DGFT Minutes
In force — no superseding record on file.
Minutes of the Policy Relaxation Committee Meeting held under the Chairmanship of DGFT, Shri Pravir Kumar, IAS on 27.11.2014
Meeting No. 13/AM15 held on 27.11.2014 at 11.00 A.M.
List of officers present in the meeting is given below:
- Shri D. K. Singh
Addl. DGFT - Shri L.B. Singhal
Addl. DGFT - Shri KC. Rout
Addl. DGFT
5. Shri Jaikant Singh
Addl. DGFT
6. Shri Darshan Singh
Jt. DGFT
7. Shri S.K. Samal
Jt. DGFT
8. Shri Jay Karan Singh
Jt. DGFT
9. Shri AkashTaneja
Jt. DGFT
10. Shri J.M. Gupta
Jt. DGFT
11. Shri S.K. Mohapatra Dy. DGFT
12. Smt. N.R.Choudhury
FTDO
The decision taken in the individual cases is as under:-
Case No.1 M/s. Halcyon Labs Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai
F.No. 01/60/162/188/AM15/PRC PRC Meeting No. 13/AM15 dated 27.11.2014
Subject: - Request for clubbing of two Annual Advance Authorisation No. 0310337192
Dated 01.07.2005 and 0310448539 dated 31.10.2007 issued with PC.9 dated 30.6.2003 condition.
Decision:
In the light of the submissions made by the applicant, the Committee observed that 4 inputs imported by the Applicant against above referred 2 Authorizations are either intermediate products or imported from registered sources. Hence, in terms of PC-12 dated 27/06/2005, these Authorizations shall have to carry normal export obligation period of 36 months. PC – 9 condition imposed by the RA is not applicable in such cases. Thus, the Committee decided the following:
I.
Clubbing of the 2 advance authorizations as referred above be allowed.
II.
This is only for regularization and closure purpose and not for any further
exports/imports.
III.
Export Obligation Period in Authorization No. 0310337192 Dated 01.07.2005
be extended upto 48 months i.e. upto 31/07/2009.
IV.
Exports affected on or before 31/07/2009 shall only be accounted for
clubbing purpose.
V.
Extension in EOP is subject to payment of composition fee @ 0.5% of FOB
value of export made beyond the stipulated EOP for clubbing and
Page 1 of 18
only be accounted for
clubbing purpose.
V.
Extension in EOP is subject to payment of composition fee @ 0.5% of FOB
value of export made beyond the stipulated EOP for clubbing and
Page 1 of 18
regularization. RA shall examine the case in terms of Para 4.1.6 of FTP and ensure value addition of minimum 15%. 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. VI. Even after clubbing, shortfall if any may be regularised on payment of Customs Duty + Interest in terms of Para 4.28 of H.B.P.
(Action: RA, Mumbai)
Case No.2 Reference from Norms Committee
F.No. Nil
Subject: - Condonation of delay
Decision:
The Committee recommended for ex – post facto approval condoning delay in filing representation beyond 4 months for consideration by NC-V in the following cases:
S.
No.
Name of the firm and
File No.
A/A No. &
Date
Date
of
communi-
cation
Represen-
tation
made on
Approved
in
NC
Meeting
No. and date.
1.
M/s.
Arvind
Ltd.,
Ahmedabad.
01/84/50/143/AM-10
0810083511
dt. 12.10.2009
04.03.2011 25.02.2014 M.
No.
06/AM-15
dt.15.5.14.
2.
M/s. Loyal Textile Mills
Ltd., Kovilpatti, T.Nadu.
01/84/50/484/AM-13
3510040463
dt. 14.03.2013
23.04.2013 04.03.2014 M.
No.
07/AM-15
dt.22.5.14.
3.
M/s. Loyal Textile Mills
Ltd., Kovilpatti, T.Nadu.
01/84/50/255/AM-13
3510039251
dt. 12.09.2012
15.03.2013 06.03.2014 M.
No.
09/AM-15
dt.5.6.14.
4.
M/s. Finproject India
Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur.
01/84/50/138/AM-12
1310035784
dt. 29.06.2011
08.05.2012 30.01.2014 M.
No.
10/AM-15
dt.12.6.14.
5.
M/s. Finproject India
Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur.
01/84/50/194/AM-12
1310036488
dt. 24.08.2011
27.04.2012 30.01.2014 M.
