DGFT Minutes
In force — no superseding record on file.
MINUTES OF THE POLICY RELAXATION COMMITTEE (PRC) MEETING NO.02/AM11 HELD ON 11.06.2010 AT 3.30 P.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 V.K. Srivastava Addl. DG 4. Shri Rajiv Arora Jt.DGFT 5. Shri L.B. Singhal Jt.DGFT 6. Shri A.K. Singh Jt.DGFT 7. Shri Tapan Mazumder Jt.DGFT 8. Ms Shubhra Jt.DGFT 9. Shri Akash Taneja Jt. DGFT 10. Shri S.S. Sah Dy.DGFT After deliberation, the following decision were taken.
Case No. 1: M/s. Hindustan Platinum Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/54/AM10/EFGC (PRC) PRC Meeting No.02/AM11 dated: 11.06.2010
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorisation No. 0310322166 dt. 18.03.2005.
The case was earlier rejected by this office on the grounds of time bar. As the firm provided evidence of having applied within the timelimit , the Committee reconsidered the case. The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 119% Qty.wise and 148% value wise within valid EO period, as claimed by the firm, and accordingly the Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid authorisation 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 regarding value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization whichever is higher at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 2: M/s. Mittal Appliances Ltd., PithampurDist
File No. 01/60/162/416/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Licence No. 1110015115 dt. 27.03.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 98.41% Qty.wise and 54.08% valuewise within valid EO period, as claimed by the firm, and accordingly the Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid advance authorization on prorata basis for a period of six
months from the date of communication of the decision of PRC for purpose of closure as per the provisions of FTP, 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 regarding value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization whichever is higher at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 3: M/s. Universal Medicap Ltd.,
File No. 01/60/162/662/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Licence No. 03410018288 dt. 12.3.2007
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 100% Qty.wise and 223% 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 regarding value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization whichever is higher at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 4: M/s. Supreme Devices Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi
File No. 01/60/162/661/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Licence No. 0510204557 dt. 06.03.2007
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 90.62% Qty.wise and 90.82% valuewise within valid EO period, as claimed by the firm, and accordingly the Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid advance authorization on prorata basis 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 regarding value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization whichever is higher at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 5: M/s. Polygel Industries Pvt. Ltd., Navi Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/265/AM10/ EFGC(PRC) Subject: Revalidation of Advance Licence No. 0310400010 dt. 19.9.2006 for further period of 6 months and EOP Extension of Advance Licence No. 0310356642 dt. 24.11.2005 upto 30.11.2008 for the purpose of clubbing. The Committee considered the request of the firm and approved revalidation of Advance Licence No. 0310400010 dt. 19.9.2006 for further period of 6 months and EOP Extension of Advance Licence No. 0310356642 dt. 24.11.2005 upto 30.11.2008 for the purpose of clubbing subject to payment of composition fee @1% for revalidation and 5% per year for EOP extension for clubbing and regularization . RA to grant EOP extension after verifying details of exports and
imports and in accordance with FTP provisions. RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated 4.12.2009 and make necessary endorsements regarding value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization whichever is higher.
Case No. 6: M/s Trident Tools Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/655/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Licence No. 0310418187 dt. 02.02.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 100% 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 4.12.2009 and make necessary endorsements regarding value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization whichever is higher at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 7: M/s Reliance Industries Ltd. Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/649/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorisation No. 0310433708 dt. 25.06.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 100% 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 4.12.2009 and make necessary endorsements regarding value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization whichever is higher at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 8: M/s Videocon Industries Ltd., Aurangabad
File No. 01/60/162/653/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Licence No. 0310434119 dt. 27.06.2007
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 100% 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 4.12.2009 and make necessary endorsements regarding value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization whichever is higher at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 9: M/s Prima Plastic Ltd. Mumbai
File No. 01/94/180/715/AM10/PC4/EFGC (PRC)
Subject: Extension of the EO period of Advance Authorisation No. 0310333721 dated 09.06.2005
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 make necessary endorsements at the time of EOP extension.
Case No. 10: M/s Gujarat Polyfilms Pvt. Ltd., Surat
File No. 01/60/162/568/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of advance authorisation no. 5210019301 dt. 27.03.2006.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 32.56% Qty.wise and 33 % valuewise within valid EO period, as claimed by the firm, and accordingly the Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid advance authorization on prorata basis 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 regarding value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization whichever is higher at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 11: M/s. Fine Organic Industries Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/680/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorisation No. 0310394194 dt. 10.08.2006.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 100% Qty.wise and 98.54% 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 regarding value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization whichever is higher at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 12: M/s Sanhit Polymer Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata,
File No. 01/60/162/659/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Licence No. 0210101645 dt. 18.06.2007
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 100% Qty.wise and 101.90% 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 regarding value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization whichever is higher at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 13: M/s United Phosphourus Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/328/AM10/ EFGC(PRC) Subject: Eop extension of adv. Lic. No. 0310367104 dt. 16.2.2006 upto 22.8.2009 and revalidation of adv. Lic. No. 0310430314 dt. 23.5.2007 for the purpose of clubbing. The Committee considered the request of the firm and approved EOP extension of adv. Lic. No. 0310367104 dt. 16.2.2006 upto 22.8.2009 and revalidation of adv. Lic. No. 0310430314 dt. 23.5.2007 for six months for the purpose of clubbing subject to payment of composition fee @1% for revalidation and 5% per year for EOP extension 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 make necessary endorsements regarding value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization whichever is higher.
