Product description – Flat rolled products of stainless steel, whether hot rolled or cold rolled of all grades/series; whether or not in plates, sheets, or in coil form or in any shape, of any width, of thickness 1.2mm to 10.5mm in case of hot rolled coils; 3mm to 105 mm in case of hot rolled plates & sheets; and up to 6.75 mm in case of cold rolled flat products. Product scope specifically excludes razor blade grade steel.

HS Codes – The product under consideration falls under Customs sub-headings 7219 and 7220. However, these have been considered as indicative only and no way binding on the scope of present investigation.

Uses –Subject goods are used for manufacture of white goods, processed equipment, dairy equipment, re-rolling, reactor vessels, material handling equipment, railways, pipes & tubes, automotive components, rail carts, metro coaches, architecture, building and construction, rolled formed sections, industrial fabrication etc. Producers produce goods conforming to the requirements of the different consumers.

Countries involved – China PR.

Applicants – M/s. Jindal Stainless Limited (JSL) and M/s. Jindal Stainless (Hisar) Limited (JSHL)

Date of imposition of duty – Original duty was imposed on7^th Sept., 2017. Present duty is recommended on 6^th April 2023 and is yet to be imposed by the Ministry of Finance.

Date of initiation – 8^th Oct., 2021.

Period of investigation – 1^st April 2020 to 30^th June 2021.

Injury period –2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 and the POI.

Date of levy of provisional duty (if any, with Customs Notification No.) – N.A.

Margins and proposed duty – DGTR has recommended 18.95% duty however, on only 200 series of stainless steel flat products, unlike the original investigation where it was imposed on all types.

Key findings –

• Imports of the product under consideration increased largely in 200 category, and imports of 300 and 400 series showed some increase in post POI.
• Information of 19 producers from the MSME segment were examined to assess the impact of imports from the subject country as imports were largely concentrated in the segment where these producers operate
• Chinese producers continued to benefit from countervailable subsidies. While the total  subsidy margin determined in this review was 19.91%; however, the investigation, being a sunset review, the Authority merely extended the original duties imposed.
• Performance of MSME producers remained adverse during the injury period and deteriorated in the POI. MSME producers registered low-capacity utilisation, with deterioration in the POI in the form of declining production, sales, market share, ROI and significant losses.
• Performance of the applicants however improved in respect of profits, cash profits and return on investment in respect of all products barring product falling under 200 series. In the segment where MSME and Chinese imports were concentrated the same is adverse.