19. 4. 89 Official Journal of the European Communities No L 108/17 COMMISSION DECISION of 21 March 1989 concerning applications for refund of anti-dumping duties collected on certain imports of hydraulic excavators originating in Japan (C. H. Beazer (Plant Sales) Ltd) (Only the English text is authentic) (89/264/EEC) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No,2423/88 of - 11 July 1988 on protection against dumped or- subsidized imports from countries not members of the European- Economic Community (}), and in particular Article 16 thereof, Whereas: A. PROCEDURE (1)  Council Regulation (EEC) No 1877/85 (2) imposed a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain hydraulic excavators exceeding six tonnes but not exceeding 35 tonnes originating in Japan. The rate of duty applied to Hitachi Construction Machinery Co. Ltd; Tokyo, was 12,4 %: (2)  Between March 1985 and September 1986 C. H. Beazer (Plant Sales) Ltd, Bridgewater, Somerset; United Kingdom, made four applications; following the normal procedure, for the refund of definitive anti-dumping duties paid on the importation of hydraulic amount requested was £ . . . (?), representing part of the £..-... paid altogether in anti-dumping duties on . the imports. (3)  The applications . were - treated as recurring applications within the meaning-of point [.4 (a) of the Commission notice concerning the reimbursement of anti-dumping duties- (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Commission notice’) (*). They were therefore (1) OJ No L 209, 2. 8. 1988, p. 1. (2) OJNo L 176, 6. 7. 1985, p. 1. (*) In accordance with Article 8 of Regulation (EEC) No 2423/88, which deals with the non-disclosure of business secrets, certain figures have been omitted from the published version of this . Decision. ) (*) OJ No C 266, 22. 10. 1986, p. 2. excavators produced - by Hitachi - Construction Machinery Co. Ltd, Tokyo. The total - 4) (3) (6)- - () (8) grouped by six-month periods for the presentation of the required information and the assessment of the actual dumping margin. The Commission asked the applicant for further details on certain calculations and for additional information on trends in certains  costs, the comparability of certain new models with those: covered by the original investigation, and certain reductions or sales facilities granted to the applicant’s customers, The applicant complied with the Commission’s request only in respect of the applications for reimbursement relating to the period from March 1985 to March 1986 inclusive, i.e. the first two reference periods, and stated that it was withdrawing the subsequent applications and would not therefore be completing the case histories. Information regarding the normal value and freight costs between March 1985 and March 1986 was "checked. on the :premises of Hitachi Construction Machinery Co. Ltd in Japan and with C. Itoh, the exporting company, Following these checks, which led to a number of corrections being made to the data originally supplied, the applicant produced new calculations, reducing the amount originally requested- for the period from March 1985 to March 1986 from £ ...t £ ... However, it pointed out that, during the on-the-spot checks on ~normal value, Hitachi Construction Machinery Co. Ltd had discovered that data relating to the first reference period had mistakenly been used again in calculating the normal value for the second period. This had resulted in a higher normal value. The applicant argued that this error at its own cost was clearly involuntary since it resulted in a wider dumping margin, and that its applications should therefore be considered justified for a larger amount.. The Commission found that the calculations presented by the applicant for the comparisons between normal value and export price were in line with the method used during the original