DGFT Minutes
In force — no superseding record on file.
MINUTES OF THE POLICY RELAXATION COMMITTEE (PRC) MEETING NO.09/AM10 HELD ON 23.03.2010 AT 11.30 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. Srivastava Addl. DG 3. Shri V.K. Gupta Addl. DG 4. Shri A. Komu Addl. DG 5. Shri Rajiv Arora Jt. DGFT 6. Shri Hardeep singh Jt.DGFT 7. Shri A.K. Singh, Jt. DGFT 8. Shri Akash Taneja Jt. DGFT 09. Shri Anil Agarwal Jt. DGFT 10. Shri Tapan Mazumdar Jt. DGFT 11. Shri S.S. Sah Dy. DGFT 12. Shri P.C. Kotia Dy. DGFT The decision taken on the individual cases are as under:
Case No. 1: M/s Minex Metallurgical Co. Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/445/AM10/EFGC(PRC) PRC Meeting No.09/AM10 dated: 23.03.2010
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorisation No. 0310420637 dt. 22.02.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was more than 100% both Qty.wise and valuewise 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. RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated 4.12.2009 and take necessary action and make necessary endorsements at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 2: M/s P.P. International, Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/277/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of advance licence no. 0310393252 dt. 04.08.2006
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 100% both Qty.wise and valuewise 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. Imports to be made from registered sources only. RA should endorse a clause to that extent in the authorization. RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated 4.12.2009 and take necessary action accordingly and make necessary endorsements at the time of revalidation. Imports to be made from registered sources only.
Case No. 3: M/s. Poddar Tyres Limited, Ludhiana
File No. 01/60/162/247/AM10/EFGC(PRC) Subject: Request of the firm for revalidation of DEPB licence no. 0910027714 dt. 29.09.2006 due to delay in the endorsement by the RA as well as delay in the finalization of Bill of Entry by Customs for imports under Customs Notification No. 34/97. The Committee considered the request of the firm & noted that for licence above, the decision of PRC communicated on 11.12.2008 and RA endorsed on the licence upto 23.5.2009 (i.e. taking six ,months from the date of PRC meeting and not six months from the date of communication. Thereafter on submission of their request to RA, Hyderabad for endorsement as per decision of PRC, the same was endorsed on 17.3.2009 (i.e. taking more than 3 months for making suitable endorsement. Thus out of six months approved, the firm could avail revalidation only for two months due to late implementation of decision by RA. In view of above circumstances the committee decided to grant 3 months and 24 days revalidation against DEPB No. 0910027714 dt. 29.09.06 from the date of endorsement. RA is further instructed to be more careful and avoid such incidences.
Case No. 4 & 5: M/s Galaxy Surfactants Ltd., Navi Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/430 & 432/ AM10/ EFGC (PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of 2 advance authorization nos. (i) 0310431219 dt. 31.05.2007 & (ii) 0310424655 dt. 27.03.07
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence at S.No. (i) was more than 100% both Qty.wise and value wise and more than 50% against S.No. (ii) within valid EO period, as claimed by the firm, and accordingly the Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid advance authorizations 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. RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated 4.12.2009 and take necessary action accordingly and make necessary endorsements at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 6 to 15: M/s. Speciality Papers Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/405 414/ AM10/ EFGC(PRC) Subject: Revalidation of 10 Advance Licence Nos. (i) 0310420297 dt. 21.02.07; (ii) 0310404516 dt. 17.10.06; (iii) 0310405663 dt. 27.10.06; (iv) 0310423217 dt. 15.03.07; (v) 0310421681 dt. 02.03.07; (vi) 0310419056 dt. 09.02.07; (vii) 0310421691 dt. 02.03.07; (viii) 0310402109 dt. 29.09.06; (ix) 0310421307 dt.
28.02.07 & (x) 0310402531 dt. 17.10.06 The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid ten Advances licences were 100% both Qty.wise and valuewise within valid EO period, as claimed by the firm, and accordingly the Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid advance authorizations 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 take necessary action accordingly and make necessary endorsements at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 16: M/s. Sadhana Nitro Chem Limited, Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/578/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: EOP Extension and Revalidation of advance licence no. 0310402715 dated 05.10.2006.
