DGFT Minutes
In force — no superseding record on file.
THE POLICY RELAXATION COMMITTEE (PRC) MEETING NO. 01/AM14 HELD ON 02.04.2013 AT 11.30 A.M. UNDER THE CHAIRMANSHIP OF Dr. A.K PUJARI, 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 D.K. Singh Addl. DG 2. Shri. V.K. Srivastava Addl. DG 3. Shri Mukesh Bhatnagar Addl.DG 4. Shri L.B. Singhal Addl. DG 5. Shri K.C. Raut Addl. DG 6. Shri Hardeep Singh Jt.DGFT 7. Shri Jaikant Singh Jt. DGFT 8. Shri Jaikaran Singh Jt. DGFT 9. Shri S.K. Samal Jt. DGFT 10. Shri A.K. Mishra Stats Advisor 11. Shri S.K. Mohapatra DDG 12. Smt. Sonika Khattar FTDO The decision taken on the individual cases are as under:
Case No.1. M/s Mohan Breweries and Distilleries Limited, Chennai
F.No. 01/60/162/186/AM12/EFGC (PRC) PRC Meeting No. 01/AM14 dated: 02.04.2013 Subject: Request for EOP extension of 6 Advance Authorization No. 410063219 dt.19.10.2004, 410064468 dt. 25.11. 2004, 410069650 dt. 15.04.2005, 410069654 dt. 15.04.2005, 410071130 dt. 03.01.2005, 410072260 dt.13.07.2005. Deferred for reexamination.
Case No.2. M/s Synthiko Foils Limited, Mumbai
F.No. 01/60/162/1042/AM13/EFGC (PRC)
Subject: Request for EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0310557428 dated 28.01.2010.
The committee noted that no considerable exports, which form merit, of the case have been made by the firm within the original validity, hence the request is rejected. The applicant is directed to get their case regularized in terms of Para 4.28 of HBP.
(Action : RA Mumbai. If the party fails to get the case regularised in terms of Para 4.28 of HBP within a month from the date of communication of this decision, RA shall take action against the firm under the provision of FT(D&R) Act. 1992 and report)
Case No.3. M/s Pompsy Food Products Pvt. Limited, Kerala
F.No. 01/60/162/429/AM08/EFGC (PRC)
Subject: Regarding Writ Petition No. 12598 of 2008.
The Committee noted the direction of the Hon’ble Court of Kerala regarding disposal of the review petition at the earliest i.e. within a period of 3 months. The Committee in this regard also noted that the Hon’ble Court had directed that opportunity of a personal hearing should be granted to the Petitioner by Addl. DGFT before passing final orders. The case to be placed in PRC after grant of PH.
Case No.4. M/s. Elder Exim Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai.
F.No. 01/60/162/1044/AM13/EFGC (PRC) Subject: Request for EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0310513019 dated 24.03.2009 for regularization purpose. After deliberating the case in length the following decisions were taken: i. Export made upto 31.05.2012 is regularized. ii. This is only for regularization and closure purpose. iii. This is subject to a payment of composition fee @ 0.5% of FOB value of export made outside the original EOP and minimum value addition of 15% as prescribed under Para 4.1.6 of FTP. iv. This is also subject to the condition that the case has not been adjudicated. v. Shortfall, if any, shall be regularized in terms of Para 4.28 of HBP. (Action : RA, Mumbai)
Case No.5. M/s SJK Silks, Bangalore
F.No. 01/60/162/191/AM10/EFGC (PRC)
Subject: Request for EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0710040649 dated 04.10.2005.
The Committee reiterated its earlier decision of PRC meeting no. 24/AM13 dt. 9.10.2012 and once again rejected the request of the firm as there is no merit in the facts/reasons for reconsideration.
Case No.6. M/s. S. Khoday Silk Twisting Factory, Bangalore.
F.No. 01/60/162/1035/AM13/EFGC (PRC)
Subject: Request for EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0710054898 dated 11.12.2007.
Withdrawn as already decided in PRC meeting no. 37/AM13 dated: 22.01.2013.
Case No.7. M/s. Aurochem Pharmaceuticals (India) Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai
F.No. 01/60/162/1048/AM13/EFGC (PRC) Subject: Request for EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0310408437 dated 16.11.2006 issued under PC9 conditions for regularization purpose. Deferred for reexamination as per the provisions under Policy Circular 15 dt. 17.09.2003 and the subsequent circular.