Case No. 14: M/s Rishab Apparel Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/626/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Licence No. 0310424966 dt. 29.03.2007
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 87.43% 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 on prorata basis for a period of six months from the date of communication of the decision of PRC for closure, 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 regarding value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization whichever is higher at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 15: M/s Jay Chemicals, Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/308/AM10/ EFGC(PRC) Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorisation No. 0310384713 dt. 14.06.2006 for 6 months for purpose of clubbing with Advance authorisation No. 0310366967 dt. 14.02.2007. The Committee considered the request of the firm and approved revalidation of Advance Authorisation No. 0310384713 dt. 14.06.2006 for 6 months for purpose of clubbing and regularization with Advance authorisation No. 0310366967 dt. 14.02.2007 subject to payment of composition fee @ 1% per year for revalidation for clubbing and regularization. RA is directed to examine the case in terms of Public Notice No. 23 dated 4.12.2009 and make necessary endorsements regarding value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization whichever is higher.
Case No. 16: M/s HPL Additives Ltd., New Delhi
File No. 01/60/162/371/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of advance authorisation no. 0510202146 dated 04.04.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 100.06% Qty.wise and 103.03% 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 regarding value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization whichever is higher at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 17: M/s Veekay Polycoats Ltd., New Delhi
File No. 01/60/162/651/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation and EOP extension of Advance Licence No. 0510199290 dt. 09.02.2007
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 60.48% Qty.wise and 64% valuewise within valid EO period, as claimed by the firm, and accordingly the Committee decided to revalidate and EOP extension of 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 composition fee @ 6% of the duty saved amount for the balance inputs in proportion to export obligation beyond export obligation period 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 regarding value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization whichever is higher at the time of revalidation and EOP extension.
Case No. 18: M/s Medplus Health Services (P) Ltd., Hyderabad
File No. 01/53/162/1527/AM10/M71/Import Cell
Subject: Grant of Import Licence for import of 104 MTs of OATS
The Committee noted that no objection certificate has been provided by D/o Agriculture & Cooperation for import of 104 MTs of OATS by M/s Medplus Health Services (P) Ltd., Hyderabad from Australia subject to condition as enumerated in the no objection certificate. The Committee also noted the recommendation of the EFC held on 22.04.2010 to grant import licence to the applicant firm for import of104 MTs of OATS from Australia for a cif value of Rs. 34,36,701/ for stock and sales. In view of the aforesaid recommendations PRC considered the request of the applicant firm in relaxation of para 2.11for grant of import licence on stock and sale purpose.
Case No. 19: M/s RPC Foods, New Delhi
File No. 01/53/8/679/AM10/R54/Import Cell
Subject: Grant of Import Licence for import of 54000 Kgs. of Medium Grain Kokuho Rice for Sushi.
The Committee noted that no objection certificate has been provided by D/o Agriculture & Cooperation for import of 54000 Kgs. of Medium Grain Kokuho Rice for Sushi by M/s RPC Foods, New Delhi from USA subject to condition as enumerated in the no objection certificate. The Committee also noted the recommendation of the EFC held on 22.04.2010 to grant import licence to the applicant firm for import of 54000 Kgs. of Medium Grain Kokuho Rice for Sushi from USA for a cif value of Rs. 31,25,000/ for stock and sales. In view of the aforesaid recommendations PRC considered the request of the applicant firm in relaxation of para 2.11 for grant of import licence on stock and sale purpose .
Case No. 20: M/s Silver Crest Clothing Pvt. Ltd.
File No. 01/94/180/295/AM10/PC4/EFGC (PRC) Subject: Revalidation of Annual Advance Authorisation No. 0710044468 dt. 21.04.2006 and Annual Advance Authorisation No. 0710044469 dt. 21.04.2006 for purpose of clubbing for redemption and regularization. The Committee considered the request of the firm and decided for revalidation of Annual Advance Authorisation No. 0710044468 dt. 21.04.2006 for purpose of clubbing with Annual Advance Authorisation No. 0710044469 dt. 21.04.2006 for redemption and regularization 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. 21: M/s Sutlej Textiles and Industries Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/663/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Extension of the EO period of Advance Authorisation No. 0310414650 dt. 05.01.2007.
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 make necessary endorsements at the time of EOP extension.
Case No. 22: M/s Alkyl Aminues Chemicals Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/458/AM10/ EFGC(PRC) Subject: To consider EOP Extension of Advance Licence No. 0310313904 dt. 27.01.2005 up to 30.1.2009 for the purpose of clubbing with Advacne Licence No. 0310516145 dt. 17.04.09. The Committee considered the request of the firm and approved EOP Extension of Advance Licence No. 0310313904 dt. 27.01.2005 up to 30.1.2009 for the purpose of clubbing with Advacne Licence No. 0310516145 dt. 17.04.09 (since request was filed within the validity of the advance licence No. 0310516145 dt. 17.04.09, revalidation of this authorization would not be required), subject to payment of composition fee @ 5% per year for EOP extension for clubbing and regularization. RA to endorse EOP extension after verifying the 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. 23: M/s Shankar Packagings Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/94/180/937/AM09/PC4/EFGC (PRC)
Subject: Request for grant of EO extension against Advance Licence No. 0310359812 dt. 16.12.2005 for six months.
