20.5.2004 Official Journal of the European Union L 183/35 COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1008/2004 of 19 May 2004 imposing a provisional anti-subsidy duty on imports of certain graphite electrode systems origi- nating in India THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, 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 (1), as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 461/2004 of 8 March 2004 (%) (‘the basic Regulation’), and in particular Article 12 thereof, After consulting the Advisory Committee, Whereas: A. PROCEDURE 1. GENERAL (1) On 21 August 2003, the Commission announced, by a notice (notice of initiation’) published in the Official Journal of the European Union (%), the initiation of an anti-subsidy proceeding with regard to imports into the Community of certain graphite electrode systems originating in India. (2)  The proceeding was initiated as a result of a complaint lodged in July 2003 by the European Carbon and Graphite Association (ECGA), acting on behalf of producers representing a major proportion, in this case more than 50 %, of the total Community production of certain graphite electrode systems. The complaint contained evidence of subsidisation of the said product and of material injury resulting there from, which was considered sufficient to justify the initiation of an anti-subsidy proceeding. (3)  Prior to the initiation of the proceeding, and in accordance with Article 10(9) of the basic Regulation, the Commission notified the Government of India (‘GOT) that it had received a properly documented complaint alleging that subsidised imports of certain graphite electrode systems originating in India were causing material injury to the Community industry. The GOI was invited for consultation with the aim of clarifying the situation as regards the contents of the complaint and arriving at a mutually agreed solution. Whilst no request for consultations was made by the GOI, due note was taken of written comments made by the GOI with regard to the allegations contained in the complaint regarding subsidised imports and material injury being suffered by the Community industry. (4 The initiation of a parallel anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports into the Community of the same product originating in India was announced by a notice published in the Official Journal of the European Union (*) on the same date. (5)  The Commission officially advised the complainant and other known Community producers, exporting producers, importers, users and suppliers known to be concerned of the initiation of the proceeding. The parties directly concerned were given an opportunity to make their views known in writing and to request a hearing within the time limit set in the notice of initiation. (6)  The two exporting producers in India, the GOI, as well as Community producers, users and importersftraders made their views known in writing. All parties who so requested within the above time limit and indicated that there were particular reasons why they should be heard were granted an opportunity to be heard. () O] L 288, 21.10.1997, p. 1. () O] L 77, 13.3.2004, p. 12. () O] C 197, 21.8.2003, p. 5. (% O] C 197, 21.8.2003, p. 2.