Case No.8. M/s. S. Khoday Silk Twisting Factory, Bangalore
F.No. 01/60/162/1034/AM13/EFGC (PRC)
Subject: Request for EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0710064929 dated 22.05.2009
That Committee noted that as per statement, the applicant has fulfilled 77.07% exports in quantity terms whereas only 2.58% in value terms. Therefore, it was decided to seek clarification as to how this was possible? (Action: Applicant)
Case No.8(A). M/s. S. Khoday Silk Twisting Factory, Bangalore
F.No. 01/60/162/1031/AM13/EFGC (PRC)
Subject: Request for EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0710064962 dated 26.05.2009.
After deliberating the case in length the following decisions were taken: I. Export obligation period is extended for 3 months from the date of endorsement or upto 31.07.2013 which ever is earlier. II. This is subject to payment of composition fee @ 0.5% on unfulfilled FOB value of exports and minimum value addition of 15% as prescribed under para 4.1.6 of FTP. III. This is further subject to verification by RA that EO as claimed to have been fulfilled is more than 50% within the valid EOP.
IV. The applicant is advised to submit the licence for endorsement to RA as early as possible. They are further advised to start discharging their stipulated balance export obligation on the basis of this minutes without waiting for the endoresement is done on the Authorisation. (Action : RA Bangalore)
Case No.9. M/s. S. Khoday Silk Twisting Factory, Bangalore
F.No. 01/60/162/1032/AM13/EFGC (PRC)
Subject: Request for EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0710064961 dated 26.05.2009.
After deliberating the case in length the following decisions were taken: I. Export obligation period is extended for 3 months from the date of endorsement or upto 31.07.2013 which ever is earlier. II. This is subject to payment of composition fee @ 0.5% on unfulfilled FOB value of exports and minimum value addition of 15% as prescribed under para 4.1.6 of FTP. III. This is further subject to verification by RA that EO as claimed to have been fulfilled is more than 50% within the valid EOP. IV. The applicant is advised to submit the licence for endorsement to RA as early as possible. They are further advised to start discharging their stipulated balance export obligation on the basis of this minutes without waiting for the endoresement is done on the Authorisation. (Action : RA Bangalore)
Case No.10. M/s. S. Khoday Silk Twisting Factory, Bangalore
F.No. 01/60/162/1033/AM13/EFGC (PRC)
Subject: Request for EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0710064959 dated 26.05.2009.
After deliberating the case in length the following decisions were taken: I. Export obligation period is extended for 3 months from the date of endorsement or upto 31.07.2013 which ever is earlier. II. This is subject to payment of composition fee @ 0.5% on unfulfilled FOB value of exports and minimum value addition of 15% as prescribed under para 4.1.6 of FTP. III. This is further subject to verification by RA that EO as claimed to have been fulfilled is more than 50% within the valid EOP. IV. The applicant is advised to submit the licence for endorsement to RA as early as possible. They are further advised to start discharging their stipulated balance export obligation on the basis of this minutes without waiting for the endoresement is done on the Authorisation.
(Action : RA Bangalore)
Case No.11. M/s. Tulsyan NEC Limited, Bangalore
F.No. 01/60/162/1030/AM13/EFGC (PRC)
Subject: Request for EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0710051678 dated 17.05.2007.
The Committee rejected the request of the firm as there is no merit for consideration as the authorization is too old. The applicant is hereby directed to get the case regularized in terms of para 4.28 of HBP. (Action : RA Bangalore. If the party fails to get the case regularised in terms of Para 4.28 of HBP within a month from the date of communication of this decision, RA shall take action against the firm under the provision of FT(D&R) Act. 1992 and report.
Case No.12. M/s Ambootia Tea Exporters Pvt. Ltd, Kolkata
F.No. 01/94/180/470/AM12/PC4/EFGC (PRC) Subject: Policy Relaxaqtion with regard to counting of EOP for import of tea as date of 1st consignment of Tea for Redemption of EO discharge as per para 4.22 of HBP Vol.1 200809 against Advance Authorization No. 021012780 dated 02.01.2098. Withdrawn for processing on file.
Case No.13. M/s. Anuh Pharma Ltd, Mumbai
F.No. 01/60/162/1043/AM13/EFGC (PRC) Subject: Request for EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0310672206 dated 22.12.2011 issued under PC9 condition. The committee noted that no policy relaxation is required. RA is directed to take necessary action as per Para 2.12.4 of HBP. (Action : RA Mumbai)
Case No.14. M/s. Wockhardt Limited, Mumbai.
F.No. 01/60/162/1045/AM13/EFGC (PRC)
Subject: Request for EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0310673192 dated 28.12.2011.