The Committee noted that EO fulfilled against aforesaid Advance Authorisation 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 and revalidate the aforesaid advance authorizations 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. RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated 4.12.2009 and take necessary action accordingly and make necessary endorsements at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 17: M/s Gandhar oil Refinery India Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/561/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Licence No. 0310405121 dt. 20.10.2006.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 100.02% Qty.wise and 95.91% valuewise 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. 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 and take necessary action accordingly and make necessary endorsements at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 18: M/s Gandhar oil Refinery India Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/562/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Licence No. 0310413426 dt. 22.12.2006.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 100% Qty.wise and 137% valuewise 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. 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 and take necessary action accordingly and make necessary endorsements at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 19: M/s Gandhar oil Refinery India Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/563/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Licence No. 0310418785 dt. 07.02.2007.
The Committee noted that balance quantity of all items for import in the authorization were nil. The Committee, therefore decided to reject the case.
Case No. 20: M/s Gandhar oil Refinery India Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/564/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Licence No. 0310419502 dt. 13.02.2007
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was more than 100% both Qty.wise and valuewise 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. 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. 21: M/s Gandhar oil Refinery India Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/565/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Licence No. 0310430113 dt. 22.05.2007
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was more than 100% both Qty.wise and valuewise 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. 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 and take necessary action accordingly and make necessary endorsements at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 22: M/s Gandhar oil Refinery India Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/566/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Licence No. 0310419243 dt. 12.02.2007
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was more than 100% both Qty.wise and valuewise 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. 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 and take necessary action accordingly and make necessary endorsements at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 23: M/s Gandhar oil Refinery India Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/567/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Licence No. 0310422412 dt. 08.03.2007
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was more than 100% both Qty.wise and valuewise 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. 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 and take necessary action accordingly and make necessary endorsements at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 24: Dr. Kalpana Luthra, Associate Professor AIIMS, Delhi
File No. 01/53/8/153/AM07/K8/IC
Subject: Relaxation of para 2.13 of Handbook of Procedures, Vol.I i.e. grant of 2nd revalidation of import licence no. 0550000599 dated 17.1.2006. The Committee granted ex post facto approval to the decision regarding grant of 2nd revalidation of 6 months from the date of endorsement of import licence no. 0550000599 dated 17.1.2006.
Case No. 25: M/s. Elektronik Lab, Mumbai
File No. 01/53/162/407/AM10/E9 Subject: Grant of import licence for import of Four Nos. Search and Rescue Transponder for supply to M/s. Raj Shipping Agencies Ltd., The Committee noted MHA’s No Objection for import of Four Nos. Search and Rescue Transponder by M/s. Electronik Lab, Mumbai and its supply to M/s. Raj Shipping Agencies Ltd. The Committee decided to relax the provisions of para 2.16 of the FTP and grant Import Licence to M/s. Electronic Lab, Mumbai for import of Four Nos. Search and Rescue Transponder for import and subsequnet sale to M/s. Raj Shipping Agencies Ltd. only. Permission letter to specifically state imports made under the licence will be supplied to. M/s. Raj Shipping Agencies Ltd only for their own use.
Case No. 26: Mr. Sahul Rizvi, Meerut
File No. 01/53/162/1754/AM07/S86/IC Subject: Relaxation of para 2.13 of Handbook of Procedures, Vol.I i.e. grant of 2nd revalidation of import licence no. 0550000729 dated 16.3.2007. The Comnmittee granted expost facto approval regarding 2nd revalidation of 6 months already granted to import licence no. 0550000729 dated 16.3.2007 of Mr. Sahul Rizvi, Meerut, a renowned shooter on account of the genuine hardship being faced by him to carry imports.
Case No. 27: M/s. Hindalco Industries Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/89/180/40/AM09/PC2(A)
Subject: Permission for import of One Bullet Proof BMW 760 Li from BMW, Germany regarding.
The Committee noted that the Ministry of Home Affairs has given No Objection to M/s Hindalco Industries Ltd., New Delhi for import of the above vehicle vide their letter No. IV24011/53/09Prov.I dated 11.1.2010. The Committee granted permission to M/s Hindalco Industries Ltd., Mumbai for import of One Bullet proof BMW 760 Li from BMW, Germany for use by Shri Kumar Mangalam Birla, Chairman, Hindalco Industries Ltd., and his family members for use in NCR of Delhi subject to fulfillment of other stipulated conditions in the Import Licensing Notes of Chapter 87 of ITC(HS).
