Regulation 2008/1353 - Amendment of Regulation (EC) No 74/2004 imposing a definitive countervailing duty on imports of cotton-type bedlinen from India

Please note

This page contains a limited version of this dossier in the EU Monitor.

1.

Current status

This regulation was in effect from December 30, 2008 until January 18, 2009.

2.

Key information

official title

Council Regulation (EC) No 1353/2008 of 18 December 2008 amending Regulation (EC) No 74/2004 imposing a definitive countervailing duty on imports of cotton-type bedlinen originating in India
 
Legal instrument Regulation
Number legal act Regulation 2008/1353
Original proposal COM(2008)792 EN
CELEX number i 32008R1353

3.

Key dates

Document 18-12-2008
Publication in Official Journal 30-12-2008; Special edition in Croatian: Chapter 11 Volume 062,OJ L 350, 30.12.2008
Effect 30-12-2008; Entry into force See Art 3
End of validity 18-01-2009; See 32004R0074

4.

Legislative text

30.12.2008   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 350/1

 

COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 1353/2008

of 18 December 2008

amending Regulation (EC) No 74/2004 imposing a definitive countervailing duty on imports of cotton-type bedlinen originating in India

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 2026/97 of 6 October 1997 on protection against subsidised imports from countries not members of the European Community (1) (the ‘basic Regulation’), and in particular Articles 15 and 19 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal submitted by the Commission after consulting the Advisory Committee,

Whereas:

  • 1. 
    PROCEDURE

1.1.   Previous investigation and measures in force

 

(1)

The Council, by Regulation (EC) No 74/2004 (2), imposed a definitive countervailing duty on imports of cotton-type bedlinen falling within CN codes ex 6302 21 00, ex 6302 22 90, ex 6302 31 00 and ex 6302 32 90 and originating in India. The rate of the duty ranges between 4,4 % and 10,4 % for individual sampled companies, with an average cooperating company rate of 7,6 % and a residual duty of 10,4 %.

1.2.   Ex officio initiation of the partial interim review

 

(2)

Following the imposition of the definitive countervailing duty the Government of India (GOI) made submissions that the circumstances with regard to two subsidy schemes (the Duty Entitlement Passbook Scheme and the Income Tax Exemption under Section 80 HHC of the Income Tax Act) had changed and that these changes were of a lasting nature. They argued that the level of subsidisation was therefore likely to have decreased and thus measures that had been established partly on these schemes should be revised.

 

(3)

The Commission examined the evidence submitted by the GOI and considered it sufficient to justify the initiation of a review in accordance with the provisions of Article 19 of the basic Regulation. After consultation of the Advisory Committee, the Commission initiated an ex officio partial interim review of the measures in force by a notice published in the Official Journal of the European Union  (3).

 

(4)

The purpose of this partial interim review investigation is to assess the need for the continuation, removal or amendment of the existing measures in respect of those companies which benefited from one or both the allegedly changed subsidy schemes where sufficient evidence was provided in line with the relevant requirements of the notice of initiation. Depending on its findings, the investigation will also assess the need to revise the measures applicable to other companies that cooperated in the original investigation and/or the residual measure applicable for all other companies.

1.3.   Review investigation period

 

(5)

The investigation covered the period from 1 October 2006 to 30 September 2007 (‘the review investigation period’ or ‘RIP’).

1.4.   Parties concerned by the investigation

 

(6)

The Commission officially informed the Government of India (GOI) of the initiation of the partial interim review investigation, along with those Indian exporting producers who cooperated in the previous investigation and that were found to benefit from one or both of the two allegedly changed subsidy schemes and who were listed in the notice of initiation of the partial interim review, as well as the representatives of the Community industry. Interested parties had the opportunity to make their views known in writing and to request a hearing. The written and oral comments submitted by the parties were considered and, where appropriate, taken into account.

 

(7)

In view of the apparent number of parties involved in this review, the use of sampling for the investigation of subsidisation was...


More

This text has been adopted from EUR-Lex.

5.

Original proposal

 

6.

Sources and disclaimer

For further information you may want to consult the following sources that have been used to compile this dossier:

This dossier is compiled each night drawing from aforementioned sources through automated processes. We have invested a great deal in optimising the programming underlying these processes. However, we cannot guarantee the sources we draw our information from nor the resulting dossier are without fault.

 

7.

Full version

This page is also available in a full version containing the legal context, de Europese rechtsgrond, other dossiers related to the dossier at hand and the related cases of the European Court of Justice.

The full version is available for registered users of the EU Monitor by ANP and PDC Informatie Architectuur.

8.

EU Monitor

The EU Monitor enables its users to keep track of the European process of lawmaking, focusing on the relevant dossiers. It automatically signals developments in your chosen topics of interest. Apologies to unregistered users, we can no longer add new users.This service will discontinue in the near future.