After deliberating the case in length the following decisions were taken: i. Export obligation period is extended from 12 months to 18 months in continuation from the date of first import consignment i.e. upto 31.08.2013. ii. This is subject to payment of composition fee @ 0.5% on unfulfilled FOB value of exports and minimum value addition of 15% as prescribed under para 4.1.6 of FTP. iii. This is further subject to verification by RA that EO as claimed to have been fulfilled more than 50% (even on prorata) within the valid EOP. iv. The applicant is advised to submit the licence for endorsement to RA as early as possible. (Action : RA Mumbai)
Case No.15. M/s Satyam PharmaChem Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai
F.No. 01/60/162/1041/AM13/EFGC (PRC)
Subject: Request for EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0310458313 dated 18.01.2008.
After deliberating the case in length the following decisions were taken: i. Export made upto 31.08.2010 is regularized. ii. This is only for regularization and closure purpose. iii. This is subject to a payment of composition fee @ 0.5% of FOB value of export made outside the original EOP and minimum value addition of 15% as prescribed under Para 4.1.6 of FTP. iv. This is also subject to the condition that the case has not been adjudicated. v. Shortfall, if any, shall be regularized in terms of Para 4.28 of HBP. (Action : RA, Mumbai)
Case No.16. M/s Sterling Auxiliaries Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai
F.No. 01/60/162/1028/AM13/EFGC (PRC) Subject: Request for clubbing of Advance Authorizations No. 1.0310476203 dated 24.06.2008 2.0310630352 dated 10.05.2011 After deliberating in length and taking into consideration the facts of the case, the following decisions were taken: i. To allow clubbing of above mentioned 2 Advance Authorizations.
ii. This is only for regularization and closure purpose and not for any further exports/imports. Excess import, if any, may be regularized in terms of Para 4.28 of HBP. iii. RA may grant necessary extension in EO subject to composition fee @ 0.5% of FOB value of export made beyond the stipulated EOP for clubbing and regularization. RA is also directed to examine the case in terms of Para 4.1.6 of FTP and ensure value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization whichever is higher. The 15% value addition for evaluating entitlement is to be applied on the entire FOB and CIF of the authorizations to be clubbed. RA should ensure proper accounting of the duty free inputs with reference to the export product while clubbing the authorizations. iv. RA may do clubbing subject to the condition that no adjudication order is issued against any licence to be clubbed. (Action : RA, Mumbai)
Case No.17. M/s. Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd, Mumbai
F.No. 01/60/162/1046/AM13/EFGC (PRC) Subject: Request for clubbing of Advance Authorizations No. 0310474706 dated 13.06.2008 and 0310471762 dated 21.05.2008 and removal from DEL. The committee after deliberations noted that clubbing of two Advance Authorizations are within the power of RA. Hence RA Mumbai shall examine and decide the case. (Action : RA Mumbai)
Case No.18. M/s Sterling Auxiliaries Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai
F.No. 01/60/162/1040/AM13/EFGC (PRC) Subject: Request for clubbing of Advance Authorizations No. 1.0310501075 dated 02.01.2009 2.0310601007 dated 11.11.2010 After deliberating in length and taking into consideration the facts of the case, the following decisions were taken: i. To allow clubbing of above mentioned 2 Advance Authorizations. ii. This is only for regularization and closure purpose and not for any further exports/imports. Excess import if any may be regularized in terms of Para 4.28 of HBP. iii. RA may grant necessary extension in EO subject to composition fee @ 0.5% of FOB value of export made beyond the stipulated EOP for clubbing and regularization. RA is also directed to examine the case in terms of Para 4.1.6 of FTP and ensure value addition of minimum 15% or as stipulated in the authorization whichever is higher. The 15% value addition for evaluating entitlement is to be applied on the entire
FOB and CIF of the authorizations to be clubbed. RA should ensure proper accounting of the duty free inputs with reference to the export product while clubbing the authorizations. iv. RA may do clubbing subject to the condition that no adjudication order is issued against any licence to be clubbed. (Action : RA, Mumbai)
Case No.19. M/s Apollo Tyres Ltd, Gurgaon
F.No. 01/60/162/645/AM13/EFGC (PRC) Subject: Request for clubbing of Advance Authorizations No. 1.0510104115 dated 01.10.2003 2.0310236790 dated 19.02.2009 Withdrawn as the request has already been decided in PRC meeting no. 43/AM13 dt. 19.03.2013.
Case No.20. M/s United Phosphorus Ltd, Mumbai
F.No. 01/60/162/1013/AM13/EFGC (PRC)
Subject: Request for revalidation of Advance Authorization No. 0310582367 dated 07.07.2010.