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 make necessary endorsements at the time of EOP extension.
Case No. 24: M/s M.J. Biopharm Private Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/711/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Request for EOP extension of Advance Authorisation No. 0310393017 dt. 03.08.2006 for six months.
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 make necessary endorsements at the time of EOP extension.
Case No. 25: M/s United Phosphourus Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/327/AM10/ EFGC(PRC) Subject: EOP Extension of Advance Licence No. 0310350205 dt. 04.10.2005 up to 30.6.2009 for the purpose of clubbing with Advacne Licence No. 0310528674 dt. 13.07.09. The Committee considered the request of the firm and approved EOP Extension of Advance Licence No. 0310350205 dt. 04.10.2005 up to 30.6.2009 for the purpose of clubbing with Advacne Licence No. 0310528674 dt. 13.07.09 (since request was filed within the validity of the advance licence No. 0310528674 dt. 13.07.09, revalidation of this authorization would not be required), subject to payment of composition fee @ 5% per year for EOP extension for clubbing and regularization. RA to endorse EOP extension after verifying the 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. 26: M/s Siria Impex (P) Ltd., New Delhi
File No. 01/60/162/682/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of advance Licences mentioned below:
1. 0510207299 dt. 07.08.07 2. 0510207248 dt. 07.08.07 3. 0510208234 dt. 29.08.07 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 Value wise 1. 100% 100.04% 2. 85.27% 85.27% 3. 65.52% 65.58%
Accordingly, the Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid advance authorization on prorata basis 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 regarding value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization whichever is higher at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 27: M/s Four Plus Overseas (I), New Delhi
File No. 01/60/162/386/AM10/ EFGC(PRC) Subject: Revalidation of DFIA No. 0510204720 dt. 11.06.2007. The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 108.52% Qty.wise and 135.15% 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 condition that the inputs of the DFIA will not be transferred. A composition fee @ 1% of the unutilized cif value of the authorization will be paid and subject to verification by RA of EO fulfillment status, as claimed by the firm.
Case No. 28: M/s Gandhar oil Refinery India Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/569/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Annual Advance Licence No. 0310430405 dt. 23.05.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 90.87% Qty.wise and 190% valuewise within valid EO period, as claimed by the firm, and accordingly the Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid advance authorization on prorata basis (quantity wise) 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 regarding value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization whichever is higher at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 29: M/s Anuh Pharma Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/94/180/992/ AM10/PC4/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: 2nd Revalidation of advance Licence no. 0310404537 dt. 17.10.2006.
The Committee noted from the agenda that the firm has claimed to have fulfilled EO as below within the valid EOP S.No. Item of export Qty.wise Valuewise
1 Chloramphenicol 25.8 100.13% 2 Chloramphenicol Palmitate 53.56 3 Erythromycin Base 72.71 4 Erythromycin Estolate 93.55 5 Erythromycin Ethyl Succinate 114.76 6 Erythromycin propionate 85 7 Erythromycin Stearate 73.28 8 Pyrazinamide 33.91 Accordingly, the Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid advance authorization on prorata basis for a period of six months from the date of communication of the decision of PRC, subject to following condition: i. The revalidation is on prorata basis. ii. Import should be from Registered sources only. iii. A composition fee @ 1% of the unutilized cif value of the authorization will be paid and RA would verify the 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 regarding value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization whichever is higher at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 30: M/s Kaizen Informatics Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore
File No. 01/89/180/02/AM11/PC2(A)
Subject: Request for Policy Relaxation for import of Mobile Mapping System Vehicle which will be reexported after use.
The Committee noted that the request made by M/s Kaizen Informatics Pvt. Ltd, Bangalore is to import a special vehicle fitted with Mobile Mapping System for the purpose of research and analysis. The Committee also noted that the Mobile Mapping System Vehicle would be reexported after three months and decided to permit import of the vehicle in relaxation of the provisions of paras 1(II) (c), 1(II) (d)(i)(ii)(iii) and 1(II)(e) of Import Licensing Notes of Chapter 87.
Case No. 31: M/s Alembic Ltd., Vadodra
File No. 01/94/180/1006/ AM10/PC4/ EFGC(PRC) Subject: Request for Regularisation against advance licence No. 3410016586 dt. 27.07.06 to cover the exports made upto 31.03.2007, issued under Policy Circular No. 9 dt. 30.06.2003
The Committee noted that E.O. fulfillment during initial six months was 96.89% quantity wise and 101.46% value wise. The Committee decided that for the exports made out side the EOP, the firm should pay applicable custom duty and interest on the balance imported raw materials .Thereafter, after regularization of the case, RA shall refer the matter to the DCGI office for appropriate action at their end for the for the balance imports effected from unregistered sources.
Case No. 32: M/s KEI Industries Ltd., New Delhi
File No. 012/94/180/383/AM09/PC4/ EFGC(PRC) Subject: EOP extension of advance licences no. 0510078487 dt. 20.1.2003 upto 30.11.2007 for purpose of clubbing and regularization with licence Nos. given below: 1. 0510078487 dt. 20.01.2003 2. 0510179007 dt. 20.03.2006 3. 0510181015 dt. 19.04.2006 4. 0510188684 dt. 1.08.2006 5. 0510210473 dt. 12.10.2007 6. 0510209193 dt. 19.09.2007 The case was rejected by RA and the Committee noted that the firm has not provided any cogent reason for considering relaxation in the case and therefore rejected the request of the firm.