No.
10/AM-15
dt.12.6.14.
6.
M/s. Finproject India
Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur.
01/84/50/103/AM-12
1310035552
dt. 06.06.2011
21.09.2011 30.01.2014 M.
No.
10/AM-15
dt.12.6.14.
7.
M/s. Finproject India
Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur.
01/84/50/061/AM-12
1310035189
dt. 20.04.2011
04.07.2011 30.01.2014 M.
No.
10/AM-15
dt.12.6.14.
Page 2 of 18
2014 M. No. 10/AM-15 dt.12.6.14. 7. M/s. Finproject India Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur. 01/84/50/061/AM-12 1310035189 dt. 20.04.2011 04.07.2011 30.01.2014 M. No. 10/AM-15 dt.12.6.14. Page 2 of 18
M/s. Finproject India
Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur.
01/84/50/105/AM-12
1310035553
dt. 06.06.2011
09.05.2012 30.01.2014 M.
No.
10/AM-15
dt.12.6.14.
9.
M/s. Supershva Swab
(I), New Delhi.
01/84/50/188/AM-11
0510272361
dt. 08.09.2010
18.11.2010 03.05.2014 M.
No.
15/AM-15
dt.17.7.14.
10. M/s.Imperial Readymade
Garments Factory India
P. Ltd., Chennai.
01/84/50/121/AM-11
0410116054
dt.05.08.2010
30.09.2010 13.06.2014 M.
No.
23/AM-15
dt.11.9.14.
11. M/s.Imperial Readymade
Garments Factory India
P. Ltd., Chennai.
01/84/50/301/AM-11
0410119610
dt.09.12.2010
31.01.2011 05.07.2014 M.
No.
23/AM-15
dt.11.9.14.
12. M/s.Imperial Readymade
Garments Factory India
P. Ltd., Chennai.
01/84/50/250/AM-11
0410119115
dt.23.11.2010
31.01.2011 05.07.2014 M.
No.
23/AM-15
dt.11.9.14.
Case No.3 M/s. Saakar Printing Design and Engineering Pvt. Ltd.
F.No. 01.53/8/472/AM12/S-126/IC/pt.
Subject: - Grant of 2nd revalidation of import license no. 3150000526 dt. 24.5.2012
Decision:
Justification and reasons cited by the applicant that due to import of counterfeit of Chinese compactable cartridge they were forced to restrict their import, is not convincing enough to establish any genuine hardship. Hence, the Committee did not accede to the request.
Case No.4 M/s. Halliburton Offshore Services Inc. Mumbai
F.No. 01/89/180/12/AM10/PC-2(A)
Subject: - Exemption/relaxation from the Policy Conditions no. of 2 (II) (a) (b) (c) of
chapter 87 of ITC (HS), 2012 Schedule 1 (Import Policy) for import of new equipment from USA.
Decision:
The Committee decided to relax the provisions of Policy Conditions No. 2 (II) (a)
(b) and (c) of Chapter 87 of ITC (HS), 2012 for import of one new truck namely
TRCK CONTROL CENTER DAS subject to the conditions that the TRUCK will be
re – exported after completion of the contract/ projects and that the same would
not ply on public road except at the time of mobilization and de – mobilization
and that the equipment would be used only at the Project site.
Page 3 of 18
Case No.5 M/s. ECIL, a PSU of Ministry of Defence.
F.No. 01/89/180/Misc.14/AM10/PC-2(A)/Pt.II
Subject: - Request for relaxation of Para 2 (II) (d) & Para (3) (II) of Chapter 87 of ITC
(HS), 2012 for importing vehicle mounted MGCSS from Norfolk USA.
Decision:
The Committee decided to grant relaxation to Para 2 (II) (d) and Para 3 (II) of
Chapter 87 of ITC (HS), 2012 Schedule – I (Import Policy) for import of one Mobile
Gamma – ray Container Scanner System (MGCSS), from Norfolk, USA, through
Mundra Port for installation at Kandla Port and has further decided to grant ex-
post facto relaxation for the item MGCSS already imported through the Tuticorin
Port.
Case No.6. M/s A-1 Fence Products Company Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai
F.No. 01/60/162/354/AM15/EFGC (PRC)
Subject: - Request for EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0310632798 dated
25.05.2011.
