No L 304/38 Official Journal of the European Communities 29. 11. 94 (Acts whose publication is not obligatory) COMMISSION COMMISSION DECISION of 16 November 1994 concerning an application for the refund of anti-dumping duties collected on - certain imports of certain magnetic disks (3,5” microdisks) originating in the People’s Republic of China (Only the English text is authentic) (94/764/EC) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty. establishing the European 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 ('), as last amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 522/94 (%), and in particular Article 16 thereof, Whereas : I. PROCEDURE A. General ()  On 18 October 1993, by Regulation (EEC) No 2861/93 (%), a definitive anti-dumping duty of 394 % was imposed on imports of certain magnetic disks (3,5” microdisks) originating in Japan, Taiwan and the People’s Republic of China. (2)  Verbatim Limited SA of Limerick, Ireland, an importer of 3,5” microdisks produced and exported by Swire Magnetics Holdings Limited, an exporter in the People’s Republic of China (hereinafter () OJ No L 209, 2. 8. 1988, p. 1. () OJ No L 66, 10. 3. 1994, p. 10. () OJ No L 262, 21. 10. 1993, p. 4. G) “ ©) referred to as ‘the exporter’), subject to an anti- dumping duty of 39,4 %, claimed, on 12 January and 10 March 1994, a refund of anti-dumping duties paid in the period 24 November 1993 to 15 February 1994. B. Admissibility The application is admissible, since it was intro- duced in conformity with the relevant provisions of Community anti-dumping legislation, in particular those concerning time limits. The applicant’s claim was based on the allegation, supported by prima facie evidence on normal value and export prices for sales to the Community, that export prices from the exporter were such that dumping either did not exist, or that the rate of duty appropriate to the imports in question was lower than the 39,4 % rate in application. The issue of individual treatment of exporters in the People’s Republic of China, was examined in the light of the findings on the matter in recital (8) of the Regulation imposing definitive duties. In view of the general principles set out in that recital which apply also to refund applications, it appears doubtful that, as a general rule, such applications can lead to a recalculation of normal value for the applicant alone. In the present case, however, the Commission has taken account of the exceptional circumstances referred to in the application.