Case No. 33: M/s. Reliant Packaging Films Ltd., New Delhi
File No. 01/60/162/712/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Clubbing of advance Licence no. 0510145570 dt. 14.12.2004 and 0510149592 dt. 25.1.2005 for regularization.
The Committee considered the request of the firm and decided to regularisation of adv. Lic. No. 0510145570 dt. 14.12.2004 and Adv. Lic. No. 0510149592 dt. 25.1.2005 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. 34: M/s. Torrent Cables Ltd., Ahmedabad
File No. 01/60/162/706/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Licence No. 0810067484 dt. 1.10.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 100% Qty.wise and 100% valuewise within valid EO period, as claimed by the firm, and accordingly the Committee decided to revalidate on prorata basis, 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 regarding value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization whichever is higher at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 35: M/s. Indo Colchem Ltd., Ahmedabad
File No. 01/60/162/726/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: EOP extension of Advance Licence No. 0810063959 dt. 29.3.2007.
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 make necessary endorsements at the time of EOP extension.
Case No. 36: M/s. Silivasa Plast New Delhi
File No. 01/60/162/610/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Licence for annual requirement No. 0510200680 dt. 8.3.2007
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 54.9% valuewise within valid EO period, as claimed by the firm, and accordingly the Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid advance authorization on prorata basis for a period of six months from the date of communication of the decision of PRC for closure purpose, 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 regarding value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization whichever is higher at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 37: M/s. Ramsarup Industries Ltd. Kolkata
File No. 01/60/162/393/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Clubbing of advance Licence no. 0210085141 dt. 5.1.2006 with 0210083664 dt. 24.11.2005 for regularization.
The Committee considered the request of the firm and decided to regularisation of adv. Lic. No. 0210085141 dt. 5.1.2006 and Adv. Lic. No. 0210083664 dt. 24.11.2005 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. 38: M/s. Forever Precious Jewllery & Diamonds Ltd., Surat
File No. 01/60/162/710/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Licence No. 0310439347 dt. 13.8.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 32.51% Qty.wise and 53.93% valuewise within valid EO period, as claimed by the firm, and accordingly the Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid advance authorization on prorata basis 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 regarding value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization whichever is higher at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 39: M/s Stonemann Royale Ltd., Mumbai
File No.: 01/89/180/70/AM 09/PC 2(A) PRC Meeting No. 02/AM 11 Dated 11.6.2010 Subject: Request is for: To allow import of polished Agglomerated Marble at a price lower than the floor price of US $ 50 per Sq. Meter against contract No. BY/SRL/AMS/001 dated 14.1.2008 as per Hon’ble High Court’s Order dated 6.4.2010 and Contract No. GM/SRL/AMS/1001 dated 27.8.07, in relaxation of
paragraph 1.5 of FTP.
The Committee observed the details of the case from the agenda and deliberated the issue at length. The Committee noted that there is no ban / prohibition on import of the polished agglomerated marble and it is freely importable subject to the restriction of floor price only and the relaxation has been sought by the firm M/s Stonemann Royale Ltd., Mumbai on this floor price imposed vide DGFT Notification No. 41 dated 18.9.08. However, importers were allowed the facility of transitional arrangement as stated in paragraph 1.5 of FTP. Committee also noted the contents of the Judgement dated 6.4.2010, passed by the Division Bench of High Court of Bombay to consider allowing import of the balance quantity of 411550 Sq. Mtrs. of polished Agglomerated Marble Blocks against the contract No. BY/SRL/AMS/001 dated 14.1.2008 only, wherein the High Court while delivering its judgement relied on the intention of the transitional arrangement under para 1.5 of FTP, which was clarified vide DGFT Policy Circular No. 4 dated 16.8.07 and the proven fact of registration of the aforesaid contract with Customs House at JNPT, Mumbai well before the imposition of the floor price on imports, thereby establishing the fact of its genuineness. The High Court had allowed only two week’s time for consideration of the case and the company requested for expeditious decision.
imports, thereby establishing the fact of its genuineness. The High Court had allowed only two week’s time for consideration of the case and the company requested for expeditious decision. Committee also noted that the firm had sought relaxation regarding transitional arrangement, not for allowing import of any prohibited / restricted item but against a restriction imposed by way of floor price against two contracts in the light of Judgement of High Court, whereas High Court’s Judgement refers to
only one contract bearing No. BY/SRL/AMS/001 dated 14.1.2008, as indicated above. The Committee noted that the relaxation is for accepting a contract registered with Customs Authority, in lieu of the contract to be supplemented with irrevocable L/C. Committee also noted that the international price of these type of products keep on changing from time to time. Keeping in view the High Court’s categorical findings on registration of the contract No. BY/SRL/AMS/001 dated 14.1.2008 with the Customs authority well before the imposition of floor price on imports, establishing the fact that no antedated contract documents were generated in this case, the request for relaxation not from any ban on imports but rather only from the floor price, and the Court’s specific comments that the denial of benefit of transitional arrangement under clause 1.5 of FTP suffers from nonapplication of mind by DGFT, the Committee decided to relax the policy provision on floor price and to
the denial of benefit of transitional arrangement under clause 1.5 of FTP suffers from nonapplication of mind by DGFT, the Committee decided to relax the policy provision on floor price and to allow import of balance quantity of 411550 Sq. mtrs of Polished Agglomerated Marble against only one contract i.e. the contract No. BY/SRL/AMS/001 dated 14.1.2008, which has been adjudicated by the Hon’ble High Court. The Committee also allowed a time period of 15 months from the date of communication of this decision for completion of imports, as requested by the firm. It also decided that the aforesaid relaxation on floor price against the specific contract shall not be construed as a precedent in respect of transitional arrangement under para 1.5 of FTP, but is to be seen in the light of the content of Judgement of High Court and the specific circumstantial evidence and merits of this case.
