L 3428 Official Journal of the European Union 18.11.2004 COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 1976/2004 of 15 November 2004 extending the definitive countervailing duty imposed by Regulation (EC) No 2597/1999 on imports of polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film originating in India to imports of polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film consigned from Brazil and from Israel, whether declared as originating in Brazil or Israel or not THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 2026/97 of 6 October 1997 on protection against subsidised imports from countries not members of the European Community (') (the basic Regulation), and in particular Article 23 thereof, Having regard to the proposal submitted by the Commission after consulting the Advisory Committee, Whereas: A. PROCEDURE 1. EXISTING MEASURES (1) By Regulation (EC) No 2597/1999 () (the original Regu- lation), the Council imposed countervailing duties on imports of polyethylene terephthalate (PET) film (PET film) originating in India. The rates of the countervailing duties ranged between 3,8 and 19,1 %. (2)  Imports of PET film originating in India are also subject to anti-dumping duties, ranging between 0 and 62,6 %, imposed by Regulation (EC) No 1676/2001 (3). 2. ONGOING INVESTIGATIONS (3) On 28 June 2002, the Commission announced by a notice of initiation published in the Official Journal of the European Communities (¥), the initiation of a partial interim review pursuant to Article 19 of the basic Regu- lation. The request is limited in scope to the form of the measure and in particular, to the examination of the acceptability of an undertaking offered by the applicant. This review is still ongoing. (4 On 22 November 2003, the Commission announced by a notice of initiation published in the Official Journal of the European Union (°), the initiation of a partial interim () OJ L 288, 21.10.1997, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Regu- lation (EC) No 461/2004 (O] L 77, 13.3.2004, p. 12). @ O] L 316, 10.12.1999, p. 1. () O] L 227, 23.8.2001, p. 1. () O] C 154, 28.6.2002, p. 2. C) 0 o) 0] C 281, 22.11.2003, p. 4. 5 review pursuant to Article 11(3) of Regulation (EC) No 384/96 (°), limited in scope to the form of the anti- dumping measures. This review is still ongoing. (5)  On 19 February 2004, the Commission announced by a notice of initiation published in the Official Journal of the European Union (7), the initiation of a partial interim review pursuant to Article 11(3) of Regulation (EC) No 384/96 limited to dumping for the Indian exporting producer Jindal Polyester Limited. This review is still ongoing. 3. REQUEST (6)  On 6 January 2004, the Commission received a request pursuant to Article 23(2) of the basic Regulation (the request) from the Community producers DuPont Teijin Films, Mitsubishi Polyester Film GmbH and Nuroll SpA (the applicants) to investigate the alleged circumvention of the countervailing measures imposed on imports of PET film originating in India. The applicants represent a major proportion of the Community production of PET film. (7)  The applicants alleged and submitted sufficient evidence showing that, following the imposition of measures on imports of PET film originating in India, there had been significant changes in the patterns of trade involving exports of PET film from India, Brazil and Israel to the Community. These changes in the patterns of trade were alleged to stem from the transhipment via Brazil and via Israel of PET film originating in India. It was alleged that there was insufficient due cause or economic justification for the aforementioned changes other than the impo- sition of duties on imports of PET film from India. (8)  Finally, the applicant alleged and submitted prima facie evidence that the remedial effects of this duty were being undermined both in terms of quantities and prices. It was claimed that significant volumes of imports of PET film from Brazil and Israel appear to have replaced imports of PET film originating in India. In addition, the applicant submitted prima facie evidence that PET film originating in India continues to benefit from subsidies found to be countervailable in the original investigation. (®) OJ L 56, 6.3.1996, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 461/2004. (') O] C 43, 19.2.2004, p. 14.