• Investment World
• eWorld
• Catalyst
• Mentor
• Life
• Canvas
• Praxis
• Urban Pulse
• Brand Quest

G. Srinivasan

It was erroneous to resort to unsubstantiated accusations that the authorities have been complacent to the deluge of cheap goods from across the Middle Kingdom, DGAD sources said.

NEW DELHI, April 14

IN its charter enumerating the National Democratic Alliance (NDA) coalition Government's "50 failures" recently, the leading Opposition Party - Congress - has mentioned the dumping of Chinese goods into the Indian market which has out-priced domestically-produced goods to the dismay of indigenous manufacturers as one of the failures on the policy front.

However, the fact is altogether different since out of 153 cases registered by the Designated Authority appointed by the Union Government, as many as 66 cases pertain to Chinese goods. While not gloating over this phenomenon, official sources told Business Line here that though Anti-Dumping Rules enacted under the Customs Tariff Act 1975 have been in vogue since 1985, the first case on anti-dumping was set off only after seven years in 1992. To streamline the process, the Government set up the Directorate General of Anti Dumping and Allied Duties (DGAD) in April 1998.

The sources said the implementation of anti-dumping measures have been on the rise since 1998 to safeguard domestic industry from unfair trade practices.

What is particularly noteworthy, they said, is that since 1992, India has initiated 153 anti-dumping cases on various items entailing many countries. Majority of the cases falls under the group of chemical and petrochemical products, pharmaceutical, steel and metals and consumer goods.

Even as wild allegations of an avalanche of Chinese goods being dumped into India are doing the round with responsible Opposition parties cashing in on such canards for partisan ends, the sources in the Government maintain that majority of products found to have been dumped from China in all these years and on which anti-dumping duty has been slapped come in the product category of chemicals and pharmaceuticals, steel and engineering items.

DGAD sources said that its actions were seldom meant to single out China or to target China for anti-dumping measures. The anti-dumping action against China has always been recommended in due conformity with the principles and procedures laid down in "our national law". There are also instances such as 8 Hydroxy Quinoline and Isobutyl Benzene in which originally anti-dumping duty was imposed on imports from China but was subsequently withdrawn in the mid-term review exercise as there was no merit in persisting with the duty.

The sources said, in response to a public outcry against dumping of products from China and on the basis of information from the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence in Department of Revenue showing dumping of five consumer products from China, viz., sports shoes, dry batteries, toys, pad locks and ball pens, the Designated Authority initiated suo mote anti-dumping probe into sports shoes, dry cell batteries and toys.

While anti-dumping duty was imposed on sport shoes and dry cell batteries, the case against toys has been closed for want of sufficient evidence of injury. In the case of ball pens and pad locks, no proceedings have been set off since causal linkage between dumping and injury has not been prima-facie established.

More recently, in January 2, 2003, the Authority has imposed anti-dumping duty on imported mulberry raw silk (not thrown) 2A grade and below from China as preliminary probe revealed that there has been dumping of raw silk by China, which has adversely affected the price of raw silk products in the country.

The sources said that the DGAD was doing its remit of responding to safeguard domestic industry hit hard by Chinese goods by recommending anti-dumping duty after carefully weighing the linkage between dumping and injury wherever this could be firmly established.

It was erroneous to resort to unsubstantiated accusations that the authorities have been complacent to the deluge of cheap goods from across the Middle Kingdom. After all, China has become a member of the WTO and its accession would foster opportunities for the Indian industry in sectors such as cotton as well as well cotton yarn, soyameal, marine products, quality fruits such as mangoes, mineral ores, building materials, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, computer software, hotel industry, professional services, audio-visual.

On the flip side, there is a looming threat to India's export markets in shoes, footwear, dyes, leather products, artificial flowers, labour-intensive and low-cost items.

Yet, well-known Indian corporate such as Bharat Forge had already exported crankshafts to Chiense truck makers and Reliance Industries plastic granules. Other Indian companies such as Videocon, Onida, NITCO, Appollo Tyres and JK Tyres have sourced their components and exportable from China while reputed firms such as Aurobindo Pharma, TCS and Sundaram Fasteners have set up or plan to set up base to penetrate the Chinese markets.

The sources said that considering the fact that bilateral trade between India and China is now close to $5 billion with trade balance in favour of New Delhi, it is time that responsible political parties desisted from China-bashing but instead get caught up in a genuine China-fever for mutual benefits and promotion of better understanding to bolster bilateral relations.

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication

Stories in this Section
CII's `India Club' to open up China for small-scale sector

Copyright © 2003, The Hindu Business Line. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu Business Line