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-dumping investigation concerning imports of Diisononyl Phthalate from Malaysia (27.09.2025)

Product Description – The product under consideration is Diisononyl Phthalate, as form of Phthalate Plasticizer. It is an organic compound with chemical formula C26H42O4, with CAS Number 28553-12-0.

HS Codes – 2917 33 00, 2917 32 00, 2917 34 00, 2917 39 20, 2917 39 90 and 2933 99 90.

Uses – The product under consideration is a plasticizer for PVC and other polymer products for making wires, cables and plastisols. It is also used in non-polymer application such as automotive components, inks, adhesives, lacquers, etc.

Countries involved – Malaysia

Applicants –

  1. KLJ Plasticizers Limited
  2. KLJ Petroplast Limited

Supporters –

  1. Payal Polyplast Private Limited
  2. Payal Plastichem Private Limited
  3. IG Petrochemicals Limited

Period of Investigation – 1st April 2024 – 31st March 2025 (12 months).

Injury Period – 2021-22, 2022-23, 2023-24 and the period of investigation.

Facts of the present case – The application was filed for redressal of dumping of Diisononyl Phthalate from Malaysia and South Korea. The domestic industry claimed that it has suffered on account of significant increase in dumped imports. The subject imports have undercut the prices of the domestic industry and depressed its prices. The domestic industry is operating at underutilized capacity and suffered due to accumulated inventories. The profitability of the domestic industry has declined, and it has incurred financial losses along with negative returns on investments. The Authority therefore found sufficient prima facie evidence of material injury being caused to the domestic industry by the dumped imports, justifying initiation of an anti-dumping investigation. However, the imports from Korea were found to be at injurious prices, and therefore, the investigation has been initiated with respect to imports from Malaysia.

Initiation of anti-dumping investigation concerning imports of BIS (2,2,6,6-Tetramethyl-4-Peridyl) Sebacate (UV 770) from European Union and China (27.09.2025)

Product Description – The product under consideration is BIS (2,2,6,6-Tetramethyl-4-Peridyl) Sebacate also known as UV 770 or Hindered Amines Light Stabilizer 770 (HALS 770). It is a low molecular weight organic compound with a colourless to pale yellow in colour.

HS Codes – 2933 39 90 and 3812 39 90

Uses – The product under consideration is added to polymer compounds for protection of such polymers from degradation from sunlight. The product under consideration is used in masterbatches for making Flexible Intermediate Bulk Container (FIBC) bags. It is also used in tapes and polymer mouldings for making car bumpers and car door panels.

Countries involved – China and European Union

Applicants –  

  1. Clean Science and Technology Limited
  2. Clean Fino-chem Limited

Period of Investigation – 1st April 2024- 31st March 2025

Injury Period 2021-22, 2022-23, 2023-24 and the period of investigation.Facts of the present case – The present application was filed for redressal of dumping and injury to the applicants from imports UV-770 from the European Union and China. The evidence submitted by the domestic industry showed that the imports from the subject countries have materially retarded the establishment of the domestic industry in India. The Authority has noted that the dumping has prevented price increase in India and forced the domestic industry sell its goods at below the cost of sale. The performance of the domestic industry is much below the projected sales prices, capacities and sales volume. Instead of projected profits it has incurred significant losses, cash losses and recorded negative return on investment. Accordingly, the Authority found it appropriate to initiate the anti-dumping investigation.

Stay Updated

Subscribe for latest insights, updates, and exclusive offers