Decision:
The Committee noted that the applicant has fulfilled more than 50% of export obligation within initial obligation period. Hence, decided the following:
I.
Export obligation period be extended upto 31.05.2015.
II.
The extension is subject to payment of composition fee @ 0.5% on
unfulfilled FOB value of exports.
III.
The minimum value addition of 15% as prescribed under Para 4.1.6 of FTP
shall be maintained.
IV.
This is further subject to verification by RA that EO as claimed to have
been fulfilled is more than 50% in proportion to imports made within
original export obligation period.
V.
The applicant is advised to submit the Authorisation for endorsement to
RA as early as possible. They are further advised to start discharging their
stipulated balance export obligation on the basis of these minutes without
waiting for the endorsement to be done on the Authorisation.
(Action: RA, Mumbai / applicant)
Case No.7. M/s. AGA Fruits (P) Ltd., Bangalore
F.No. 01/60/162/340/AM15/EFGC(PRC) Page 4 of 18
Subject: - Request for EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0710078407 dated
29.03.2011.
Decision:
The Committee noted that the applicant has fulfilled more than 80% of stipulated export obligation within initial obligation period. Hence, decided the following:
I.
Export obligation period be extended upto 31.03.2015.
II.
The extension is subject to payment of composition fee @ 0.5% on
unfulfilled FOB value of exports.
III.
The minimum value addition of 15% as prescribed under Para 4.1.6 of FTP
shall be maintained.
IV.
This is further subject to verification by RA that EO as claimed to have
been fulfilled is more than 50% in proportion to imports made within
original export obligation period.
V.
The applicant is advised to submit the Authorisation for endorsement to
RA as early as possible. They are further advised to start discharging their
stipulated balance export obligation on the basis of these minutes without
waiting for the endorsement to be done on the Authorisation.
(Action: RA, Bangalore / applicant)
Case No.8. M/s. Centurion Laboratories, Baroda
F.No. 01/60/162/274/AM15/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: - Request for EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 3410031081
dated 27.07.2011 issued under PC-9 condition for regularization purpose
Decision:
The Committee noted that the applicant has fulfilled 80% of the stipulated export obligation within the initial export obligation period. Hence, decided the following:
I.
Export obligation period be extended from 12 months to 18 months from
the date of first import consignment i.e. upto 28.02.2013.
II.
This is only for accounting and regularization of exports already effected.
III.
This is subject to a payment of composition fee @ 0.5% on FOB value of
export made outside the original EOP.
IV.
Minimum value addition of 15% as prescribed under Para 4.1.6 of FTP shall
be maintained.
V.
Conversion of DBK shipping bills into DEEC is not allowed.
VI.
The applicant has to pay duty +interest on inputs consumed and exported
after 18 months from date of first import.
VII.
PC-18 condition stands waived to the extent of requirement of re-
export/destruction certificate on export made outside the extended EOP.
Page 5 of 18
(Action: RA, Vadodara)
Case No.9. M/s. Glenmark Generics Ltd., Mumbai
F.No. 01/60/162/337/AM15/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: - Request for EOP extension from 12 months to 18 months in Advance
Authorization No. 0310697712 dated 07.06.2012 issued under PC-9 condition for regularization purpose.
Decision:
The Committee noted that the applicant has fulfilled 79% of stipulated export obligation within the initial export obligation period. Hence, decided the following:
I. Export obligation period be extended by 1 month i.e. upto 31.08.2013. II. This is only for accounting of exports already effected for redemption purpose. III. This is subject to a payment of composition fee @ 0.5% on FOB value of export made outside the original EOP. The value addition of 15% as prescribed under Para 4.1.6 of FTP shall be maintained.
(Action: RA, Mumbai)
Case No.10. M/s. Wockhardt Limited, Mumbai
F.No. 01/60/162/265/AM15/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: - EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0310723636 dated 11.02.2013
issued under PC-9 condition for regularization purpose.
Decision:
The Committee noted that the applicant did not make any exports within the initial export obligation period. However, they have made 76% exports outside the obligation period. Hence, decided the following:
I.
Export obligation period be extended from 12 months to 18 months from
the date of first import consignment i.e. upto 30.09.2014.
II.
This is only for accounting and regularization of exports already effected.
III.