Case No. 40: M/s. Panam Enginners, Mumbai
File No. 01/94/180/1005/AM10/PCIV/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of DEPB licence no. 0310424763 dt. 28.3.2007
The Committee agreed to revalidate the aforesaid DEPB for the period for which delay was on account of administrative / technical delay either at DGFT or Customs which needs to be verified. The period of revalidation of DEPB to be approved by ADG(AJ) on file.
Case No. 41: M/s. Kikani Manufacturing Co. Mumbai
File No. 01/94/180/594/AM10/PCIV/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Clubbing of adv. Lic. No. 0310217559 dt. 11.8.2003 with adv. Lic. No. 0310405944 dt. 31.10.2006
The Committee considered the request of the firm and approved EOP extension of adv. Lic. No. 0310217559 dt. 11.8.2003 upto 31.08.2008 and revalidation of adv. Lic. No. 0310405944 dt. 31.10.2006 for six months for the purpose of clubbing subject to payment of composition fee @1% for revalidation and 5 % per year for clubbing and regularization. RA to endorse EOP extension after 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 make necessary endorsements regarding value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization whichever is higher.
Case No. 42: M/s Hindustan Zinc Limited, Udaipur
File No. 01/89/180/67/AM09/PC2(A) (Pt.)
Subject: Relaxation with reference to Para 2(II) of ILN to Chapter of ITC (HS) for Import of 3 equipments for underground mining operation. The Committee noted that the request made by M/s.Hindustan Zinc Limited, Udaipur is to import three utility/ mining equipments (2 nos. of Low Profile Dumping Machines and 1 no. of Diesel Powered Load Haul Dumping Equipment) for underground mining operations. The Committee considered the request of the firm and granted permission in relaxation of the provisions of para 2(II) (a) (b) (i) (ii) (iii) of Import Licensing Note of Chapter 87 for import of three equipments subject to the conditions that the equipments would not ply on the public roads and would be used only on project site.
Case No. 43: M/s. Euro Ceramics Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/525/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorisation No. 0310424852 dt. 28.03.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 100% 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 closure) 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 regarding value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization whichever is higher at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 44: M/s. Aditya Birla Nuvo Ltd., New Delhi
File No. 01/60/162/463/AM10/ EFGC(PRC) Subject: Extension of the EO period of 3 Advance Licence Nos. 0710047560 dated 22.09.2007; 0710047982 dated 18.10.2006 & 0710048448 dated 15.11.2006. The Committee noted that EO fulfilled against aforesaid 3 Advance Authorizations 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 3 advance authorizations, 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 make necessary endorsements at the time of EOP extension.
Case No. 45: M/s. Albright & Wilson Chemicals India Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/312/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Licence No. 0310394171 dt. 10.08.2006.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 100% Qty.wise and 103.78% 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 4.12.2009 and make necessary endorsements regarding value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization whichever is higher at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 46: M/s Mulder (India) Pvt. Ltd.
File No. 01/60/162/579/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Extension of the EO Period of Advance Licence No. 0710044327 dated 12.04.2006.
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 make necessary endorsements at the time of EOP extension.
Case No. 47: M/s. Gland Pharma Ltd., Hyderabad
File No. 01/60/162/533/AM08/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Extension of the EO period for further six months of Advance Licence No. 0910020164 dated 17.09.04
The Committee noted that case pertains to 2004 with the value addition being less than 4%. The Committee therefore decided not to grant any further extension for above advance licence and directed regularization of the case as per the FTP provisions.
Case No. 48: M/s KK Polycolor India Ltd., Kolkata
File No. 01/60/162/635/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Licence No. 0210092705 dt. 18.08.2006.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 100% Qty.wise and 100.30% 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 regarding value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization whichever is higher at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 49: M/s Torrent Cables Ltd., Ahmedabad
File No. 01/60/162/648/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorisation No. 0810065335 dt. 11.06.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 99.6% Qty.wise and 108.67% valuewise within valid EO period, as claimed by the firm, and accordingly the Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid advance authorization on prorata basis ( quantity wise) 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 regarding value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization whichever is higher at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 50: M/s Ratnagiri Chemicals Pvt. Ltd.
File No. 01/60/162/446/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Extension of the EO period of Advance Licence No. 0310413837 dated 28.12.2006.
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 make necessary endorsements at the time of EOP extension.
Case No. 51: M/s Rachana Dye Chem, Gujarat.
File No. 01/60/162/640/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorisation No. 3410019493 dt. 23.08.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 100% 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 4.12.2009 and make necessary endorsements regarding value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization whichever is higher at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 52: M/s Synthite Industries Ltd.