The Committee noted that the licence was transmitted and accepted by Custom on 24.9.2012 and the authorization was valid upto 31.1.2013. Hence the firm has sufficient time to make imports under the said authorization. The committee did not consider the reasons warranting policy relaxation. Therefore the committee rejected the request.
Case No.21. M/s United Phosphorus Ltd, Mumbai
F.No. 01/60/162/1012/AM13/EFGC (PRC)
Subject: Request for revalidation of Advance Authorization No. 0310588437 dated 19.08.2010.
The Committee noted that the firm could not utilized the Advance Authorization on account of non acceptance of licence at ICD, Ankleshwar. The committee on the basis of the technical records decided to revalidate the aforesaid authorization for 3 months from the date of endorsement or upto 31.7.2013 which ever is earlier. (Action : RA, Mumbai)
Case No.22. M/s United Phosphorus Ltd, Mumbai
F.No. 01/60/162/1014/AM13/EFGC (PRC)
Subject: Request for revalidation of Advance Authorization No. 0310597342 dated 18.10.2010.
The Committee noted that the licence was transmitted and accepted by Custom on 8.11.2012 and the authorization is valid upto 30.4.2013. Hence the firm has sufficient time to make imports under the said authorization. The committee did not consider the reasons warranting policy relaxation. Therefore the committee rejected the request.
Case No.23. M/s Automark Technologies (India) Pvt. Ltd, Nagpur
F.No. 01/60/162/936/AM13/EFGC (PRC)
Subject: Request for revalidation of Advance Authorization No. 5010000226 dated 05.01.2010.
The committee did not find any cogent reason given by the firm warranting relaxation. Hence, the request is rejected.
Case No.24. M/s Krishna Antioxidants Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai
F.No. 01/60/162/579/AM12/EFGC (PRC)
Subject: Request for revalidation of Advance Authorization No. 0310481528 dated 06.08.2008.
The Committee noted that Advance Authorization was initially valid upto 31.8.2010 and request for EODC/enhancement was made on 24.12.2010 i.e. after expiry of the said AA. The committee therefore did not agree with contentions made in the representation. Hence rejected the case.
Case No.25. M/s EURO Décor Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai
F.No. 01/60/162/1016/AM13/EFGC (PRC)
Subject: Request for revalidation of Advance Authorization No. 0310580350 dated 24.06.2010.
The committee noted that the application was submitted online and port of registration was chosen by the applicant himself. Hence this was the mistake committed by them. In spite of that TRA facility was available to them. The request is therefore rejected. However, the case will be reviewed if the applicant is able to prove that TRA facility was denied to them by the Customs. (Action : Applicant)
Case No.26. M/s Krishna antioxidants Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai
F.No. 01/60/162/1047/AM13/EFGC (PRC)
Subject: Request for revalidation of Advance Authorization No. 0310542063 dated 23.10.2009.
The committee did not find any cogent reason given by the firm warranting relaxation. Hence, the request is rejected.
Case No.27. M/s Sledge Hammer Oil Tools Pvt. Ltd.
F.No. 01/60/162/726/AM13/EFGC (PRC) Subject: Reissuance of DEPB licence since the same is not available at custom for debiting due to some Notification error. DEPB no. 0510278895 dated 08.12.2010. The committee decided to close the matter as the firm has withdrawn its request.
Case No.28. M/s Grabal Alok Impex Limited, Mumbai
F.No. 01/60/162/1027/AM13/EFGC (PRC)
Subject: Request for revalidation of DEPB Authorization No. 0310583433 dated 14.07.2010.
The committee did not find any cogent reason given by the firm warranting relaxation. Hence, the request is rejected.
Case No.29. M/s Haldiram Snacks Pvt. Ltd, NOIDA
F.No. 01/60/162/901/AM13/EFGC (PRC)
Subject: Request for EODC/Redemption of Advance Authorization No. 0510252829 dated 18.11.2009.
The Committee noted that the firm has not mentioned the complete details of size of pouches with related TC. RA may correlate the exports made under authorization with any excise related document to ensure that the imported material was actually exported. (Action : RA, CLA New Delhi)
Case No.30. M/s Orient Craft Ltd, New Delhi
F.No. 01/94/180/458/AM13/PC4
Subject: Request for issuance of DEPB.
Deferred for obtaining report from RA. PolicyIV Section will examine on receipt of report. (Action: RA, CLA, New Delhi)
Case No.31. M/s Tube Products Incorporate.