Case No. 28: M/s. Bee Rel Engineering Pvt. Ltd.
File No. 01/91/180/316/AM10/ PC3
Subject: Request for extension in validity of following SFIS Scrips:
Sl Scrip No. Date Expiry dt. Scrip Value Unutilized Value 1. 0310448072 26.10.07 25.10.09 10000000/ 3960555/ 2. 0310448073 26.10.07 25.10.09 10000000/ 8526738/ 3. 0310448074 26.10.07 25.10.09 1089989/ 801752/ Total 13289045 The committee discussed the matter at length and the following decision was taken: The committee considered the fact that there is an economic slowdown and accordingly decided to take a lenient view to revalidate the SFIS scrips mentioned above for six months from the date of endorsement on the SFIS scrip with a deduction of 5% of balance unutilized value of the duty credit scrip. However, the applicant to approach RA immediately within the next 15 days of communication of PRC decision and RA shall endorse the revalidation of the above 3 SFIS Scrips within a maximum of 7 days thereafter.
Case No. 29: M/s. Jaguar Overseas Ltd.,
File No. 01/91/180/1069/AM10/PC3
Subject: Request for extension in validity of SFIS Scrip No. 0510207054 dt. 1.8.2007 (Unutilized value Rs. 20,77,852/.
The committee discussed the matter at length and the following decision was taken: The committee considered the fact that there is an economic slowdown and accordingly decided to take a lenient view to revalidate the SFIS scrip mentioned above for six months from the date of endorsement on the SFIS scrip with a deduction of 5% of balance unutilized value of the duty credit scrip. However, the applicant to approach RA immediately within the next 15 days of communication of PRC decision and RA shall endorse the revalidation of the above SFIS Scrip within a maximum of 7 days thereafter.
Case No. 30: M/s. Dolphin Offshore Enterprises (India) Ltd.
File No. 01/91/180/1727/AM09/PC3 Subject: Sl SFIS Scrip No. Date of issue Date of Expiry Value Unutilized Value 1. 0310443661 19.09.07 18.09.09 30000000/ 23606943. 20/ 2. 0310443662 19.09.07 18.09.09 30000000/ 30000000/ 3. 0310443663 19.09.07 18.09.09 20483460/ 13240508/ Total 66847451.20
The committee discussed the matter at length and the following decision was taken: The committee considered the fact that there is an economic slowdown and accordingly decided to take a lenient view to revalidate the SFIS scrips mentioned above for six months from the date of endorsement on the SFIS scrip with a deduction of 5% of balance unutilized value of the duty credit scrip. However, the applicant to approach RA immediately within the next 15 days of communication of PRC decision and RA shall endorse the revalidation of the above 3 SFIS Scrips within a maximum of 7 days thereafter.
Case No. 31: M/s. Ravin Cables Ltd., Mumbai.
File No. 01/60/162/423/ AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No. 0310420903 dt. 23.02.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 96.43% Qty.wise and 274.78% valuewise 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. RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated No. 32: M/s. Rama Cylinders Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai File No. 01/60/162/441/ AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Extension of the EO period of Advance Licence No. 0310373352 dated 27.03.2006
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. RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated 4.12.2009 and take necessary action and make necessary endorsements at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 33: M/s Kalpena Industries Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/573/ AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No. 0310428375 dt. 01.05.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 99.18% Qty.wise and 111.24% valuewise 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. RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated
Case No. 34: M/s Rapsri Engineering Industries Ltd.,
File No. 01/60/162/144/ AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorisation No. 0710049342 dt. 03.01.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was more than 100% both qty. wise and valuewise 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. RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated
Case No. 35: M/s. Dorf Ketal Chemcials (I) Pvt, Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/590 /AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Licence No. 0310415409 dt. 11.01.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was more than 100% both qty. wise and valuewise 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. RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated
Case No. 36: M/s. Rapsri Engineering Industreis Ltd., Bangalore
File No. 01/60/162/142/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Licence No. 0710048612 dt. 24.1.2006.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was more than 100% both qty. wise and valuewise 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. RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated
Case No. 37: M/s Krishna Antioxidants Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/572/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of advance Licence no. 0310422954 dt. 13.03.2007
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 100% qty. wise and 109.59% valuewise 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. RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated
Case No. 38: M/s Translloy India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/576/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Licence No. 0310424823 dt. 28.03.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was more than 100% both qty. wise and valuewise 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. RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated
Case No. 39: M/s. Banswara Syntex Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/588/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Licence No. 0310412840 dt. 20.12.2006
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 81.67% qty. wise and 100% valuewise 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. RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated
Case No. 40: M/s. Satyam Overseas Corp., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/581/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Licence No. 0310424166 dt. 23.03.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 100% qty. wise and 105.339% valuewise 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. RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated
Case No. 41: M/s Technova Imaging Systems (P) Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/585/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorisation No. 0310425386 dt. 02.04.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 100% qty. wise and 101.304% valuewise 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. RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated 4.12.2009 and take necessary action and make necessary endorsements at the time of revalidation. This revalidation is also subject to verification that EODC was issued by RA not for closure of the case but for bond waiver.