This is subject to a payment of composition fee @ 1% per month on FOB
value of export made outside the original EOP and to be accounted for.
IV.
Minimum value addition of 15% as prescribed under Para 4.1.6 of FTP shall
be maintained.
V.
On unutilized quantity, the applicant has to follow procedure as per Policy
Circular no. 18 dt. 30.10.2007.
Page 6 of 18
(Action: RA, Mumbai)
Case No.11. M/s. Centurion Laboratories, Baroda
F.No. 01/60/162/273/AM15/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: - EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 3410030032 dated 28.04.2011
issued under PC-9 condition for regularization purpose.
Decision:
The Committee noted that the applicant has made only 42.43% exports within the initial export obligation period and 41.12% outside the export obligation period. Hence, decided the following:
I. Export obligation period be extended from 12 months to 18 months from the date of first import consignment i.e. upto 31.12.2012. II. This is only for accounting and regularization of exports already effected. III. This is subject to a payment of composition fee @ 1% per month on FOB value of export made outside the original EOP. IV. Minimum value addition of 15% as prescribed under Para 4.1.6 of FTP shall be maintained. V. The applicant has to pay duty +interest on inputs consumed and exported after 18 months from date of first import. VI. PC-18 condition stands waived to the extent of requirement of re- export/destruction certificate on export made outside the extended EOP.
(Action: RA, Vadodara)
Case No.12. M/s Euromed Health Private Ltd., Chatrapatti, Tamilnadu
F.No. 01/60/162/536/AM14/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: - EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 3510031112 dated 05.08.2010
Decision:
The Committee noted that EOP extension upto 30.4.2014 has already been granted by PRC vide its meeting no. 24/AM14 dt. 08.10.2013 against above Authorization. Despite of that the applicant has failed to discharge balance obligation within extended EO period. The Committee therefore did not accede to the request for further extension. The applicant is hereby directed to get their case regularized in terms of Para 4.28 of HBP.
(Action: RA Madurai - If the firm fails to get the case regularized in terms of Para4.28 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 submit an Action Taken Report). Page 7 of 18
Case No.13. M/s. Gadre Marine Exports Pvt. Ltd. Ratnagiri
F.No. 01/60/162/347/AM15/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: - EOP extension of Advance Authorization no. 0310558479 dt. 4.2.2010 for
regularization.
Decision:
The committee was of the consistent views that extension of obligation period beyond 48 months should not be allowed. Therefore, the Committee did not accede to the request for extension beyond 48 months as all exports in this case were made after 48 months. The applicant is hereby directed to get their case regularized in terms of Para 4.28 of HBP.
(Action: RA Mumbai- If the firm fails to get the case regularized in terms of Para4.28 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 submit an Action Taken Report).
Case No.14. M/s. Glenmark Generics Ltd., Mumbai
F.No. 01/60/162/338/AM15/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: - Request for EOP extension from 12 months to 18 months in Advance
Authorization No. 0310698943 dated 18.06.2012 issued under PC-9 condition for regularization purpose.
Decision:
The Committee noted that the applicant has made 57.54% exports within initial export obligation period and remaining 45.84% after initial export obligation period but within 6 months. Hence, decided the following:
I. Export obligation period be extended by 6 months i.e. upto 28.02.2014. II. This is only for accounting of exports already effected for redemption purpose. III. This is subject to a payment of composition fee @ 0.5% on FOB value of export made outside the original EOP. The value addition of 15% as prescribed under Para 4.1.6 of FTP shall be maintained.
(Action: RA, Mumbai)
Case No.15. M/s. Cadila Healthcare Ltd., Ahmedabad
F.No. 01/60/162/328/AM15/EFGC(PRC) Page 8 of 18
Subject: - Request for EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0810117707 dated
21.01.2013 issued under PC-9 condition for regularization purpose.
Decision:
The Committee noted that the applicant has fulfilled 53.56% of export obligation within the initial export obligation period and remaining 46.6% after initial export obligation period, but within 2 months. Hence, decided the following:
I. Export obligation period be extended by 2 months i.e. upto 31.03.2014. II. This is only for accounting of exports already effected for redemption purpose. III. This is subject to a payment of composition fee @ 0.5% on FOB value of export made outside the original EOP. The value addition of 15% as prescribed under Para 4.1.6 of FTP shall be maintained.
