DGFT Committee Minutes
MINUTES OF THE POLICY RELAXATION COMMITTEE (PRC) MEETING NO.08/AM10 HELD ON 29.01.2010 AT 10.30 A.M. UNDER THE CHAIRMANSHIP OF SHRI R.S. GUJRAL, DIRECTOR GENERAL OF FOREIGN TRADE. PRC Meeting was held under the Chairmanship of DGFT and list of officers present in the meeting is given below: 1. Shri Amitabh Jain Addl. DG 2. Shri V.K. Gupta Addl. DG 3. Shri A. Komu Addl. DG 4. Ms Shubhra Jt.DGFT 5. Shri Hardeep singh Jt.DGFT 6. Shri Akash Taneja Jt. DGFT 7. Shri Anil Agarwal Jt.DGF 8. Ms. Vibha Bhalla Jt.DGFT 9. Shri S.S. Sah Dy.DGFT The decision taken on the individual cases are as under:
Case No. 1: M/s. GHCL Limited (Textile Division), Dist. Valsad
File No. 01/60/162/415/AM10/EFGC(PRC) PRC Meeting No.08/AM10 dated: 29.01.2010
Subject: Extension in EO period of advance authorization No. 0310402619 dt. 05.10.2006.
The Committee noted that EO fulfilled against aforesaid Advance Licence was more than 50% both Qty.wise and valuewise within valid EOP, as claimed by the firm. Therefore, the Committee decided to extend EOP, against the aforesaid advance authorization, for a period of six months from the date of communication of the decision of PRC, subject to verification by RA of EO claimed to have been fulfilled by the firm within the valid EOP and also subject to payment of composition fee @ 6% of the duty saved amount for the balance inputs in proportion to export obligation beyond export obligation period.
Case No. 2 M/s. . M/s. Duke Consumer Care Limited, Hyderabad
File No. 01/60/162/387/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Extension in EOP against advance authorization No. 0910027939 dt. 23.10.2006.
The Committee noted that EO fulfilled against aforesaid Advance Authorization was more than 50% both Qty.wise and valuewise within valid EOP, as claimed by the firm. Therefore, the Committee decided to extend EOP, against the aforesaid advance authorization, for a period of six months from the date of communication of the decision of PRC, subject to verification by RA of EO claimed to have been fulfilled by the firm within the valid EOP and also subject to payment of composition fee @ 6% of the duty saved amount for the balance inputs in proportion to export obligation beyond export obligation period.
Case No. 3: M/s. Gurind India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi
File No. 01/60/162/372/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of DFIA No. 0510203628 dt. 15.5.2007. The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid DFIA was more than 50% both qty. wise and value wise within valid EO period, as claimed by the firm, and accordingly the Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid DFIA for a period of six months from the date of communication of the decision of PRC, subject to payment of composition fee @ 1% of the unutilized cif value of the DFIA and also subject to verification by RA of EO fulfillment status, as claimed by the firm. Further, PRC decided that DFIA will not be endorsed transferable.
Case No. 4: M/s. Apar Industries Limited, Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/417/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of advance licence No. 3410017657 dt. 18.12.2006.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 100% both qty. wise and value wise within valid EO period, as claimed by the firm, and accordingly the Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid advance licence for a period of six months from the date of communication of the decision of PRC, subject to payment of composition fee @ 1% of the unutilized cif value of the licence and also subject to verification by RA of EO fulfillment status, as claimed by the firm. RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated 4.12.2009 and make necessary endorsements at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 5: M/s. Macoma Hardwares, Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/425/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of advance licence No. 0310423831 dt. 21.03.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 100% qty. wise and 95% value wise within valid EO period, as claimed by the firm, and accordingly the Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid advance licence for a period of six months from the date of communication of the decision of PRC, subject to payment of composition fee @ 1% of the unutilized cif value of the licence and also subject to verification by RA of EO fulfillment status, as claimed by the firm.
Case No. 6: M/s. Kerala balers (P) Ltd., Alleppey
File No. 01/60/162/433/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Extension of the EO period of Advance Authorization No. 1010024565 dated 10.10.06
The Committee noted that EO fulfilled against aforesaid Advance Authorization was more than 50% both Qty.wise and valuewise within valid EOP, as claimed by the firm. Therefore, the Committee decided to extend EOP, against the aforesaid advance authorization, for a period of six months from the date of communication of the decision of PRC, subject to verification by RA of EO claimed to have been fulfilled by the firm within the valid EOP and also subject to payment of composition fee @ 6% of the duty saved amount for the balance inputs in proportion to export obligation beyond export obligation period.
