Jindal Stainless chairman urges govt to impose appropriate duties on imports from certain countries
Jindal Stainless
Chairman
Ratan Jindal
on Wednesday urged the government to protect the industry and livelihood of people by imposing appropriate duties on surging imports from select countries.
The industry leader made the remarks while addressing the Global Stainless Steel Summit (2025) in Mumbai.
"Today, low-priced imports from China and Vietnam persist across numerous industries, including stainless steel.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Homeowners can claim a free boiler upgrade if they live in these postcodes
Eco Green Tips
Apply Now
Undo
In this context, it is essential that we collectively take a stand to protect our industry, particularly MSMEs, and the livelihood of our people, by imposing appropriate duties on these countries. I request the government's continuous support in this regard," he said while addressing the gathering.
Jindal said many countries with excess production disrupt the level-playing field, particularly for the MSME sector. They divert surplus stainless steel through nations with free
trade
agreements with India or through ASEAN countries like Vietnam.
Live Events
"We have all witnessed how Indian industries like textiles, electronics, and machinery have been severely impacted by the aggressive
export
policies of countries like China and Vietnam," he said.
India's installed stainless steel capacity stands at 7.5 MT, with a current utilisation of about 60 per cent, indicating significant potential for ramp-up, provided the right policy environment and
demand
momentum are sustained.
He said future investment in stainless steel is bound to get impacted. As domestic capacities are lying idle and 30 per cent of the consumption is still coming from imports.
He also advocated for a separate policy to promote the interests of stainless steel sector.
"We, thus, need a policy ecosystem that is conducive to domestic manufacturing and consistent in favouring Make in India in the long term.
"Only then will we be able to claim our rightful position in the global stainless steel industry," Jindal said.
Later, addressing the media, JSL Director Vijay Sharma said on behalf of the industry, ISSDA will be filing and application with Directorate General of Trade Remedies (DGTR) this month to investigate the
dumping of stainless steel
items into the domestic market from select group of countries.
India's
stainless steel imports
rose to 1.73 million tonnes in FY25, with China, Indonesia, Vietnam and South Korea being the major contributors to the shipments, as per the market research firm BigMint. PTI
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
36 minutes ago
- Time of India
How Trump's visa crackdown is threatening Harvard's 7,000 plus international students and what the court just ruled
Federal court blocks Trump's move to restrict Harvard's international student enrollment. (AP Photo) President Donald Trump's administration has escalated efforts to restrict international students at Harvard University, directly affecting over 7,000 foreign students and casting uncertainty over one of the nation's most prestigious universities. This crackdown targets nearly a quarter of Harvard's student body, shaking the university's global standing and raising significant legal and educational concerns. However, recent court rulings have temporarily stalled some of these moves, leaving the fate of Harvard's international students unresolved. The Trump administration's push against Harvard's foreign enrollment represents a broader policy effort to tighten controls on international students in the US. Central to this effort is the Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) attempt to revoke Harvard's certification to host foreign students under the Student Exchange and Visitor Program. This program authorizes universities to issue the necessary documents for foreign students to study in the US, making it critical for Harvard's international enrollment. Federal judge halts homeland security's attempt to block international students In a significant development, U.S. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 5 Books Warren Buffett Wants You to Read In 2025 Blinkist: Warren Buffett's Reading List Undo District Judge Allison Burroughs temporarily blocked the DHS's ban on Harvard hosting foreign students, citing irregularities in the government's process. The judge's preliminary injunction prevents the administration from withdrawing Harvard's participation in the visa program until the lawsuit filed by the university is resolved. According to Harvard, the ruling 'does not affect the DHS's ongoing administrative review,' but the court's intervention provides temporary relief for more than 7,000 students relying on the program, as reported by the Associated Press. The Trump administration claims that revoking Harvard's certification is a lawful exercise of its authority to regulate foreign student visas. Usually, such action is reserved for clear violations like loss of accreditation or failing to operate as a bona fide institution of learning. However, Harvard argues the administration's efforts are politically motivated retaliation over campus protests and alleged failures to control antisemitism, which the university disputes. Harvard President Alan Garber has stated the university has taken measures to combat antisemitism and will not concede to the administration's demands, according to the Associated Press. Blocking entry of incoming students and increased visa scrutiny In addition to attempting to revoke Harvard's ability to enroll foreign students, President Trump issued a proclamation to block entry for incoming Harvard students, invoking authority to deny entry to groups deemed detrimental to national interests. Harvard has challenged this in court, arguing that targeting only Harvard students does not constitute a valid 'class of aliens,' and Judge Burroughs has paused the entry ban for now. Further complicating the situation, the US State Department has intensified social media vetting for visa applicants attending Harvard and other universities, searching for signs of hostility toward the US. This policy expansion means more scrutiny for thousands of foreign students hoping to study at American institutions. The State Department also instructed consulates to prioritize visa approvals for students enrolling at schools with less than 15% foreign student populations, a threshold Harvard exceeds, as reported by the Associated Press. Harvard's international student body and the stakes International students make up approximately 26% of Harvard's total student body, with certain programs being even more dependent on foreign enrollment. For example, 49% of students at the Harvard Kennedy School hold F-1 visas, a third of the business school's students come from abroad, and 94% of the master's program in comparative law consists of international students. This crackdown threatens not only the students' ability to remain in the US but also Harvard's identity as a global academic leader. Conservatives supporting the administration's policies criticize Harvard as a hub of liberalism and antisemitism, but the university insists the government's actions are illegal retaliation, as reported by the Associated Press. As the court case unfolds, Harvard's 7,000 plus international students remain in limbo, highlighting the complex intersection of immigration policy, education, and politics under President Trump's administration. Is your child ready for the careers of tomorrow? Enroll now and take advantage of our early bird offer! Spaces are limited.
