In a Government Gazette notice on June 20, the International Trade Administration Commission of South Africa (Itac) informed of its decision of May 13 to rescind its earlier decision to initiate sunset reviews of the antidumping duties on carbon black originating in or imported from Egypt and India, and galvanised steel tubes and pipes originating in or imported from India.

What is of particular interest in respect of this decision is that it is the first time, as far as I am aware, that Itac has rescinded an earlier decision.

But why was this decision taken? You will recall the Supreme Court of Appeal case of Progress Office Machines versus the South African Revenue Service, where the court found in favour of Progressive Office Machines. In essence, the matter in contention was whether or not a provisional payment constituted an antidumping duty. The court found that it was, indeed, a duty.

As a consequence of Itac's past treatment, instead of initiating the sunset reviews prior the lapse of the provisional payment, it only did so prior to the lapse of the final antidumping duty. This meant that the antidumping duty expired before a sunset review investigation was initiated.

Having taken account of the court's judgment, Itac, on December 13, 2007, decided to rescind its decision to initiate the aforementioned sunset reviews. On December 14, 2007, all interested parties were informed of Itac's decision and invited to comment. In this instance, again, I am not aware of any such notice appearing in the Government Gazette.

Then, on May 13, 2008, taking due consideration of all available information and comments, Itac made its final decision to rescind its eaarlier decision.

What also makes this notice of interest is the fact that, at the time of writing this column, the antidumping duties had not been withdrawn.

One would have expected that, if sunset review investigations had been withdrawn, then the antidumping duties would also be withdrawn with retrospective effect. You will be kept informed of any further developments.

If you are involved in antidumping investigations or if a product you import is liable for antidumping duties, you might want to pay careful attention as to what other announcements are made as a consequence of the Progress Office Machines court case.

POSSIBLE ANTIDUMPING REVIEW

Itac has published a notice stating that, unless a duly substantiated request is made by or on behalf of the Southern African Customs Union industry, indicating that the expiry of an antidumping duty would likely lead to the continuation or recurrence of dumping and material injury the anti-dumping duties would expire during 2009.

The products in question are stainless steel tube and pipe originating in or imported from Chinese Taipei (Taiwan), Malaysia and South Korea. These duties were imposed on July 16, 2004, and are due to expire on July 15, 2009.

Response is due by July 20, 2008.

INITIATION OF A SUNSET REVIEW INVESTIGATION

A notice was published in respect of the initiation of a Sunset Review of the antidumping duties on gypsum plasterboard originating in or imported from Indonesia and Thailand.

South African importers and overseas exporters or manufacturers of the product have until July 28 to submit their completed importer questionnaires and exporter questionnaires.

ANTIDUMPING APPLICATION

The initiation of an investigation into the alleged dumping of tall oil fatty acid originating in or imported from Sweden.

The application was lodged by Industrial Olechemical Products, which is the manufacturer of the product in the Southern African Customs Union region.

South African importers and overseas exporters or manufacturers of the product have until July 28 to submit their completed importer questionnaires and exporter questionnaires.

RESTROSPECTIVE ANTIDUMPING DUTY AMENDMENT

The South African Revenue Service has published an amendment to the antidumping duties in respect of foil products of aluminium – hollowware for table or kitchen use.

The amendment serves to exclude certain aluminium products which are of a thickness not exceeding 150 micrometres from antidumping duties.

The amendment has been introduced with retrospective effect to February 7, 1997.