8. 1. 87 " Official Journal of the European Communities No L 6/1 (Acts whose publication is obligatory) COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC) No 29/87 of 22 December 1986 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain deep freezer‘s originating in the Soviet Union THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2176/84 of 23 July 1984 on protection against dumped or subsi- dized imports from countries not members of the Euro- pean Economic Community (), and in particular Article 12 thereof, Having regard to the proposal from the Commission after consultations within the Advisory Committee set up under the above Regulation, Whereas : A. Provisional action (1) By Regulation (EEC) No 2800/86 (3, the Commis- sion proposed a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of certain deep freezers originating in the Soviet Union. B. Continuation of investigation (2)  After the provisional anti-dumping duty was imposed, the Soviet exporter, Technointorg, which had so far refused to cooperate, and certain impor- ters asked for, and obtained, a Commission hearing. Their comments have been taken into considera- tion. The Commission refused to hear one importer which had requested to be heard after the time limit laid down by Article S of Regulation (EEC) No 2800/86 had expired. Technointorg asked for and was granted access to the information given to the Commission by other parties concerned in the investigation, to the extent that this was relevant for the defence of its inte- rests, had been used by the Commission in the () OJ No L 201, 30. 7. 1984, p. 1. () OJ No L 259, 11. 9. 1986, p. 14. investigation and was not confidential under Article 8 of Regulation (EEC) No 2176/84. (3)  Technointorg disputed that it had refused to coope- rate during the preliminary investigation : it argued that it had given instructions to its subsidiary in Belgium, EWA-Technical and Optical Equipment (EWA), to represent it in the procedure and that neither Technointorg nor EWA had received the questionnaires for exporters. The Commission notes that EWA informed it that it had been instructed to act for Technointorg three months after the procedure had been initiated, and in any case after expiry of the time limit laid down by the Commission for sending in questionnaires. The Commission also notes that at no time did EWA ask for the questionnaire for exporters to be sent to it. Technointorg itself, moreover, admitted at the beginning of the procedure that it had received the questionnaire, and despite several reminders from the Commission it declined to supply the information requested. (49  After the provisional anti-dumping duty was imposed, Technointorg said it was ready to coope- rate fully with the Commission. The Commission notes that, despite these state- ments, Technointorg supplied no information as to its exports to the Community. In any case, as it did not make its views known within the time limits laid down when the notice of initiation of the procedure was published (}), any information it might have submitted concerning its exports to the Community could not have been taken into consi- deration, without a supplementary investigation being carried out. Quite apart from  the additional administrative burden which it would involve, carrying out such a further inquiry after a provisional anti-dumping duty had been imposed might encourage parties ¢) OJ No C 319, 11. 12. 1985, p. 3.