Product description – The product under consideration isBis (2,2,6,6-Tetramethyl-4-Piperidyl) Sebacate, also known as UV 770 or Hindered Amines Light Stabilizer 770 (HALS 770). It is a low molecular weight organic compound having CAS No. 52829-07-9 and chemical formula C₂₈H₅₂N₂O₄.

HS Codes – 29 33 3990 and 38 12 3990.

Uses – It is a UV light stabiliser used to prevent degradation of polymers from exposure to ultraviolet radiation or sunlight, thereby increasing product life of polymer material. It is mainly used by masterbatch producers to make Flexible Bulk Container Bags (FIBC) or in production of polymer compounds such as car bumpers and tapes.

Countries – European Union and China.

Domestic industry –

1. Clean Science and Technology Limited (CSTL)
2. Clean Fino-Chem Limited (CFCL)  (a wholly owned subsidiary of CSTL)

Period of Investigation – 1^st April 2024 to 31^st March 2025.

Injury period – 2021-22, 2022-23, 2023-24 and the period of investigation. The domestic industry was operational from 2022-23. Hence, the operational period of the domestic industry was considered for injury assessment.

Margins and recommended duties –

Key Findings –

1. The investigation was initiated on the basis of a duly substantiated application filed by Clean Science and Technology Limited (CSTL) and Clean Fino-Chem Limited (CFCL) concerning imports of UV 770 from the European Union and China.
2. The product produced by the domestic industry has the same CAS number as the imported product. The product manufactured by the domestic industry is technically and commercially substitutable with the imported product and is a like article to the product under consideration.
3. The applicants are the only producers of subject goods in the country and constitute the domestic industry as defined under Rule 2(b).
4. The dumping margins for both subject countries is positive and significant.
5. As the conditions of cumulation have been met in the present case, the Authority has cumulatively assessed the impact of imports.
6. The domestic industry is in the process of establishment, with newly commissioned dedicated production lines for the subject goods entailing significant investment.
7. The domestic industry has suffered injury in the form of material retardation to the establishment of the industry.
8. Subject imports have increased over the injury period. The subject imports constitute entirety of imports into India.
9. The price undercutting is negative as the domestic industry was forced to sell below import prices and projected prices as a new market player in order to gain customers which have long standing relationships with existing exporters/producers. The subject imports have significantly undercut the projected prices of the domestic industry.
10. The subject imports caused price suppression and depression as the selling price of the domestic industry was 36% below its projected selling price, despite achieving lower cost of sales than projected.
11. Production, sales, and capacity utilisation of the domestic industry remained significantly below the projected performance, despite having sufficient capacity to meet the entire demand.
12. The domestic industry has incurred financial losses, cash losses and recorded negative return on investments as against the projected profits.
13. The injury margin determined for the producers/exporters from the subject countries is positive and significant.
14. Injury is not due to high fixed costs incurred for the new plant or start-up inefficiencies as the profitability of the domestic industry has declined where costs have been considered on capacity utilisation as per projections.
15. Injury is not due to performance in other products, process losses, rejection rates, batch cycle times, customer approvals, and bottlenecks.
16. Imposition of anti-dumping duty is not against public interest and ensure viability of the sole producers in India.
17. The capacity of the domestic industry is sufficient to cater to the entire demand in the country and will not create any supply constraints.
18. Imposition of duties will not bar imports of subject goods, thus, there is no threat of creation of monopoly.
19. The impact of duties on downstream product, Flexible Bulk Container Bags, is less than 0.8%.