Case No. 42: M/s. Satyam PharmaChem Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/582/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Licence No. 0310424571 dt. 27.03.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 100% qty. wise and 103.169% valuewise 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. RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated
Case No. 43: M/s. Associated Cable Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/348/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Licence No. 0310417366 dt. 25.01.2007
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 102% qty. wise and 96% valuewise 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. RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated
Case No. 44: M/s. Advinus Therapeutics P Ltd., Bangalore
File No. 01/53/8/350/AM07/A48/IC
Subject: Grant of revalidation of import licence No. 0750000189 dt. 1.2.2007.
The Committee noted that the request of the firm regarding grant of revalidation of import licence No. 0750000189 dt. 1.2.2007 to M/s. Advinus Therapeutics P Ltd., Bangalore to enable them to import Rats & Mice for Research & Development purpose against import licence No. 0750000189 dt. 1.2.2007 in view of non availability of the animals. Committee decided to grant a further revalidation for 6 months from the date of endorsement.
Case No. 45: M/s. Elcome Marine Services P Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/53/8/539/AM10/E29/IC Subject: Grant of import licence for import of One Set of Raytheon Radar for supply to the Dhamra Port Company Limited (a Joint Venture of L&T and Tata Steel). The Committee noted the recommendation of EFC for revalidation of import licence for import of One Set of Raytheon Radar for supply to the Dhamra Port Company Limited (a Joint Venture of L&T and Tata Steel). Committee also noted that MHA has conveyed No Objection for import of One Set of Raytheon Radar for supply to the Dhamra Port Company Limited (a Joint Venture of L&T and Tata Steel). The Committee decided to grant the requested Import Licence for stock & sale to M/s. Elcome Marine Services P Ltd Mumbai for import & subsequent sale to Dhamra Port Company Limited (a Joint Venture of L&T and Tata Steel) only. Permission letter and import authorization to specially state that imports made under the licence will be supplied to M/s. Dhamra Port Germany only for their own use.
Case No. 46: M/s. Mew Electricals Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/589/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Licence No. 3410017948 dt. 24.01.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was more than 50% both Qty.wise and valuewise 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. RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated
Case No. 47: M/s. Raigarh Distt. Rifle Association, Chaattisgarh
File No. 01/53/162/851/AM08/R42/ Import Cell Subject: Request for grant of revalidation of import Licence No. 6350000003 dt. 25.10.2007 upto 25.10.2010 from its expiry on 24.10.2009. The Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid import Licence No. 6350000003 dt. 25.10.2007 of Import Licence (from its expiry on 24.10.2009) upto 25.10.2010. All other original conditions viz. items, value etc. remain unchanged.
Case No. 48: M/s. Torrent Cables Ltd., Ahmedabad
File No. 01/94/180/745/AM10/PC4/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorisation No. 0810062983 dt. 19.02.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was more than 100% both Qty.wise and valuewise 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. RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated Case No. 49: National Hydro Power Corporation in the matter arising out of CM No. 9778 of 2005 in WP © 3009 of 1996 in the case of J.K. Corpn. Vs UOI and ors, filed in the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi. File No. 01/82/162/315/AM07DES.V/DBK Subject: Relaxation of delay in filing of claim for TED/DBK refund by NHPCHon’ble High Court of Delhi’s Judgement in I.A. No. 9778/2005 in WP(C) No.3009 of 1996. In view of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi’s order dated 7.1.2010, PRC decided to relax time limit prescribed for filing the application for TED/ DBK refund under the Policy/ Procedure for claims filed by NHPC.