Case No. 7: M/s Vimlesh Industries Pvt. Ltd., Sonepat
File No. 01/60/162/346/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Licence No. 0510186536 dt. 12.07.2006
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was more than 100% both qty. wise and value wise within valid EO period, as claimed by the firm, and accordingly the Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid advance licence for a period of six months from the date of communication of the decision of PRC, subject to payment of composition fee @ 1% of the unutilized cif value of the licecne and also subject to verification by RA of EO fulfillment status, as claimed by the firm. PRC further approved the enhancement in export quantity & value alongwith import quantity & value at proposed value addition of 63% in the enhancement application.
Case No. 8: M/s. Welspun Syntex Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/402/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Licence No. 0310418694 dt. 07.02.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was more than 100% both qty. wise and value wise within valid EO period, as claimed by the firm, and accordingly the Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid advance licence for a period of six months from the date of communication of the decision of PRC, subject to payment of composition fee @ 1% of the unutilized cif value of the licence and also subject to verification by RA of EO fulfillment status, as claimed by the firm.
Case No. 9: M/s Bonny Polyplast Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi
File No. 01/60/162/418/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of advance Licence no. 0510196148 dt. 12.12.2006.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 100% qty. wise and 97.51% value wise within valid EO period, as claimed by the firm, and accordingly the Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid advance licence for a period of six months from the date of communication of the decision of PRC, subject to payment of composition fee @ 1% of the unutilized cif value of the licence and also subject to verification by RA of EO fulfillment status, as claimed by the firm. The modification in the description of import item was discussed in PRC but the same was rejected.
Case No. 10: M/s GSC Glass Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi
File No. 01/60/162/419/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of advance licence no. 0510198204 dated 22.01.2007.
The Committee noted from the agenda that the firm has claimed to have fulfilled EO as below with the valid EOP: S.No. Qty wise Value wise (1) 101% 104% (2) 100% 98%
(3) 100% 98% (4) 95% 94% (5) 100% 99% (6) 100% 98% (7) 100% 81% Accordingly, the Committee and accordingly the Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid advance licences for a period of six months from the date of communication of the decision of PRC, subject to payment of composition fee @ 1% of the unutilized cif value of the licences and also subject to verification by RA of EO fulfillment status, as claimed by the firm.
Case No. 11& 12: M/s. Bafna Silk Creations Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore
File No. 01/60/162/420 & 421/ AM10/ EFGC(PRC) Subject: Revalidation of 2 DFIA Nos. (i) 0710047352 dt.13.09.2006& (ii) 0710049495 dt. 10.01.2007. The Committee noted from the agenda that the firm has claimed to have fulfilled EO as below with the valid EOP: Qty wise Value wise For DFIA No. (i) 100% 100% For DFIA No. (ii) 93.84% 100% Accordingly, the Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid DFIA for a period of six months from the date of communication of the decision of PRC, subject to payment of composition fee @ 1% of the unutilized cif value of the authorizations and also subject to verification by RA of EO fulfillment status, as claimed by the firm.
Case No. 13: M/s. Aga Fruits (P) Ltd., Bangalore
File No. 01/94/180/135/AM08/PC.I/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Extension in EO period for one month against their advance licence no. 0710020626 dt. 17.04.03.
The Committee noted that they were granted EO extension earlier by PRC as a last opportunity. They have completed the EO however, one shipping bill is outside the extended EOP for which licencee is asking one month extension. The Committee considered the request and decided to extend EOP for one month from date of endorsement on AA against the aforesaid advance licence subject to payment of composition fee @ 1% of the duty saved amount for the balance inputs in proportion to export obligation beyond export obligation period. However, this should not be treated as a precedent for future reference.
Case No. 14: M/s. Prime Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/104/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Extension of the EO period of Advance Licence No. 0310376295 dated 18.04.2006.
The Committee noted that the licencee has claimed that they fulfilled 50% EO both Quantity wise and Valuewise within valid EOP. The Committee to reverify the quantum of exports claimed to have been fulfilled. Further, it was decided to confirm whether licence has been issued with PC9 condition.