File No. 01/60/162/616/AM10/ EFGC(PRC) Subject: EOP Extension of Advance Licence No. 1010025879 dt. 05.03.2007 for 6 months for the purpose of clubbing with Advacne Licence No. 1010029512 dt. 14.05.08. The Committee considered the request of the firm and approved EOP extension of adv. Lic. No. 1010025879 dt. 05.03.2007 for six months for the purpose of clubbing with adv. Lic. No. 0310430314 dt. 23.5.2007(since request was filed within the validity of the advance licence No. 1010029512 dt. 14.05.08, 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 make necessary endorsements regarding value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization whichever is higher.
Case No. 53: M/s Silver Crest Clothing Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore
File No. 01/60/162/294/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Clubbing of 6 advance licence no. as details given below:
1. 0710041647 dt. 30.11.2005 2. 0710041778 dt. 02.12.2005 3. 0710041802 dt. 02.12.2005 4. 0710042141 dt. 20.12.2005 5. 0710043537 dt. 07.03.2006 6. 0710044021 dt.28.03.2006 The Committee considered the request of the firm and decided for revalidation of Advance Authorisation No. 0710041647 dt. 30.11.2005 for six months for purpose of clubbing with Advance Authorisation No. 0710041778 dt. 02.12.2005, 0710041802 dt. 02.12.2005, 0710042141 dt. 20.12.2005, 0710043537 dt. 07.03.2006 and 0710044021 dt.28.03.2006 for redemption and regularization 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. 54: M/s Suru Chemicals & Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/731/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorisation No. 0310441215 dt. 29.08.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 93.03% Qty.wise and 90.75% valuewise within valid EO period, as claimed by the firm, and accordingly the Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid advance authorization on prorata basis 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 regarding value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization whichever is higher at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 55: M/s Troikaa Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Ahmedabad.
File No. 01/60/162/586/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Extension of the EO period of Advance Authorisation No. 0810064752 dated 09.05.07.
The Committee noted that the firm had applied for EOP extension after expiry of two years, which is outside the timelimit of norms prescribed by PRC and therefore rejected the request of the firm. Firm is to regularize the case by payment of Customs Duty and interest. For imports from unregistered sources so used, the RA after regularization, will forward it to DCGI office for necessary action, if any at their end. The exports made after expiry of EOP needs to be justified to the Drug Controller.
Case No. 56: M/s Ahmedabad Strips P. Ltd., Ahmedabad
File No. 01/60/162/737/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorisation No. 0810066916 dt. 31.08.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 70.8% Qty.wise and 105.22% valuewise within valid EO period, as claimed by the firm, and accordingly the Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid advance authorization on prorata basis 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 regarding value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization whichever is higher at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 57: M/s. Neelikon Food Dyes & Chemicals Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/713/AM10/ EFGC(PRC) Subject: Clubbing and Redemption of 3 advance Licence no. 0310277179 dt. 25.6.2004, 0310345935 dt. 2.9.2005 and 0310528976 dt. 15.7.2009 for regularization.
The Committee considered the request of the firm and approved EOP Extension of Advance Licence No. 0310277179 dt. 25.6.2004 upto 19.4.2007 for the purpose of clubbing with Adv. Lic. No. 0310345935 dt. 2.9.2005 and Adv. Lic. No. 0310528976 dt. 15.7.2009 (since request was filed within the validity of the advance licence No. 0310528976 dt. 15.7.2009, 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 make necessary endorsements regarding value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization, whichever is higher.
Case No. 58: M/s Gunnebo India Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/53/8/157/AM08/G17/ILS
Subject: Request for grant of 2nd Revalidation of Import Licence No. 0350001429 dt. 15.11.07 for a period of six months.
The Committee noted that M/s Gunnebo India Ltd., Mumbai was granted import licence for import of 27,250 kgs of Halotron 1 Presat Base and licence expired on 14.11.2009. The Committee also noted the recommendation of the EFC held on 20.5.2010 to process the case for PRC consideration. In view of the aforesaid recommendations PRC allowed the request of the applicant firm in relaxation of para 2.5 of FTP and 2.13 of HBP(Vol.I) for grant of revalidation of Import licence for six months from expiry of the authorization date.
Case No. 59: M/s Hughes Network Systems India Ltd., New Delhi
File No. 01/53/8/693/AM10/H35/Import Cell Subject: Grant of import licence for import of Satellite Communication Equipment for Stock & Sale purpose in relaxation of para 2.16 of FTP. The Committee noted that M/s Hughes Network Systems India Ltd., New Delhi has applied for import of Satellite Communication Equipment for Stock & Sale purpose. The Committee inquired whether MHA comments have been received ? The Committee also noted that the EFC held on 20.5.2010 decided that the case be examined on file base of on WPC licence. The Committee decided that necessity of comments of MHA be examined in the file.
Case No. 60: M/s Refex Refrigerants Ltd., Chennai
File No. 01/53/8/157/AM08/G17/ILS Subject: Request for grant of 2nd Revalidation of Import Licence No. 0450000425 dt. 05.09.2007 for further period of six months. The Committee noted that M/s Refex Refrigerants Ltd., Chennai was granted import licence on 5.9.2007 and it expired on 04.09.2009. The Committee also noted the recommendation of the EFC held on 20.5.2010.In view of the EFC’s recommendation, PRC allowed the request of the applicant firm in relaxation of para 2.5 of FTP and 2.13 of HBP(Vol.I) for grant of 2nd revalidation of Import licence for another six months from the date of communication of the decision of PRC.