Case No. 50: M/s. TPS Infrastructure Limited, New Delhi
File No. 01/89/180/52/AM10/PC2(A)
Subject: Requst for permission to import 2 nos. second hand, left hand drive, scarab minor machines (Road sweepers), for R&D purposes. Committee decided to relax the provisions of Para 2(II) (f) of Import Licensing Notes of Chapter 87 of the ITC(HS) for import of 2 nos. second hand left hand scarab minor machines (road Sweepers) for R&D purpose. However, Customs will make the necessary endorsement as is done for vehicles imported for R&D purpose i.e. the vehicle imported will not be registered under CMVR Rules and will not ply on Indian roads.
Case No. 51: M/s. Maruti Suzuki India Limited, Gurgaon
File No. 01/89/180/51/M09C2(A)
Subject: Request for allowing reimport of one SX4 vehicle from SMC for R&D purposes.
Committee noted that the request made by Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., is to reimport of one SX4 vehicle from SMC, Japan for R&D purpose. Committee decided to relax the provisions of of Para(II) (f) of Import Licensing Note of Chapter 87 of the ITC(HS) for import of the above vehicle for R&D purpose. However, Customs will make the necessary endorsement as is done for vehicles imported for R&D purpose i.e. the vehicle imported will not be registered under the CMVR Rules and will not ply on Indian roads.
Case No. 52: M/s Raviraj Foils Ltd., Ahmedabad
File No. 01/60/162/374/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of advance authorization no. 0810056968 dated 05.06.2006.
The Committee noted from the agenda that the firm has claimed to have fulfilled EO as below within the valid EOP: S.No. Name of items Qty wise Value wise 1. 61/14Aluminium Foil Plastic Coated/Laminated 98.72% 98.72% 2. 61/16Aluminium Foil Synthetic Resin/Lacquer Coated/Printed 100.07% 100.069% 3. 61/17Aluminium Foil Synthetic Resin/Lacquer Coated 100.44% 100.435% 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 take necessary action and make necessary endorsements at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 53: M/s. Star Oxochem Pvt. Ltd., Gujarat
File No. 01/60/162/380/AM10/EFGC(PRC) Subject: To consider EOP extension of Advance Licence No. 3110016290 dt. 30.06.2004 up to 16.09.2008 for the purpose of clubbing with Advance Licence No. 3110032910 dt. 29.02.2008 The Committee considered the request of the firm and approved extension of EOP against advance licence No. 3110016290 dated 30.06.2004 upto 16.09.2008 for clubbing purposes (since request was filed within the validity of the advance licence No. 3110032910 dated 29.02.2008, 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. RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated 4.12.2009 and take necessary action and make necessary endorsements at the time of EOP extension.
Case No. 54: M/s. Zenith Industrial Rubber products Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/591/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorisation No. 0310426797 dt. 16.04.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was more than 100% both Qty.wise and valuewise 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. RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated
Case No. 55: M/s. Maruti Suzuki India Limited, Gurgaon
File No. 01/89/180/51/AM09/PC2(A) (pt.)
Subject: Request for allowing reimport of one Swift vehicle from Germany for R&D purposes on reexport basis.
The Committee noted that M/s Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Gurgaon has requested to reimport of one Swift vehicle from Germany which is manufactured in Hungary only for R&D purpose. Committee decided to relax the conditions of Para 2(II) (f) of Import Licensing Note of chapter 87 of ITC (HS) for the aforesaid import. However, Customs will make the necessary endorsement as is done for vehicles imported for R&D purpose i.e. the vehicle imported will not be registered under the CMVR Rules and will not ply on Indian roads.
Case No. 56: M/s Zenith Birla (India) Limited., Mumbai.
File No. 01/60/162/339/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of advance licence no. 0310418328 Dated 05.02.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was more than 100% both Qty.wise and valuewise 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. RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated
Case No. 57: M/s Commercial SynBags Ltd., Indore.
