Rising Chinese Solar Imports Trigger Anti-Dumping Measures to Protect India’s Solar Sector

The Directorate General of Trade Remedies (DGTR) has concluded its anti-dumping investigation in  a Case concerning imports of 'Solar Cells whether or not assembled in Modules or made up into Panels' from China PR, recommending protective measures to shield India’s domestic solar industry.

The investigation identified material injury caused to domestic producers, including FS India Solar Ventures and Jupiter International Ltd., recognised as the core domestic industry under India’s Anti-Dumping Rules.

Initiated following complaints from domestic manufacturers, the DGTR examined imports of solar cells, monocrystalline, multicrystalline, and thin-film, and modules or panels made using c-Si or thin-film technology. The authority treated solar cells and modules as a single product for injury analysis, noting that cells are intermediate products meant for assembly into modules and have no independent use. The investigation confirmed that domestically produced c-Si cells, thin-film modules, and TopCon cells are comparable to imported products in material aspects, functions, and end-use.

The authority stated in its final findings, ‘The DGTR investigation covered all forms of solar cells, whether assembled into modules or sold individually. Authorities noted that excluding any form could trigger a shift in imports, undermining domestic production.’

The findings clarified that domestic producers importing solar cells for conversion into modules or operating in Special Economic Zones could not be considered part of the domestic industry.

Only FS India Solar Ventures and Jupiter International were deemed eligible domestic producers. On-site inspections verified production records, sales, and contracts, confirming these companies were directly impacted by dumped imports. “The DGTR identified Jupiter International and FS India Solar Ventures as the sole domestic producers eligible under the rules, highlighting that other Indian companies largely relied on imports. FS India’s thin-film modules were deemed comparable to imported c-Si modules, validating their domestic industry status,” the authority noted in its final findings.

The investigation revealed that imports from China accounted for roughly two-thirds of total solar imports during the injury period, rising both in absolute and relative terms. Imported products were sold below normal value, leading to steep price undercutting. Domestic producers operated at losses to remain competitive, despite expanding capacities and production. Market share for domestic manufacturers remained limited, inventories rose, profitability declined, and projected sales and investment returns were not achieved.

“The report confirmed that solar cells and modules from China were dumped at prices below fair value. This surge in cheap imports forced domestic players to slash prices, operate under losses, and face declining profitability despite capacity expansion,” the authority said.

The DGTR also addressed concerns regarding product differentiation, newly operational producers, and external financial support. Thin-film modules were treated as like articles to imported c-Si modules. Commencement of production by individual producers or external loans and subsidies do not affect eligibility to constitute domestic industry. Selective arguments aimed at limiting analysis were rejected, reaffirming that injury assessment must consider the domestic industry and product as a whole.

“Despite ramping up production, domestic manufacturers struggled with underutilised capacity, rising inventories, and lost contracts, while returns on investment remained minimal. The Indian solar industry’s market share stayed limited due to persistent undercutting from dumped imports," said the authority.

The DGTR concluded that dumped imports caused material injury and posed a risk of further harm due to increasing import volumes, declining prices, and excess foreign capacity. “Authorities warned that the threat of further injury remains high, with cheap imports continuing to rise and foreign producers poised to expand capacities, potentially exacerbating pressure on domestic manufacturers,” noted the authority.

The authority emphasised that anti-dumping measures serve the larger public interest by protecting domestic industry viability, promoting investment, and supporting India’s energy security and renewable energy goals without harming downstream consumers.

In line with the 'lesser duty' principle, the DGTR recommended definitive anti-dumping duties for three years, calculated as the lower of the margin of dumping or injury. “Having regard to the lesser duty rule followed, the Authority recommends imposing an anti-dumping duty equal to the lesser of the margin of dumping or the margin of injury, to remove injury to the domestic industry. The duty will apply for three years from the date of notification, as a percentage of the CIF value of the goods,” the authority stated.

Recommended duties vary across producer groups: Aiko Group faces 23 percent, other non-specified producers 30 percent of CIF value, while cooperative producers such as Jinko and Trina groups were granted nil duty, reflecting negative injury margins. The regime is designed to ensure fairness and market stability.

The DGTR’s decision reveals India’s commitment to building a robust domestic solar manufacturing sector and maintaining a level playing field amid global competition. It complements initiatives like the Production Linked Incentive (PLI) scheme, which promotes capacity expansion for solar cells and modules, while highlighting renewable energy’s role in meeting the country’s growing energy demand sustainably.

With these measures, India seeks to protect domestic production, encourage new capacity investments, and maintain steady growth in the solar sector, ensuring energy supply through environmentally friendly, renewable sources.