Case No. 15: M/s. Reliance Industries Limited, Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/401/AM10/EFGC (PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of advance licence no. 0310428822 dated 08.05.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 100% qty. wise and 11.70% value wise within valid EO period, as claimed by the firm, and accordingly the Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid advance authorization for a period of six months from the date of communication of the decision of PRC, subject to payment of composition fee @ 1% of the unutilized cif value of the authorization and also subject to verification by RA of EO fulfillment status, as claimed by the firm.
Case No. 16: M/s. Reliance Industries Limited, Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/403/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of advance licence no. 0310414473 dated 03.01.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid advance licence was more than 50% both qty. wise and value wise within valid EO period, as claimed by the firm, and accordingly the Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid advance licence for a period of six months from the date of communication of the decision of PRC, subject to payment of composition fee @ 1% of the unutilized cif value of the licence and also subject to verification by RA of EO fulfillment status, as claimed by the firm.
Case No. 17: M/s. Reliance Industries Limited, Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/437/AM10/EFGC (PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of advance licence no. 0310429505 dated 15.05.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 98.25% qty. wise and 100% value wise within valid EO period, as claimed by the firm, and accordingly the Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid advance licence for a period of six months from the date of communication of the decision of PRC, subject to payment of composition fee @ 1% of the unutilized cif value of the licence and also subject to verification by RA of EO fulfillment status, as claimed by the firm.
Case No. 18: M/s. Reliance Industries Limited, Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/438/AM10/EFGC (PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of advance licence no. 0310427533 dated 23.04.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid advance licecne was more than 50% both qty. wise and value wise within valid EO period, as claimed by the firm, and accordingly the Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid advance licence for a period of six months from the date of communication of the decision of PRC, subject to payment of composition fee @ 1% of the unutilized cif value of the licence and also subject to verification by RA of EO fulfillment status, as claimed by the firm.
Case No. 19: M/s Priyanka (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi
File No. 01/60/162/443/AM10/EFGC (PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of advance Licence no. 0510204641 dt. 07.06.2007
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 92.49% qty. wise and 100% value wise within valid EO period, as claimed by the firm, and accordingly the Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid advance licence for a period of six months from the date of communication of the decision of PRC, subject to payment of composition fee @ 1% of the unutilized cif value of the licence and also subject to verification by RA of EO fulfillment status, as claimed by the firm.
Case No. 20: M/s. Siria Impex (P) Ltd., New Delhi
File No. 01/60/162/436/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No. 0510205252 dt. 21.06.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance Authorization was more than 50% both qty. wise and value wise within valid EO period, as claimed by the firm, and accordingly the Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid advance authorization for a period of six months from the date of communication of the decision of PRC, subject to payment of composition fee @ 1% of the unutilized cif value of the authorization and also subject to verification by RA of EO fulfillment status, as claimed by the firm.
Case No. 21: M/s Dhariyal Polymers Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad
File No. 01/60/162/447/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No. 0810063179 dt. 23.02.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance Authorization was more than 100% both qty. wise and value wise within valid EO period, as claimed by the firm, and accordingly the Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid authorization for a period of six months from the date of communication of the decision of PRC, subject to payment of composition fee @ 1% of the unutilized cif value of the authorization and also subject to verification by RA of EO fulfillment status, as claimed by the firm.
Case No. 22: M/s. Gujarat Narmada Valley Fertilizers Company Ltd., Gujarat.
File No. 01/60/162/248/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of advance licence no. 3410018557 dated 13.04.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid licence was more than 50% both qty. wise and value wise within valid EO period, as claimed by the firm, and accordingly the Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid advance licence for a period of six months from the date of
communication of the decision of PRC, subject to payment of composition fee @ 1% of the unutilized cif value of the licence and also subject to verification by RA of EO fulfillment status, as claimed by the firm.
Case No. 23: M/s. United Phosphorus Ltd., Mumbai
F.No. 01/94/180/925/AM09/PC4/EFGC(PRC) Subject: Request for extension of EOP beyond 30 months for clubbing of advance licence no. (i) 0310220679 dt. 26.08.2003 & (ii) 0310389629 dt. 14.07.06. The Committee considered the request of the firm and approved extension of EOP beyond 30 months for advance licence No. 0310220679 dt. 26.08.2003 for clubbing purposes since request was filed within the validity of the advance authorization No. 0310389629 dt. 14.7.06, revalidation of this authorization would not be required subject to payment of composition fee @ 5% per year for clubbing and regularization. RA to endorse EOP extension after processing the licences verifying details of exports and imports.
