3. 4. 92 Official Journal of the European Communities No L 88/1 (Acts whose publication is obligatory) COUNCIL REGULATION (EEC) No 830/92 of 30 March 1992 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain polyester yarns (man-made staple fibres) originating in Taiwan, Indonesia, India, the People’s Republic of China and Turkey and collecting definitively the provisional duty THE COUNCIL 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 subsi- dized imports from countries not members of the Euro- pean Economic Community ('), and in particular Article 12 thereof, Having made a formal application to the EEC-Turkey Association Council pursuant to Article 47 (1) of the Additional Protocol to the Agreement establishing an association between the European Economic Community and Turkey (), and in the absence of a decision of the said Association Council within the time limit referred to in Article 47 (2) of this Protocol, Having regard to the proposal from the Commission submitted after consultation within the Advisory Committee as provided for under the abovementioned Regulation, Whereas : A. PROVISIONAL MEASURES (1)) The Commission, by Regulation (EEC) No 2904/91 (%) imposed a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports into the Community of certain yarns of polyester staple fibres falling within CN codes 55092110, 55092190, 55092210, 5509 22 90, 5509 51 00 and 5509 53 00 originating in Taiwan, Indonesia, India, the People’s Republic of China and Turkey and terminated the anti- dumping proceeding in respect of imports of the yarns concerned originating in the Republic of Korea and in respect of imports of sewing thread falling with CN code 5508 10 11 originating in all the countries concerned by the proceeding. () OJ No L 209, 2. 8. 1988, p. 1. () OJ No L 293, 29. 12. 1972, p. 4. () OJ No L 276, 3. 10. 1991, p. 7. The Council, by Regulation (EEC) No 202/92 (%) extended this duty for a period not exceeding two months. B. SUBSEQUENT PROCEDURE (2) Following the imposition of the provisional anti- dumping duty, the interested parties, who so requested, were granted an opportunity to be heard by the Commission. They also made written submissions making known their views on the findings. 3) Some exporters, who did not make themselves known to the Commission within the time limit specified in the opening notice, submitted responses to the Commission questionnaire, in general, well after the on-the-spot investigations in the exporting countries concerned took place and, in many cases, following the adoption of the provi- sional measures. Upon request, these exporters were heard by the Commission and, while their views were considered, to carry out a new investigation for any exporter would have unduly delayed the proceeding. The responses to the questionnaires submitted by them bhad, therefore, to be disre- garded. 4y Upon request, parties were informed of the essen- tial facts and considerations on the basis of which it was intended to recommend the imposition of definitive duties and the definitive collection of amounts secured by way of a provisional duty. They were also granted a period within which to make representations subsequent to the disclosure. (5  The oral and written comments submitted by the parties were considered and, where appropriate, the Commission’s findings were modified to take account of them. () OJ No L 21, 30. 1. 1992, p. 31.