3.3.94 Official Journal of the European Communities No L 59/27 COMMISSION DECISION of 8 February 1994 concerning an application for the refund of anti-dumping duties collected on certain imports of certain polyester yarns (man-made staple fibres) originating in Indonesia (Unicom BVBA/Unitrac) (Only the Dutch and French texts are authentic) (94/136/EC) THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES, Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European 1992 (the second reference period), amounts to (Bfrs ...)(%). Community, (3)  Following submis§ions by t.he apPlicants with regard to the margin of dumping during the above . . ) reference periods, the Commission sought and veri- Having regard to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2423/88 fied all information deemed to be necessary for the of 11 July 1988 on protection against dumped or sub- purposes of a determination and carried out sidized imports from countries not members of the Euro- investigations at the premises of the exporter in pean Community ('), and in particular Article 16 thereof, Indonesia. Whereas : Subsequently, the applicant was informed of the preliminary results of this examination and given an opportunity to comment. Its observations were taken into account where considered necessary. A. PROCEDURE 4  The Commission informed the Member States and gave its opinion on the matter. No Member State disagreed with this opinion. (1)  On 31 March 1992 by Council Regulation (EEC) No 830/92 (2), a definitiv? anti-dumping ‘duty of B. ARGUMENTS OF THE APPLICANT 11,9 % was imposed on imports of certain poly- ester yarns (man-made staple fibres) originating in Taiwan, Indonesia, India, the People’s Republic of (5)  The applicant based its claim on the allegation, China and Turkey. supported by data concerning normal value and export prices to the Community, that the export (2 Unicom BVBA/Unitrac, Italiélei 17a, B-2000 prices from the exporter were such that dumping Antwerp 1, importer of polyester yamns produced did not exist. . and exported by PT Indo Rama Synthetics, an Indonesian exporter (hereinafter referred to as ‘the exporter’), subject to the anti-dumping duty of C. ADMISSIBILITY 11,9 %, claimed on 19 June 1992 a refund of anti- dumping duties paid in the period 3 October 1991 (6) The applications are admissible since they are to 30 April 1992 and lodged a second application introduced in conformity with the relevant provi- on 25 August 1992 for the the period 1 May to 30 sions of the Community’s anti-dumping legislation, November 1992. In accordance with the Commis- in particular that concerning time limits. sion notice concerning the reimbursement of anti- ‘ dumping duties (*) (hereinafter referred to as ‘the notice’), the Commission considered that as the D. MERITS OF THE CLAIM refund request related to more than three consign- ments in a period exceeding six months, it should (7)  Pursuant to Article 16 (1) of Regulation (EEC) No be treated as a recurring application in the context of point 1.4 of the notice. The total refund claimed by Unicom BVBA/ Unitrac, for anti-dumping duties paid between 3 October 1991 and 30 April 1992 (the first reference period), and between 1 May and 30 November 2423/88 and point II of the notice, the applicant showed, and the verifications carried out confirmed, that the export prices were, with the exception of a small number of transactions, not lower than the normal value for sales of the like product in Indo- nesia. (*) In the published version of the Decision, some figures have been omitted pursuant to the provisions of Article 8 of Regu- lation (EEC) No 2423/88 concerning non-disclosure of busi- ness secrets. ' () OJ No L 209, 2. 8. 1988, p. 1. () OF No L 88, 3. 4, 1992, p. 1. () OJ No C 266, 22. 10. 1986, p. 2.