Case No. 24: M/s. Dinman Polypacks Private Limited, Kolkatta
File No. 01/60/162/434/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of advance licence no. 0210085083 dated 03.01.2006.
The Committee noted that EO fulfilled against aforesaid Advance Authorization was 100% both Qty.wise and valuewise within valid EOP, as claimed by the firm and accordingly the Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid advance licence for a period of six months from the date of communication of the decision of PRC, subject to payment of composition fee @ 1% of the unutilized cif value of the authorization and also subject to verification by RA of EO fulfillment status, as claimed by the firm.
Case No. 25: M/s. Jindal Poly Films Ltd., New Delhi
File No. 01/60/162/219/AM10/EFGC(PRC) Subject: For Extension in Export Obligation Period for a period of 6 months in advance authorization no. 0510130262 dt. 25.06.2004 for clubbing with advance licence no. 0510131255 dt. 06.07.2004 for regularization of both the advance authorizations. The Committee considered the request of the firm and decided to approve EOP extension for a period of 6 months in advance authorization no. 0510130262 dt. 25.06.2004 for clubbing with advance licence no. 0510131255 dt. 06.07.2004 for the purpose of regularization of both the advance authorizations subject to payment of composition fee @ 5% per year of the duty saved amount for the balance inputs in proportion to export obligation beyond export obligation period for advance authorization dated 25.6.04.
Case No. 26: M/s. Sharavathy Conductors Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore.
File No. 01/60/162/375/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No. 0710052082 dt. 20.06.2007.
The Committee noted that EO fulfilled against aforesaid Advance Authorization was more than 100% both Qty.wise and valuewise within valid EOP, as claimed by the firm, and accordingly the Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid advance authorization for a period of six months from the date of communication of the decision of PRC, subject to payment of composition fee @ 1% of the unutilized cif value of the authorization and also subject to verification by RA of EO fulfillment status, as claimed by the firm. RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated 4.12.2009 and make necessary endorsements at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 27: M/s. Intas Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Ahmedabad
File No. 01/60/162/322/AM10/EFGC(PRC) Subject: EOP extension against advance licence no. 0810079162 dt. 02.04.2009 issued under Policy Circular no.9 dt. 30.06.2003, for 6 months. The Committee noted that EO fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance Licence was 71.49% Qty. wise and 100% value wise within valid EOP, as claimed by the firm. Committee also noted that the original EOP is now 12 months as per the FTP, 200914. Therefore, the Committee decided to extend EOP for six months, against the aforesaid advance authorization, subject to verification by RA of EO claimed to have been fulfilled by the firm within the valid EOP and also subject to the payment of composition fee @ 6% of the duty saved amount for the balance inputs in proportionate to balance E.O. beyond original EOP.
Case No. 28: M/s. Dolphin Laboratories Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/94/180/534/AM10/PC4/EFGC(PRC) Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No. 0310160296 dt. 25.09.2002 for the purpose of clubbing with advance authorization no. 0310202663 dt. 20.05.03. The Committee noted that the firm had applied for clubbing for to RA in 2006 & accordingly considered the request of the firm for revalidation of Advance Authorization No. 0310160296 dt. 25.09.2002, for 6 months for the purpose of clubbing with advance authorization no. 0310202663 dt. 20.05.03 subject to payment of composition fee @ 1% of the unutilized cif value of the authorization and also subject to verification by RA of EO fulfillment status, as claimed by the firm.
Case No. 29 to 34: M/s. Jindal Saw Ltd., New Delhi.
File No. 01/60/162/394399 /AM10/EFGC(PRC) Subject: Revalidation of 6 Advance Licence Nos. (i) 3110026892 dt. 16.10.07; (ii) 3110029118 dt. 03.05.07; (iii) 3110028541 dt. 14.03.07; (iv) 3110029043 dt. 23.04.07; (v) 3110029148 dt. 08.05.07 & (vi) 3110029147 dt. 08.05.07. The Committee noted from the agenda that the firm has claimed to have fulfilled EO as below with the valid EOP: S.No. of above mentioned advance licences Qty wise Value wise (i) 105% 101% (ii) 102% 98.89% (iii) 106% 92.53% (iv) 106% 99.94%
(v) 102% 99.98% (vi) 102% 99.98% Accordingly, the Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid advance licences for a period of six months from the date of communication of the decision of PRC, subject to payment of composition fee @ 1% of the unutilized cif value of the licences and also subject to verification by RA of EO fulfillment status, as claimed by the firm. RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated 4.12.2009 and make necessary endorsements at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 35: M/s. Alembic Limited, Vadodra
File No. 01/94/180/538/AM10/PC4/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: To accept physical exports against the advance licence no. 3410009318 dt. 24.12.03 issued for Deemed exports.
