Background
Chandan Steel Limited appealed a final decision by the Court of International Trade upholding an antidumping order on stainless steel flanges from India. The Department of Commerce had initiated an investigation after domestic producers petitioned for it. During an administrative review, Commerce requested specific sales data, including a window period of three months prior and two months after the review period. Chandan repeatedly failed to submit complete data, omitting the window period sales and data for flanges below a certain size despite multiple opportunities to correct the omissions. Commerce determined that Chandan had not cooperated to the best of its ability and applied adverse facts available, assigning a dumping margin of 145.25 percent.
The court’s reasoning
The Federal Circuit reviewed the case de novo, applying the substantial evidence standard. The court found that Commerce’s decision to use facts otherwise available was supported by substantial evidence because Chandan failed to provide requested information and significantly impeded the proceeding. The court also upheld the use of adverse inferences, noting that Chandan’s reporting was inattentive and unreliable despite its experience in Commerce proceedings. Regarding the application of total rather than partial adverse facts available, the court agreed with Commerce that the deficiencies were fundamental and pervasive. Finally, the court held that Commerce acted within its discretion in selecting the 145.25 percent margin, as it was applied to an uncooperative respondent in the same proceeding and corroborated by Chandan’s own product-specific margins.
Chandan’s failure to provide relevant information, especially in light of its familiarity with Commerce proceedings, constitutes substantial evidence which supports the conclusion that Chandan did not put forth its maximum effort to provide Commerce with full and complete answers to all inquiries in an investigation.
Chandan Steel Ltd. v. United States, 25-1291 (Fed. Cir. 2026)
What it means going forward
The decision reinforces the Department of Commerce’s authority to apply total adverse facts available and high dumping margins when respondents fail to cooperate fully in antidumping investigations, even if the missing data represents a small percentage of total sales.