(Action: RA, Ahmedabad)
Case No.16. M/s. Uniworth Ltd., Kolkata
F.No. 01/60/162/327/AM15/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: - Request for EOP extension of two Advance authorizations no. 0210123695
dt. 25.02.2009 and 0210123749 dt. 26.02.2009.
Decision:
The Committee noted that the firm has made 100% imports but no exports have been made within the original export obligation period against the above referred Advance Authorisations. As such there is no merit in the case for consideration. Moreover, the Committee does not allow extension beyond 48 months of the issue of Advance Authorization. The Committee therefore did not accede to the request. The applicant is hereby directed to get their case regularized in terms of
Para 4.28 of HBP.
(Action: RA Kolkata- If the firm fails to get the case regularized in terms of Para4.28 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 submit an Action Taken Report).
Case No.17. M/s. Wockhardt Limited, Mumbai
F.No. 01/60/162/344/AM15/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: - EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0310714637 dated 8.11.2012
issued under PC-9 condition.
Decision:
Page 9 of 18
The Committee observed that the applicant has made only 49% exports within initial export obligation period and request for further extension is made after lapse of 6 months from the date of expiry of initial export obligation period. The Committee normally allows further six months extension of export obligation period which in this case has already lapsed. The Committee, therefore, did not accede to the request. The applicant is hereby directed to get their case regularized in terms of Para 4.28 of HBP read with PC – 18 dated 30/10/2007.
(Action: RA Mumbai- If the firm fails to get the case regularized in terms of Para4.28 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 submit an Action Taken Report).
(Action: RA, Mumbai)
Case No.18. M/s Jonson Rubber Industries Ltd. New Delhi
F.No. 01/60/162/153/AM15/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: - Request for accounting of exports made under two S/bills no. 3017136 dt.
29.3.2011 and 3441235 dt. 28.4.2011 towards discharge of export obligation in Advance Authorization No. 0510204074 dated 25.05.2007 and EOP extension upto 48 months for regularization purpose.
Decision:
The Committee decided the following:
I.
Export Obligation period under Advance Authorization no. 0510204074
dated 25.05.2007 is extended upto 48 months from the date of issue of
Authorization, i.e. upto 31/05/2011.
II.
Exports made through two S/bills no. 3017136 dt. 29.3.2011 and 3441235 dt.
28.4.2011 may be accounted towards discharge of export obligation against
Advance Authorization No. 0510204074 dated 25.05.2007 .
III.
This is subject to payment of composition fee @0.5% on FOB value of
export made outside the original EOP against the Advance Authorization
no. 0510204074 dated 25.05.2007, for accounting purpose.
IV.
This is only for regularization and closure purpose
V.
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.
VI.
RA shall ensure that two shipments which are accounted in the
Authorization No. 0510204074 dated 25.05.2007 have not been accounted
for and / or shall not be accounted for under any other Authorization for
redemption purpose.
Page 10 of 18
(Action: RA, CLA New Delh)
Case No.19. M/s United Phosphorus Ltd., Mumbai
F.No. 01/60/162/321/AM15/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: - Request for clubbing of 5 Advance Authorizations no. (i) 0310557951 dt.
01.02.2010, (ii) 0310582367 dt. 07.07.2010, (iii) 0310622028 dt. 18.03.2011, (iv) 0310645771 dt. 02.08.2011 and (v) 0310713818 dt. 30.10.2012.
Decision:
The Committee decided the following:
I.
Clubbing of the 5 Advance Authorizations as referred above be allowed.
II.
This is only for regularization of exports already effected and closure
purpose and not for any further exports/imports.
III.
Exports made within 48 months from the date of earliest Authorization (i.e.
upto 31.01.2014) shall only be taken into consideration for accounting and
clubbing subject to payment of composition fee @ 0.5% on FOB value of
export made beyond the stipulated EOP in the earliest Authorization.
IV.
RA shall examine the case in terms of Para 4.1.6 of FTP and ensure value
addition of minimum 15%. 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.
V.
Even after clubbing, shortfall, if any, shall be regularized on payment of
Customs Duty + Interest in terms of Para4.28 of H.B.P.
(Action: RA, Mumbai )
Case No.20. M/s. Vivemed Labs Limited, Ltd, Hyderabad
F.No. 01/60/162/324/AM15/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: - Clubbing of 2 Advance Authorization no. 0910032298 dated 30.11.2007
and 0910046651 dated 05.05.2011 for regularization.