Case No. 61: M/s The STC of India Ltd., Bangalore
File No. 01/53/8/611/AM10/T48/Import Cell
Subject: Grant of Import Licence for import of 2000 MTs of Farmers Dressed Feed Oats packed in 50 Kgs. bags.
The Committee noted that no objection certificate provided by D/o Agriculture & Cooperation for import of 2000 MTs of Oats by M/s The STC of India Ltd., Bangalore from Australia subject to condition as enumerated in the no objection certificate. The Committee also noted the recommendation of the EFC held on 20.05.2010 to grant import licence to the applicant firm for import of 2000 MTs of Oats from Australia for a cif value of Rs. 2,71,15,000/ for stock and sale purpose. In view of the aforesaid recommendations PRC allowed the request of the applicant firm in relaxation of para 2.11for grant of import licence for stock and sale purpose.
Case No. 62: M/s Maruti Suzuki India Limited, Gurgaon
File No. 01/89/180/51/AM09/PC2(A)
Subject: Request for allowing reimport of one AStar vehicle from Japan for R&D purposes on reexport basis.
The Committee noted that the request made by M/s. Maruti Suzuki Ltd., is to reimport one AStar vehicle from Suzuki Motor Corporation, Japan for R&D purposes. Committee decided to relax the provisions of para 2(II) f of Import Licensing Note of Chapter 87 for import of the above vehicle keeping in view the no objection received from the M/o Road Transport & Highways, subject to the following conditions : (i) M/s. Maruti Suzuki India Limited will get the vehicle registered and pay all the taxes to the concerned State Government. (ii) The vehicle will strictly be used for the purpose for which it is imported and will not get engaged in any commercial activities. (iii) The vehicle will not be sold in India to an individual/organization/institution etc. (iv) The vehicle will follow all the prevalent rules and regulations related to road transport in the country. (v) After scrapping the vehicle, the concerned RTO will be suitably informed so that the registration could be cancelled.
Case No. 63: M/s Jindal Poly Films Ltd., New Delhi
File No. 01/60/162/746/AM10/ EFGC(PRC) Subject: Request for granting approval for Clubbing and Redemption of Advance Authorisation no. (i) 0510185637 dt. 03.07.2006 & (ii) 0510150859 dt. 10.02.2005 The Committee considered the request of the firm and decided for revalidation of Advance Authorisation No. 0510185637 dt. 03.07.2006 for six months for purpose of clubbing with Advance Authorisation No. 0510150859 dt. 10.02.2005 for redemption and regularization 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. 64: M/s Jindal Poly Films Ltd., New Delhi
File No. 01/60/162/747/AM10/ EFGC(PRC) Subject: Request for granting approval for Clubbing and Redemption of Advance Authorisation no. (i) 0510180851 dt. 17.04.2006; (ii) 0510182326 dt. 16.05.2006 & 0510188126 dt. 03.08.06. The Committee considered the request of the firm and decided for revalidation of Advance Authorisation No. 0510188126 dt. 03.08.06 for six month for purpose of clubbing with Advance Authorisation No. 0510180851 dt. 17.04.2006 and Adv. Lic. No. 0510182326 dt. 16.05.2006 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 and also the parameters of clubbing stated in policy & procedure. 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. 65: M/s Refex Refrigerants Ltd., Chennai
File No. 01/53/162/2352/AM07/ R82/Import Cell Subject: Request for grant of 2nd Revalidation of Import Licence No. 0450000415 dt. 14.08.2007 for further period of six months. The Committee noted that M/s Refex Refrigerants Ltd., Chennai was granted import licence and licence expired on 13.08.2009 and it was granted first revalidation for six months by RA. The Committee also noted the EFC’ recommendation in its meeting dated 20.5.2010 to process the case for PRC consideration. In view of the aforesaid recommendation, PRC allowed the request of the applicant firm in relaxation of para 2.5 of FTP and 2.13 of HBP(Vol.I) for grant of revalidation of Import licence for six months up to 14.8.2010.
Case No. 66: M/s Hotel Leelaventure Ltd.
File No. 01/94/180/79/AM06/PCI Subject: Request for No Objection Certificate for transfer of Cars imported against DFCE No. 031024860 dt. 29.5.2003 issued under SFIS during 200304. The Committee considered the case as per Agenda. The Committee noted that it was only under the FTP RE2007 that the policy was changed and import of car was disallowed under SFIS Scheme and SFIS scrips issued on basis of FTP RE2007 or subsequently, import of cars is not allowed. The Committee also noted that Public Notice 40 dated 28.01.2004 relates to EXIM Policy and does not relate to SFIS Scheme under Foreign Trade policy (which was announced on 31.8.2004.) The Committee noted that as a matter of policy for relaxation, the provision of granting NOC after 5 years of imports under the EPCG scheme be adopted as a yardstick for similarly places cases submitted before PRC, relating to import of cars under SFIS Scheme scrips issued under the Policy prior to 01.04.2007. In view of this, the Committee agreed to grant the NOC for transfer of cars imported under SFIS Scheme by the applicant company. RA to take consequential action.
Case No. 67: M/s. Aventis Pharma Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/583/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Licence No. 0310406387 dt. 02.11.2006.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 111.9% Qty.wise and 121.1% 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 regarding value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization whichever is higher at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 68: M/s. ITS India Pvt. Ltd., Raigad
File No. 01/60/162/751/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: EOP Extension of Advance Licence No. 0310420843 dated 23.02.2007.