Scroll.in
38 minutes ago
- Scroll.in
The paradox of English: It is both a foreign tongue and a deeply embedded Indian language
Alongside their offensive against Urdu, India's language nationalists appear to have turned their ire on English. That is what one could conclude from the declaration by Union Home Minister Amit Shah at a book launch in New Delhi on Thursday, when he predicted that 'soon a time would come when those speaking English will feel ashamed'. 'In our lifetime, we will see a society in which those speaking English will feel ashamed, that day is not far,' he said. 'I believe that the languages of our country are the ornament of our culture. Without them, we would not have been Bharatiya. Our country, its history, its culture, our dharma – if these have to be understood, it cannot be done in foreign languages.' Shah's statement quickly sparked a political backlash. Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, Rahul Gandhi, countered forcefully: 'English is not a dam, it is a bridge. English is not shameful, it is empowering. English is not a chain – it is a tool to break the chains.' Other opposition figures, including Trinamool Congress leaders Derek O'Brien and Sagarika Ghose, echoed this sentiment, slamming the home minister for what they saw as a regressive and divisive stance. Echoes of Mulayam Singh Shah's remarks recall a moment 35 years ago when Mulayam Singh Yadav, who was then chief minister of Uttar Pradesh, launched his own crusade against English. In May 1990, Yadav infamously declared English to be 'the language of foreigners and the elite', blaming it for perpetuating socio-economic disparity and cultivating feelings of inferiority among non-English speakers. His one-point mission: Angrezi hatao. Banish English. In a curious twist, Yadav, a self-declared supporter of Urdu urged Urdu-speaking communities to unite with Hindi speakers to oppose English. Urdu, having only recently been granted official status as Uttar Pradesh's second language, was now being weaponised against a new linguistic rival. This contradiction is not out of character for Indian politics, where language often becomes a proxy for identity, power and culture. The disdain for English in some Indian political circles can be traced back to the 1950s and '60s, to socialist leader Ram Manohar Lohia and even earlier, to Mohandas Gandhi and the Indian National Congress. Gandhi viewed English as an alien imposition that had displaced indigenous languages from their rightful place in Indian society. At Independence, the Indian Constitution made Hindi the official language, but allowed English to continue for a transitional period of 15 years. This compromise was pragmatic, not sentimental. English was seen as a necessary link language in a culturally and linguistically diverse nation. However, the efforts to impose Hindi on South India in the 1960s sparked widespread resistance and deepened the North-South linguistic divide. Even today, English continues to be viewed by many as a colonial vestige, despite its extensive indigenisation. The Lohia doctrine Lohia considered English to be not just a colonial leftover, but a barrier to original thought and mass education. He argued that true educational reform and people-oriented governance were possible only if conducted in the people's languages. Recognising India's cultural diversity, Lohia made exceptions for South Indian states, allowing them to retain English for inter-state and central communication for 50 years. However, his nuanced vision was distorted by his followers. The anti-English frenzy gained renewed vigour in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, leading to draconian steps like removing English from school curricula altogether. In Bihar in the 1970s, Chief Minister Karpoori Thakur reduced English to an optional subject, resulting in a generation of students branded as the 'Karpoori class' – matriculates without English proficiency. Mulayam Singh Yadav resurrected the campaign in the 1990s, giving it a political legitimacy that had long-lasting social consequences. Misplaced stereotypes Yadav's campaign also triggered unwarranted attacks on Christian institutions, which were accused of using English as a tool for religious conversion and elitist education. This conflation of English with Christianity mirrors the equally irrational equation in the Hindi heartland of Urdu with Islam. Such logic ignores the complex realities of Indian linguistic identity. English may have arrived with colonial Christians, but it soon became a key vehicle for political awakening and nation-building. It was through English that India's founding leaders – from Raja Rammohun Roy to Nehru – engaged with global currents of nationalism, democracy, liberty and modernity. The same language, intended by the British to produce obedient clerks, ended up producing freedom fighters, thinkers and reformers who led India's struggle for independence. More Indian than foreign? Despite its origins, English in India has long shed its colonial skin. It is the medium of scientific advancement, legal systems, administrative governance and higher education. It has played a vital role in the country's post-Independence progress – particularly in the globalisation era. Ironically, many politicians who publicly denounce English still prefer to send their children to English-medium schools. Even in the Hindi heartland, English remains a key administrative language. Today, English enjoys a paradoxical status: both a foreign tongue and a deeply embedded Indian language. English is also the mother tongue of the Anglo Indian community, a recognised minority in India, and serves as an official language in states like Nagaland. As globalisation continues to shape India's economic and cultural landscape, English remains the country's primary interface with the world. To treat it as a threat to Indian identity is to ignore the multifaceted reality of modern India. Language should be a medium of unity, not a tool of discord. English, like all Indian languages, must be valued for its integrative potential, not vilified for its past. The country does not need another round of linguistic chauvinism. Instead, India should recognise the multilingual richness of English – and the maturity to embrace it.
Deccan Herald
43 minutes ago
- Deccan Herald
Operation Sindhu: 827 Indian nationals brought back from Iran so far, says MEA
#OperationSindhu flight brings citizens home. 🇮🇳 evacuated 290 Indian nationals from Iran, including students and religious pilgrims by a charter flight. The flight arrived in New Delhi at 2330 hrs on 20 June and was received by Secretary (CPV& OIA) Arun Chatterjee. Government…