Decision:
The Committee is of consistent view that clubbing of Authorizations issued beyond 36 months should not be allowed. Therefore, the Committee decided to reject the request as the gap between the above two authorizations is substantial. The applicant is advised to get the cases regularized separately in terms of Para 4.28 of HBP.
Page 11 of 18
(Action : RA, Hyderabad; 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.21. M/s Abdos Polymers Ltd. Ghaziabad
F.No. 01/60/162/289/AM15/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: - Request for revalidation of AA no. 0510290827 dt. 16.5.2011
Decision:
The Committee decided to reject the request as the reasons cited by the applicant that they could not import the raw materials due to heavy price fluctuations and unexpected price rise, are only commercial risk and not genuine hardship warranting relaxation under Para 2.5 of FTP.
Case No.22. M/s. Aarti Industries Ltd., Mumbai
F.No. 01/60/162/288/AM15/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: - Request for revalidation of Advance Authorization No. 0310687211 dated
21.03.2012. Decision:
The Committee decided to reject the request as the reason cited by the applicant that due to higher price they could not import is only commercial risk and not genuine hardship warranting relaxation under Para 2.5 of FTP.
Case No.23. M/s. Heena Metal Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai
F.No. 01/60/162/301/AM15/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: - Request for revalidation of Advance Authorization No. 0310645667 dated
02.08.2011.
Decision:
The applicant say that the Authorization was valid for export upto 2/8/2014 and import validity expired on 28/2/2014 is not convincing ground because it was known facts that Authorization carry six months additional validity for exports over import validity. The Committee, therefore, did not accede to the request.
Case No.24. M/s. Mittal Polypacks Pvt. Ltd. Kolkata.
F.No. 01/60/162/277/AM15/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: - Request for second revalidation of Advance Authorization No. 0210163901
dated 12.08.2011.
Page 12 of 18
Decision:
The Committee noted that RA has already allowed one revalidation for six months. They have completed 85% imports. Hence reason cited by the applicant that due to unfavourable global economic scenario, they could not import balance materials, is contradictory statement. The committee, therefore, did not accede to the request.
Case No.25. M/s. Shankar Packagings Ltd. Mumbai
F.No. 01/60/162/296/AM15/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: - Request for revalidation of Advance Authorization No. 0310660761 dated
19.10.2011.
Decision:
The Committee noted that the applicant has imported almost 50% and exported only 70%. RA has already allowed one revalidation for further six months. The Committee, therefore, did not accede to the request.
Case No.26. M/s. Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited, Jhansi
F.No. 01/60/162/309/AM15/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: - Request for revalidation of Advance Authorization No. 0610022343 dt.
15.06.2011.
Decision:
The Committee decided to defer the case for seeking a report from RA to verify whether there was any delay on the part of RA in taking action?
(Action: RA Kanpur)
Case No.27. M/s Devashish Polymers Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai
F.No. 01/60/162/218/AM15/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: - Request for revalidation of Advance Authorization No. 0310651870 dt.
06.09.2011.
Decision:
The Committee noted that the applicant has made only 2% exports and did not make any import. RA has already allowed one revalidation for six months. The Committee, therefore, did not accede to the request.
Case No.28. M/s. Nilkamal Ltd. Mumbai
F.No. 01/60/162/295/AM15/EFGC(PRC) Page 13 of 18
Subject: - Request for revalidation of Advance Authorization No. 0310640993 dated
07.07.2011.
Decision:
The Committee noted that the applicant has imported around 15% and got one revalidation for six months from RA. The reason that they could not import balance items because raw materials in the domestic market were much cheaper that the international market. The Committee did not agree with the justification because the Authorization holder had option to procure the goods from the domestic sources against the Authorization without payment of duty. Hence, the Committee did not accede to the request.
Case No.29. M/s Sabero Organics Gujarat Ltd., Mumbai
F.No. 01/60/162/239/AM15/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: - Request for revalidation of two Advance Authorizations no. 0310547113 dt.
24.11.2009 & 0310559156 dt. 09.02.2010
Decision:
The Committee noted that RA has already allowed one revalidation for six months, the applicant’s plea that documents were not traceable by new management is not acceptable justification. The Committee, therefore, did not accede to the request.