File No. 01/60/162/238/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of advance licence no. 1110015262 dated 17.04.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 99.156% qty. wise and 106.079% valuewise within valid EO period, as claimed by the firm, and accordingly the Committee decided to delete the word prorata basis and 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 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 take necessary action and make necessary endorsements at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 58: 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 EO fulfilled against aforesaid Advance Licence was 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 other conditions mentioned in the licence, 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. RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated 4.12.2009 and take necessary action and make necessary endorsements at the time of EOP extension. This EOP extension is also subject to verification by RA that the imports had not been effected from unregistered sources (policy circular No. 9/2003).
Case No. 59: M/s Bajaj Healthcare Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/472/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorisation No. 0310420330 dt. 14.05.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was more than 100% both Qty.wise and valuewise 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. RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated
Case No. 60: M/s. Speciality Restaurants Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/91/180/777/AM10/ PC3 Subject: Request for extension in validity of SFIS Scrip No. 0210108151 dated 14.1.2008 issued by RA, Kolkata, for Rs. 47,80,573/, unutilized value Rs. 25,34,233/. The Scrip expired on 13.1.2010. The committee discussed the matter at length and the following decision was taken: The committee considered the fact that there is an economic slowdown and accordingly decided to take a lenient view to revalidate the SFIS scrip mentioned above for six months from the date of endorsement on the SFIS scrip with a deduction of 5% of balance unutilized value of the duty credit scrip. However, the applicant to approach RA immediately within the next 15 days of communication of PRC decision and RA shall endorse the revalidation of the above SFIS Scrip within a maximum of 7 days thereafter. Case No. 61: M/s. National Standard (India) Limited (Formerly National Standard Duncan Limited) Mumbai File No. 01/60/162/429/AM10/EFGC(PRC) Subject: For revalidation of advance licence no. 0310070603 dt. 29.01.01 for a period of 6 months and EOP extension of Advance Licence No. P/L/2074516 dt. 08.07.1996 upto 31.7.2001 and after revalidation & extension of EOP, all exports including under DEPB Scheme may be clubbed & licences redeemed as per packages sanctioned by BIFR for the purpose of clubbing and regularization. Recommendations of the BIFR Sanctioned Scheme for Central Govt. DGFT.
DEPB Scheme may be clubbed & licences redeemed as per packages sanctioned by BIFR for the purpose of clubbing and regularization. Recommendations of the BIFR Sanctioned Scheme for Central Govt. DGFT. The Committee directed to examine the case strictly as per the scheme of the BIFR and evaluate the specific request of the firm in accordance with the policy provision and the relief given under the scheme. It was, therefore, decided to defer consideration of the case for next meeting. Simultaneously it was also decided to issue instructions to RAs to attend all such proceedings of BIFR wherein relief has been sought from FTP provisions.
Case No. 62 to 78: M/s. Bremels Rubber Industries Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore.
File No. 01/60/162/476 492/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of 17 Advance Authorization
Nos. (i) 0710050745 dt. 20.03.2007; (ii) 0710051583 dt. 10.05.2007; (iii) 0710050493 dt. 08.03.2007; (iv) 0710050482 dt. 07.03.2007;
(v) 0710051585 dt. 10.05.2007; (vi) 0710051198 dt. 12.04.2007; (vii) 0710051425 dt. 26.04.2007; (viii) 0710051200 dt. 12.04.2007; (ix) 0710051199 dt. 12.04.2007; (x) 0710051201 dt. 12.04.2007; (xi) 0710050742 dt. 20.03.2007; (xii) 0710051426 dt. 26.04.2007; (xiii) 0710051584 dt. 10.05.2007; (xiv) 0710051586 dt. 10.05.2007; (xv) 0710051582 dt. 10.05.2007; (xvi) 0710050717 dt. 20.03.2007; & (xvii) 0710051587 dt. 10.05.2007; The Committee noted from the agenda that the firm has claimed to have fulfilled EO as below within the valid EOP: S.No. Qty.wise Valuewise (i) (i) 100% (ii) 100% (i)96% (ii)100% (ii) 100% 100% (iii) 100% 100% (iv) 100% 100% (v) 100% 100% (vi) 100% 100% (vii) 100% 100% (viii) 100% 100% ix) 100% 100% (x) 100% 100% (xi) (i)98% (ii)100% (i)91% (ii)94% (xii) 97% 92% (xiii) (i)100%] 88.89% (ii)0% ] (i)100%] 87.50% (ii)0% ] (xiv) 100% 100% (xv) (i)69% (ii) 100% (i)62% (ii) 100% (xvi) 100% 100% (xvii) 100% 100%
(i)98% (ii)100% (i)91% (ii)94% (xii) 97% 92% (xiii) (i)100%] 88.89% (ii)0% ] (i)100%] 87.50% (ii)0% ] (xiv) 100% 100% (xv) (i)69% (ii) 100% (i)62% (ii) 100% (xvi) 100% 100% (xvii) 100% 100%
Accordingly, the Committee and accordingly the Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid advance authorizations 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 RA is directed to examine each & every licence separately in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated 4.12.2009 and take necessary action and make necessary endorsements at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 79: M/s PCL Oil & Solvents Ltd., New Delhi.
