tokens: As the setting of that rate is based on data relating to the sampling , the applicant can discharge its burden of proof , as the Commission rightly states , by also showing either that the factors forming the basis for the setting of the dumping margin used to establish the rates of the anti-dumping duty that apply to the companies included in the sampling had changed in a significant and lasting manner , or that such changes had affected all exporting producers of the exporting country . 31 To the extent that the applicant has raised , in its request for an interim review limited to dumping aspects , only the establishment of a new distribution system which included the establishment of a related company and the introduction of a new type of product that did not exist during the investigation period , it put forward information relating only to its own situation , a fact , moreover , which is expressly acknowledged by the applicant . 32 It follows that the Commission was fully entitled to conclude that the applicant had failed to submit the evidence necessary to justify the opening of a partial interim review limited to dumping aspects and , consequently , to refuse its request . 33 That conclusion is not called into question by the applicant ’ s various arguments . 34 In the first place , as to the argument alleging discrimination against the applicant when compared with other undertakings included in the sample , first , it must be recalled that , according to consistent case-law , compliance with the principles of equality and non-discrimination requires that comparable situations must not be treated differently and that different situations must not be treated in the same way unless such treatment is objectively justified ( see judgment of 13 December 2007 , Asda Stores , C ‑ 372 / 06 , EU : C : 2007 : 787 , paragraph 62 and the case-law cited ) .