On April 10, 2019, the General Court of the European Union (GCEU) handed down judgment in Case T-300/16, resolving to annul Commission Regulation (EU) 2016/387 of March 17 of 2016, establishing a definitive countervailing duty on imports of malleable iron cast iron tubes originated from India (hereinafter referred to as Regulation 2016/387) purchased from the supplier Jindal Saw Ltd, opening with this, the possibility of recovering the countervailing duty paid.
From March 19, 2016, with the entry into force of Regulation 2016/387, imports of iron tubes classified under the HS codes 7303.00.10.10 and 7303.00.90.10, originated from India and manufactured by the entity Jindal Saw Ltd, have been subject to the payment of an 8.7% of countervailing duty (identified with the code C054) making the value of these goods more expensive to EU operators.
In this regard, remember that, in general terms, countervailing duties are established by the EU when it is considered that the importation of certain goods causes an injury to the EU industry because of price discrimination (dumping), or due to a subsidy in the country of origin with consequences in export prices, thereby distorting the functioning of the EU market.
In order to protect EU operators, the EU has designed and implemented a series of protection mechanisms against imports that are dumped by non-EU countries, including the Regulation on Anti-Dumping Measures (the basic Regulation No. 1225/2009).
After introducing the above, based on the Regulation of Anti-Dumping Measures, the European Commission established a countervailing duty against imports of iron pipes and tubes from the manufacturer Jindal Saw Ltd on the grounds that it had received subsidies from the State of India whose detrimental effects affected the EU operators.
Once the investigations were initiated by the European Commission, Jindal Saw Ltd appealed to the GCEU, considering that the investigations and the results thrown by them were incorrect, by failing to comply with the procedure for the implementation of the anti-subsidy measure (countervailing duty).
The GCEU has ruled that the European Commission has failed to comply with the corresponding procedure, determining that it is a sine qua non requirement to impose a countervailing duty, the existence of a causal link between the subsidized imports and the injury to the Union industry, by what the claim of Jindal Saw Ltd considers, excluding it from Regulation 2016/387.
The decision of the GCEU implies, among other actions, that the countervailing duty imposed on imports of iron tubes and pipes manufactured by Jindal Saw Ltd, should never have been implemented and, as a consequence, the collection thereof by the countervailing duties of the EU member States is inadmissible. Therefore, any importer, client of Jindal Saw Ltd, that has been affected by the assessment this countervailing duty, in principle, has the right to request its refund, from the moment of importation, as long as it is within the limits of expiration covered by the EU customs regulations.
How can we assist you?
Salinas & Partners, with more than 30 years of experience in customs and foreign trade matters, and, in particular, in anti-dumping measures, we are at your disposal to assist you in advising on claiming the anti-dumping duties improperly paid to the Tax Administration.