SCHEDULE

THE ANTI-DUMPING DUTIES ACT, 2015 THE ANTI-DUMPING DUTIES ACT, 2015 ACT No. XIV OF 2015 [8th September, 2015] An Act to reform and repeal the Anti-Dumping Duties Ordinance, 2000 WHEREAS it is expedient to give effect in Pakistan to the provisions of Article VI of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, 1994, and to the Agreement on Implementation thereof and to amend and consolidate the law relating to imposition of anti-dumping duties to offset such dumping, to provide a framework for investigation and determination of dumping and injury in respect of goods imported into Pakistan and for matters ancillary thereto or connected therewith; AND WHEREAS the imposition of anti-dumping duties to offset injurious dumping is in the public interest; AND WHEREAS it is expedient to provide for certain reforms in the Anti-Dumping Duties Ordinance, 2000 (LXV of 2000), by repealing the said Ordinance and re-enacting the law for the purposes hereinafter appearing; It is hereby enacted as follows: THE SCHEDULE [See section 32(2)] BEST INFORMATION AVAILABLE 1. As soon as possible after initiation of an investigation, the Commission should specify in detail the information required from any interested party, and the manner in which that information should be structured by the interested party in its response. The Commission should also ensure that the interested party is aware that if information is not supplied within a reasonable time, the Commission shall be free to make determination on the basis of facts available, including those contained in an application for initiation of an investigation by domestic industry. 2. The Commission may also request an interested party to provide its response in a particular medium such as computer tape or computer language. Where such a request is made, the Commission should consider the reasonable ability of the interested party to respond in the preferred medium or computer language, and should not request the party to use for its response a computer system other than that used by the party. The Commission should not maintain a request for a computerised response if the interested party does not maintain computerised accounts and if presenting the response as requested would result in an unreasonable extra burden on the interested party or it would entail unreasonable additional cost and trouble. The Commission should not maintain a request for a response in a particular medium or computer language if the interested party does not maintain its computerised accounts in such medium or computer language and if presenting the response as requested would result in an unreasonable extra burden on the interested party or it would entail unreasonable additional cost and trouble. 3. All information which is verifiable, which is appropriately submitted so that it can be used in an investigation without undue difficulties, which is supplied in a timely fashion, and, where applicable, which is supplied in a medium or computer language requested by the Commission, should be taken into account when determinations are made. If a party does not respond in the preferred medium or computer language but the Commission finds that the circumstances set out in para 2 have been satisfied, any failure to respond in the preferred medium or computer language shall not be considered to significantly impede the investigation. 4. Where the Commission does not have the ability to process information if provided in a particular medium such as computer tape, the information should be supplied in the form of written material or any other form acceptable to the Commission. 5. If an information provided is not ideal in all respects, this shall not justify the Commission from disregarding it, provided an interested party has acted to the best of its ability. 6. If evidence or information is not accepted by the Commission, the supplying party shall be informed forthwith of the reasons therefore, and shall be given an opportunity to provide further explanations within a reasonable period, as may be determined by the Commission, due account being taken of the time-limits of an investigation. If the explanations are considered by the Commission as not being satisfactory, the reasons for rejection of such evidence or information should be given in any published determinations. 7. If the Commission has to base its findings, including those with respect to normal value, on any information from a secondary source, including any information supplied in an application for initiation of an investigation, it shall do so with special circumspection. In such cases, the Commission shall, where practicable, check the information from other independent sources at their disposal, such as published price lists, official import statistics and customs returns, and from the information obtained from other interested parties during the investigation provided that if an interested party does not co-operate and thus relevant information is being withheld from the Commission, this situation may lead to a result which is less favourable to the party than if the party did co-operate.