No ADD for Entries Not Subject to Order at Time of Entry, Importer Tells Trade Court

Antidumping duty respondent Goodluck India Limited filed a complaint at the Court of International Trade to contest the Commerce Department's assessment of antidumping duties on its entries since they were not subject to the ADD order at the time, the company said. Goodluck participated in the antidumping duty investigation into cold-drawn mechanical tubing of carbon and alloy steel from India in which it was assigned a 33.7% cash deposit rate. The respondent then challenged this decision at CIT, which eventually overturned Commerce, affirming a final zero percent margin for Goodluck. The result was Commerce revoking the ADD order for Goodluck (Goodluck India Limited v. United States, CIT #22-00024).

The case, however, was then appealed to the Federal Circuit, where the decision to revoke the order for Goodluck was reversed. The order was reinstated and along with it the 33.7% cash deposit rate. But during this time, Commerce began the second and third administrative reviews of the ADD order. Commerce then instructed CBP to liquidate Goodluck's entries subject to the third administrative review at the 33.7% rate -- a move Goodluck now contests since it says it was not subject to the order at the time the review was initiated.

"Commerce cannot instruct CBP to liquidate entries for failing to request a review of entries of merchandise which was not subject to an ADD Order at time of entry, and for which a review could not have been requested," the complaint said. "Commerce’s regulations require that an exporter or producer can only request a review if it is 'covered by an order.'" The importer also said that the practice runs contrary to Commerce's "established agency practice granting interested parties the opportunity to request a review of shipments entered in a period in which an ADD Order had been provisionally revoked."