Barcode : 4326250-02 A-533-889 REV - Admin Review 12 / 13 / 19 - 5 / 31 / 21
Some parties allege that Antique Group ’ s questionnaire responses that are on the record are complete , timely filed , and verifiable and , as such , Commerce should use that information to determine an AFA rate , rather than relying on the petition rate . These arguments cite Diamond Sawblades , where the CAFC concluded that Commerce should have relied on existing information on the record , rather than disregard all of the respondent ’ s questionnaire information and , instead , applied AFA . 189 The deciding factor in that case was that the respondent was unable to obtain information requested by Commerce that was relatively minor in nature , while the rest of the record was supporting documentation and deemed reliable . As discussed above in Comment 3 , Commerce finds that Antique Group ’ s information on the record is inadequate and unreliable for purposes of calculating a margin . As described above , the record information is neither complete nor accurate and , due to a lack of supporting documentation , not verifiable . In Diamond Sawblades , the CAFC pointedly notes ,
this is not a case involving withholding of information , failure to meet timing , form or manner requirements , or significant impeding of a proceeding under { sections 776 ( a )( 2 )( A ), ( B ) and ( C ) of the Act }. Such situations implicate a policy of cooperation with Commerce that is evident on the fact of those statutory provisions … . 190
Not only is Diamond Sawblades different from the instant review on the basis that the respondent in that case submitted timely responses but , the CAFC makes clear that , had the respondent , among other things , failed to submit responses in a timely manner , it clearly would have triggered the applicable AFA portion of the statute . This is consistent with Commerce ’ s determination in the Preliminary Results and supports a continued determination that , because Antique Group did not timely file the requested information and deficient information was wideranging , Commerce has no basis on which to rely on the questionnaire responses on the record for the calculation of a margin or for the calculation of an AFA rate .
With to respect to arguments about PESL ’ s preliminary margin or the types of PESL ’ s sales or products that had margins higher than the petition rate , we note that these have no bearing on our corroboration analysis , nor do historical margins across other AD orders from India . First , whether PESL ’ s overall margin is lower than the AFA rate and the individually-calculated rates for PESL is immaterial to our corroboration analysis . The corroboration standard used by Commerce is to review secondary information to determine whether the AFA rate is supported by secondary information that is probative . There is no standard or requirement that the secondary information used to corroborate the AFA rate must be reflective of other unrelated outcomes in the segment . In fact , this points back to the statute , which clearly states that Commerce is not required to consider economic reality or general industry conditions when selecting an AFA rate . Moreover , as the petitioner notes , in both Ta Chen and Nan Ya Plastics , the CAFC found that , if the rate chosen has a relationship to the actual sales information , Commerce acts within its discretion for purposes of corroboration regardless of the number of transaction-specific margins that are above the petition rate . 191 This is consistent with Commerce ’ s corroboration analysis in the Preliminary Results , and parties have cited no
189
See Diamond Sawblades , 986 F . 3d 1351 .
190
Id ., 986 F . 3d at 1365 .
191
See Ta Chen , 298 F . 3d at 1340 ; see also Nan Ya Plastics , 810 F . 3d at 1346 .
43 Filed By : David Lindgren , Filed Date : 1 / 3 / 23 1:27 PM , Submission Status : Approved