File No. 01/60/162/289/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of advance licence no. 0510177212 dated 23.02.2006.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 100% both Qty.wise and valuewise 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 RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated
Case No. 80: M/s Krishna Antioxidants Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/443/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of advance Licence no. 0310428974 dt. 09.05.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was more than 100% both Qty.wise and valuewise 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. RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated 4.12.2009 and take necessary action and make necessary endorsements at the time of revalidation. It was also decided that concerned norms Committee shall review the SION for the said product.
Case No. 81: M/s D.B. Engineering Private Ltd., New Delhi
File No. 01/60/162/449/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Licence No. 0510207409 dt. 09.08.2007
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 100% both Qty.wise and valuewise 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. RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated
Case No. 82: M/s. NYK Line (India) Limited, Mumbai
File No. 01/89/180/56/AM10/PC2(A)
Subject: Request for Homologation Waiver in respect of TUGMASTER imported for exclusive Port operation.
The Committee noted that the firm’s request regarding exemption from the conditions of Para 2(II) (c) of Import Licensing Notes of Chapter 87of ITC (HS) pertaining to import of TERBERG TUGMASTER for port operation as they would use the vehicle in port premises only and will not ply it on public roads. The Committee decided to relax the above conditions in view of the reasons and undertaking given by the firm.
Case No. 83: Shri Abdul Zuhin, Trichur, Kerala
File No. 01/89/180/36/AM10/PC2(A) Subject: Request for relaxation in Policy in respect of import of a new Subaru Impreza (1997 cc) sports car, right hand drive from Singapore. The Committee noted that the applicant had requested to import 1997 CC Sports Car and had sought relaxation under Para 2(II) © of the Import Licensing Note of Chapter 87 of ITC (HS). The Committed noted that primarily, the imports of All Terrain Vehicle (ATV) specifically designed for off the roads sports was exempted from the conditions at Sl. No. 1 & 2 of Chapter 87. The capacity of the applicant’s vehicle did not justify this to be a sports vehicle and Committee, therefore, rejected the request.
Case No. 84: M/s. Welspun Syntex Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/604/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Licence No. 0310424075 dt. 22.03.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 100% Qty.wise and 98.52 valuewise 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 RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated 4.12.2009 and take necessary action and make necessary endorsements at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 85: M/s. Gala Brush Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/94/1780/226/AM10/PC4.EFGC(PRC) Subject: Request for clubbing of three advance licence nos. (i) 0310187098 dt. 10.03.03, (ii) 031026145 dt. 26.03.04 and (iii) 0310261229 dt. 29.03.04.
