, its inventories increased, and its profits, cash profits and return on capital employed were negative in both years of its operation. The Authority, having been prima facie satisfied with the information concerning existence of countervailable subsidies on production and export of the subject goods in the subject countries, the consequential material retardation of the establishment of the domestic industry as a result of the alleged subsidized imports and the causal link between such injury and the subsidized imports, has initiated the investigation vide Notification No. 6/54/2026-DGTR.

Stay Updated

Subscribe for latest insights, updates, and exclusive offers