The Committee observed that the licencee has made physical exports against the Deemed exports licence and earned foreign exchange. Even though the licence is issued prior to PN 45 (dated 14.1.2005), in the instant case it was decided to accept the physical exports made against Advance LIcence no. 3410009318 dt. 24.12.03 and regularize the case, after verification of the physical exports made against the licence by the concerned RA.
Case No. 36: M/s. Lupin Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/94/180/343/AM10/PC4/EFGC (PRC)
Subject: EOP extension of advance authorization no. 0310411308 dt. 07.12.2006
The Committee noted that EO fulfilled against aforesaid Advance Authorization was more than 50% both Qty.wise and valuewise within the valid EOP, as claimed by the firm. Therefore, the Committee decided to extend EOP, for a period of six months from the date of expiry of the EOP to regularize the exports already made by them beyond valid EOP subject to payment of composition fee @ 6% of the duty saved amount for the balance inputs in proportion to export obligation beyond export obligation period.
Case No. 37: M/s. Coromandel Fertilisers Ltd., Secunderabad.
File No. 01/53/8/834/AM09/C61/Import Cell
Subject: Relaxation of para 2.26 i.e. goods have been cleared from the customs before issue of import licence.
The Committee considered the request of the firm & noted that Customs have cleared 3 consignments of Urea totaling 87091.612 MTs on the basis of NOC given by Ministry of Chemicals & Fertilizers. It was also noted that firm had applied for a Import Licence in March, 2009, much before these clearances were affected. However, Import Licence could not be issued as certain clarifications were sought from D/o Fertilizers. After deliberations, Committee agreed for relaxation of Para 2.26 of FTP i.e. goods cleared from Customs against Authorization issued subsequently.
Case No. 38: M/s. R.K. Plastics, Falna (MP)
File No. 01/53/1612/1633/AM06/R65/Import Cell
Subject: Request for grant of 2nd revalidation of import Licence No. 1350000271 dated 31.10.2006 from the date of endorsement for six month. The Committee noted that the first revalidation was given by RA for six months from the date of its expiry to the firm and decided to allow next revalidation of above mentioned Import Licence for further six months from the date of communication for importing balance quantity of 409 MTs of Plastic Waste/Scrap.
Case No. 39: M/s. Reliance Industries Limited, Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/296/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: DEPB claim made in maual mode for EDI Port shipment.
The Committee noted that the DEPB S/Bills were passed by JNPT Customs and they have also issued a shipment certificate confirming the fact. The PRC therefore decided that RA may issue a DEPB on manual system and it should be endorsed on DEPB as well as customs should be specifically informed regarding the manual filing of Shipping Bill to avoid any duplication of benefit by the applicant.
Case No. 40: M/s. Raj Petro Speciality P. Ltd., Chennai
File No. 01/60/162/774/AM10/EFGC(PRC) Subject: Request for revalidation of advance licence No. 0410060207 dt.19.07.2004 for the purpose of clubbing with advance licence No. 0410059181 dt. 02.07.2004. The Committee considered the request of the firm for revalidation of advance licecne No. 0410060207 dt.19.07.2004 for six months from the date of communication of PRC decision for the purpose of clubbing with advance licence No. 0410059181 dt. 02.07.2004 subject to payment of composition fee @ 1% of the unutilized cif value of the licence. RA to endorse revalidation after processing the licences, verifying details of exports and imports.
Case No. 41: M/s. Devharsh Infotech Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/451/AM10/EFGC (PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No. 0310413170 dt. 21.12.2006.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 100% both qty. wise and value wise within valid EO period, as claimed by the firm, and accordingly the Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid advance licence for a period of six months from the date of communication of the decision of PRC, subject to payment of composition fee @ 1% of the unutilized cif value of the licence and also subject to verification by RA of EO fulfillment status, as claimed by the firm. RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated 4.12.2009 and make necessary endorsements at the time of revalidation.
Verbatim extracted text (OCR/PDF). Older scans and tables may show extraction artifacts — verify against the original for anything you act on.
No analysis has been generated for this document yet.