F.No. 01/60/162/660/AM13/EFGC (PRC) Subject: Revalidation of DEPB No. 3410027862 dt. 6.9.2010. Deferred for obtaining a report from NIC as to what due diligence has been taken by the system to check as to how shipping bills of different ports was allowed to file in the DEPB application? RA Vadodara shall also examine and report as to why application was not rejected at initial stage itself? (Action : EDI/ RA Vadodara)
Case No.32. M/s Marson Electrical Industries, Agra
F.No. 01/94/180/917/AM09/PC4
Subject: Regularization of Advance Authorization No. 0610008099 dated 20.09.2004.
Deferred for obtaining the outcome of hearing held on 25.3.2013 before the Hon’ble High Court of Rajasthan.
Case No.33. M/s Mother’s Commerce Company Pvt. Ltd.
F.No. 01/91/180/1328/AM12/PC3 Subject: Relaxation for eligibility of Time barred shipping Bills for the period 200607 to 200910 for claiming benefits under Chapter 3 scheme of FTP. The case was discussed in details and considering the genuine hardship in filing of application to claim Chapter 3 incentives, it was decided to allow claims filed for AM 200607, 200708, 200809 and 200910 by imposing 10% flat late cut on incentives to be granted. (Action : RA Puducherry)
Case No.34. M/s Tai Pan.
F.No. 01/60/162/679/AM13/EFGC (PRC)
Subject: Request for permission for relaxation for issue of supplementary DFIA (Enhancement) after transferability of DFIA Authorization No. 3010074785 dated 04.05.2011. Deferred for obtaining report whether the said DFIA is still with the exporter or has been transferred.
Case No.35. M/s Mann Tourist Transport Service Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi
F.No. 01/89/180/67/AM09/PC2(A) Subject: Request for relaxation of mandatory requirement of Type Approval Certificate to import of 25 number of Toyota Commuter 14 seater vans into India from Japan. The Committee took note of the recommendation of the Ministry of Tourism. It was further noted that the import of new cars/vehicles is subject to Policy Conditions under Chapter 87 in ITC(HS) 2012. The PRC gets requests for getting exemption of different Policy Conditions under Chapter 87. However, exemptions from Policy Conditions are granted very judiciously. So far the PRC has granted exemptions to the following categories of importers: Mining Sector for those vehicles which are not available in the country and not moving on public roads. Auto companies for R&D purposes (both old and new vehicles) Categories for importers as listed in Policy Conditions 3(I) including physically handicapped persons PRC does not approve cases for exemption of Policy Conditions which may affect the public safety as the proposed vehicles are lefthand driven and commercial vehicle to be used on public road. Hence, PRC did not agree for exemption.
Case No.36. M/s Shreem Electric Ltd, / RA, Pune
F.No. 01/92/180/76/AM12/PCVI Subject: Relaxation required: For the goods outsourced by6 main contractor (supplied to the Project Authority directly from whom the main contractor outsourced goods), declaration re: nonavailment of CENVAT credit by such manufactures and suppliers be accepted. Deferred for reexamination.
Case No.37. M/s Arch Pharma Ltd, Mumbai
F.No. 01/60/162/729/AM13/EFGC (PRC) Subject: Relaxation of procedure regarding redemption and closure of 10 DFIAs i) 0310420380 dt. 21.2.2007, ii) 0397048921 dt. 14.3.2007, iii) 0310424818 st. 28.3.2007, iv) 0310439874 dt. 17.8.2007, v) 0310439873 dt. 17.8.2007, vi) 0310440270 dt. 21.8.2007, vii) 0310440755 dt. 24.8.2007, viii) 0310451227 dt. 19.10.2007, ix) 0310450210 dt. 14.11.2007 and x) 0310474366 dt. 12.6.2008. Since the applicant has submitted the prescribed documents as per ANF 4F, the case is withdrawn
Case No.38. M/s Swastik Pipes Limited, New Delhi.
F.No. 01/60/162/735/AM13/EFGC (PRC) Subject: Request for clubbing of 3 Advance Authorizations Nos. 0510247091 dated 31.07.2009, 0510284564 dated 23.02.2011 & 0510286772 dated 24.03.2011. The Committee noted that exports under two subsequent authoristions were made prior to issue of the same. Therefore, the Committee reiterated its earlier decision of PRC meeting no. 40/AM13 dt. 19.10.2012 and once again rejected the request of the firm as there is no merit in the facts/reasons for reconsideration
Case No.39. M/s Gujarat State Fertilizers & Chemicals Limited, Vadodara.
F.No. 01/60/162/960/AM13/EFGC (PRC)
Subject: Representation against demand notice, DFRC Licence No. 3410003510 dated 24.10.2002 issued under file no.
34/81/38/00075/AM02/AUDIT dated 04.05.2010. Transferred to PCIV Section for examination. The Committee ended with the Vote of Thanks to the Chair.
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 10470 --apply.