The Committee noted that EO fulfilled against aforesaid Advance Authorization was more than 50% Qty.wise and more than 100% 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 make necessary endorsements at the time of EOP extension.
Case No. 69: M/s Bhakti Polymers, Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/742/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Request for 6 months Revalidation of advance licence no. 0310422811 dt. 12.03.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 106.33% Qty.wise and 140.26% 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 regarding value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization, whichever is higher at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 70: M/s VHCL Industries Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/740/AM10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: 2nd revalidation in the Qty. based advance licence no. 0310441082 dt. 28.08.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 79.20% Qty.wise and 91.43% valuewise within valid EO period, as claimed by the firm, and accordingly the Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid advance authorization on prorata basis (qty wise) 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 regarding value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization, whichever is higher at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 71: Sh. Y.S. Mandhatasinhji Jadeja
File No. 01/89/180/06/AM11/PC2(A)
Subject: Permission for Import of Rolls Royce to India, Model: 1934
The Committee considered the request and decided to permit the import of a Rolls Royce (Model:1934) to India in relaxation of the provisions of para 1(II) (a) of Import Licensing Note of Chapter 87.
Case No. 72: M/s Silvassa Marble Mfgrs. Association
File No.: 01/89/180/Misc.06/AM 08/PC 2(A) PRC Meeting No. 02/AM 11 Dated 11.6.2010 Subject: Request is for:“Extension of import validity of import authorisation for import of rough marble to 24 months from the date of endorsement of enhancement of entitlement. Import Authorisations issued and amended under DGFT Policy Circular Nos. 12/0409 dated 27.6.08, No. 67/0409 dated 2.3.2009 & No. 08/0914 dated 29.9.2009.” The Committee noted the details of the case from the Agenda. It observed that, as per the policy provision, import licences are issued with a maximum validity period of 24 months reckoned from the date of issuance of the licence. It further noted that though the new entitlements of the import quota of marble for different periods were allowed from time to time, as per policy, it provided for endorsement of such enhancement of the original quantity to that extent in the original import licence itself, without enhancing the validity period of the import licences. Committee also noted that in case different import validity periods are endorsed for the enhancement in entitlement made from time to time in the same import licence, it might have administrative difficulties in its implementation and may have varying interpretation at field level at the time of clearance of import consignment. Hence, as a one time measure, for smooth
ht have administrative difficulties in its implementation and may have varying interpretation at field level at the time of clearance of import consignment. Hence, as a one time measure, for smooth clearance of import consignment without any interpretational and implementation hassle, Committee decided to allow an import validity of 24 months from the date of issuance of last DGFT Policy Circular No. 8 dated 29.9.2009 for enhancement in entitlements for all such import licences covered under the aforesaid three Policy Circulars.
Case No. 73: M/s Godrej Industries Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/786/AM 10/ EFGC(PRC) Subject: Request for Clubbing and redemption of advance licence no. (i) 0310403054 dt. 09.10.2006 (ii) 0310393392 dt. 07.08.2006. The Committee considered the request of the firm and decided for revalidation of Advance Authorisation No. 0310403054 dt. 09.10.2006 for six months for purpose of clubbing with Advance Authorisation No. 0310393392 dt. 07.08.2006, 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. 74: M/s IBM India P Ltd., Bangalore
File No. 01/53/8/603/I30/AM07/IC
Subject: Revalidation of import authorizations in terms of Para 2.13 of HBP.
The Committee noted that M/s IBM India P Ltd., Bangalore was granted import licence for import of refurbished computer parts . The first revalidation for six months beyond 03.10.2009 was granted by RA. The Committee also noted that the case regarding revalidation of import licence was considered by EFC in the meeting held on 20.5.2010 which decided that the case may be processed for consideration by PRC. In view of the aforesaid recommendations PRC allowed the request of the applicant firm in relaxation of para 2.13 of HBP(Vol.I) for grant of revalidation of Import licence for six months from the date of communication of the decision of PRC.
Case No. 75: M/s SuRaj Diamonds and Jewellery Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/695/AM 10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorisation No. 0310443120 dt. 14.09.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 41% Qty.wise and 49% valuewise within valid EO period, as claimed by the firm, and accordingly the Committee decided to revalidate the aforesaid advance authorization on prorata basis 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 regarding value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization whichever is higher at the time of revalidation.
Case No. 76: M/s Marico Ltd., Mumbai
File No. 01/60/162/536/AM 10/ EFGC(PRC)
Subject: Revalidation of Advance Licence No. 0310423681 dt. 20.03.2007.
The Committee noted that the export obligation fulfilled in respect of aforesaid Advance licence was 100% 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 4.12.2009 and make necessary endorsements regarding value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization whichever is higher at the time of revalidation.
Subject: Revalidation of Import authorizations in terms of para 2.13 of HBP.
The Committee noted that there are several cases for Ist revalidation of 6 months, which are received in HQ and processed for endorsement of revalidation by EFC. In each cases it is decided with the approval of EFC chairman that RA may be asked to consider and endorse 6 months’ revalidation at their level. To further simplify the procedure it was decided by PRC that we may issue necessary clarification or amendment in HBP Vol.I that first revalidation of import authorization (except for SCOMET items) may be considered by RA without referring the case to EFC. There is no provision for 2nd revalidation, therefore any request for that can only be decided by PRC as a special case in terms of Para 2.5 of FTP
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 10354 --apply.