The Committee considered the request of the firm and decided for revalidation of three advance licence nos. (i) 0310187098 dt. 10.03.03, (ii) 031026145 dt. 26.03.04 and (iii) 0310261229 dt. 29.03.04 for the purpose of clubbing subject to payment of composition fee @1% of the unutilized Cif value of the authorizations and also verification of EO fulfillment status as claimed by the firm by RA. RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated 4.12.2009 and take necessary action and make necessary endorsements at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 86: M/s Ram Ratna International, Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/428/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of advance licence no. 0310426990 dated 17.04.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was more than 100% both Qty.wise and valuewise 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. RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated
Case No. 87: M/s Welspun Gujarat Stahl Rohren Ltd., Bharuch, Gujarat
File No. 01/60/162/601/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of advance licence no. 3410016020 dated 12.05.2006.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was more than 100% both Qty.wise and valuewise 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. RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated
Case No. 88: M/s. DSM AntiInfectives India Ltd., Gurgaon
File No. 01/60/162/506/AM10/EFGC(PRC) Subject: EOP Extension of Advance Authorisation Nos. 1) 2210007456 dt. 14.02.2008; 2) 2210007529 dt. 15.03.2008; 3) 2210007714 dt.15.04.2008 and regularization of these licences. The Committee noted that EO fulfilled against aforesaid advance authorizations was 55.02% Qty.wise for S.No. (1) and 88.35% for S.No. (2) within valid EOP. It also noted that subsequently balance export obligation leading to a total of 100% or more E.O.) had been fulfilled against these two advance authorizations beyond the EOP. as claimed by the firm. Therefore, the Committee decided to extend EOP, against the
aforesaid two advance authorizations, for a further period of six months from the date of expiry of original EOP of 6 months for regularization purpose, subject to verification by RA of EO claimed to have been fulfilled by the firm within the valid EOP and out side thereof also subject to payment of composition fee @ 6% of the duty saved amount for the balance inputs in proportion to export obligation fulfilled within this extended EOP of 6 months (beyond export obligation period). The request for advance authorization at S.No. (3) was rejected being EO fulfilled less than 50% within valid EOP. The firm shall either reexport the excess raw material or destroy the same in terms of policy circular No.18 dated
rejected being EO fulfilled less than 50% within valid EOP. The firm shall either reexport the excess raw material or destroy the same in terms of policy circular No.18 dated 30.10.2007 after payment of applicable customs duty and interest on the excess imported material. RA is also directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated 4.12.2009 and take necessary action and make necessary endorsements at the time of EOP extension.
Case No. 89: M/s. Miele India Pvt. Ltd.,
File No. 01/89/180/49/AM10/PC2(A)
Subject: Policy relaxation for Import of Miele Motor Bike (YOM:1948).
The Committee decided to relax condition of Para 1 (ii) (a) of IL Note of Chapter 87 of ITC (HS) for import of the Miele Motor Bike (YOM 1948) as per agenda. Customs will make an endorsement that vehicle will not ply on Public Roads and will not be registered under CMVR.
Case No. 90: M/s. Hoegh Autoliners (India) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/89/180/50/AM10/PC2(A)
Subject: Policy relaxation for Import of a vehicle “Terberg Model RT222 terminal tractor”.
The Committee noted that the vehicle proposed to be imported was a normal truck and not a specialty vehicle as claimed by the applicant. It was felt that the vehicle could be used for plying on Indian roads. The Committee, therefore, rejected the request.
Case No. 91: M/s. Grover Vineyards Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/323/AM10/EFGC(PRC) Subject: Revalidation of Advance License No. 0710051434 dated 26.04.2007 for a period of six month from the date of endorsement and extension of Export Obligation Period(EOP) upto 02.07.2009 against Advance License No.s (i) 0710038222 dt. 31.05.2005, (ii) 0710039666 dt. 16.08.2005, (iii) 0710040524 dt. 27.09.2005, (iv) 0710040787 dt. 07.10.2005 and (v) 0710041749 dt. 01.12.2005, for the purpose of clubbing. The Committee considered the request of the firm and decided that in order to control possibility of potential mischief, clubbing in such cases will be allowed only where EO in one authorization has been fulfilled not more than 200% i.e. at most 100% over and above the required EO has been fulfilled. The Committee, therefore in this case, did not agree to the request of clubbing made by the firm.
Case No. 92: M/s. Opera Clothing (P) Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/603/AM10/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: EOP extension of Advance Authorization No 0310411121 dated 06.12.2006.
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. RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated 4.12.2009 and take necessary action and make necessary endorsements at the time of EOP extension.
Verbatim extracted text (OCR/PDF). Older scans and tables may show extraction artifacts — verify against the original for anything you act on.
No analysis generated for this document yet (analysis runs over brief docs + on-demand). Run build_analysis.py --ids 10352 --apply.