Case No.30. M/s. Uttam Galva Steels Limited, Mumbai
F.No. 01/60/162/366/AM15/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: - Request for revalidation of DFIA No. 0310718892 dt. 01.01.2013
Decision:
The Committee noted that there was no delay on the part of RA in taking action and the applicant was aware that after transferability, no further revalidation is allowed. Hence, the Committee did not accede to the request.
Case No.31. M/s. Shree Tirupati Balajee Agro Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. Pithampur
F.No. 01/60/162/300/AM15/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: - Request for revalidation of Advance Authorization No. 1110023251 dated
22.09.2010.
Decision:
Page 14 of 18
The Committee noted that RA has already allowed one revalidation for six months. Despite of that the applicant could not import the balance raw materials. The Committee, therefore, did not agree to allow further revalidation.
Case No.32. M/s. Satyam Polyplast, Jaipur
F.No. 01/60/162/298/AM15/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: - Request for revalidation of 3 Advance Authorizations No. 1310036749 dated
14.09.2011, 1310037743 dated 28.11.2011 and 1310037744 dated 28.11.2011.
Decision:
The Committee noted that RA has already allowed six months revalidation
against each Authorization. The applicant has made partial import too. Hence, the
reason cited that they could not import balance material because of non-
availability of raw material in the international market, is not convincing ground.
The applicant had option to procure goods from domestic sources. Hence, the
Committee did not accede to the request.
Case No.33. M/s. Oriental Rubber Industries Ltd. Pune
F.No. 01/60/162/297/AM15/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: - Request for revalidation of Advance Authorization No. 3110044857 dated
04.10.2010.
Decision:
The applicant’s justification that they could not import balance raw materials due to shortage in global market is not acceptable to the Committee. The applicant had the option to procure goods from domestic market without payment of duty. Hence, the Committee did not accede to the request.
Case No.34. M/s. Oriental Rubber Industries Ltd. Pune
F.No. 01/60/162/292/AM15/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: - Request for revalidation of Advance Authorization No. 3110047600 dated
29.03.2011.
Decision:
Justification and reason cited by the applicant that they could not import balance raw materials because they discharged export obligation by utilizing indigenous raw materials is not convincing justification. The applicant had option to utilize the Authorization while procuring goods from domestic sources. Hence, the Committed did not accede to the request.
Page 15 of 18
Case No.35. M/s. Oriental Rubber Industries Ltd. Pune
F.No. 01/60/162/291/AM15/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: - Request for revalidation of Advance Authorization No. 3110044204 dated
05.08.2010.
Decision:
Justification and reason cited by the applicant that they could not import balance raw materials because they discharged export obligation by utilizing indigenous raw materials is not convincing justification. The applicant had option to utilize the Authorization while procuring goods from domestic sources. Hence, the Committed did not accede to the request.
Case No.36. M/s. Panasonic Carbon India Co. Ltd. Chennai
F.No. 01/60/162/306/AM15/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: - Request for revalidation of Advance Authorization No. 0410130557 dated
18.11.2011.
Decision:
Justification cited by the applicant that they could not get the particular raw materials from Assam due to disturbance in Assam region is not convincing to the Committee because the Authorization holder was free to import / procure raw materials from anywhere. Hence, the Committee did not accede to the request.
Case No.37. M/s. Continental India Ltd., New Delhi
F.No. 01/60/162/303/AM15/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: - Request for revalidation of Advance Authorization No. 0510305860 date
19.10.2011.
Decision:
The Committee decided to reject the request as the reasons cited are only commercial risk and not genuine hardship warranting relaxation under Para 2.5 of FTP. RA has already allowed on revalidation for six months. Hence, the Committee did not see any merit in the case.
Case No.38. M/s. NSIL Exports Limited, Mumbai
F.No. 01/60/162/290/AM15/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: - Request for revalidation against Advance Authorization No. 5610000617 date
12.06.2012
Page 16 of 18
Decision:
The Committee decided to reject the request as the reasons cited by the applicant that due to the fluctuation in exchange rate they could not import balance materials are only commercial risk and not genuine hardship warranting relaxation under Para 2.5 of FTP.
Case No.39. M/s. Ebullient Packaging Pvt. Ltd. Mumbai
F.No. 01/60/162/364/AM15/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: - Request for revalidation of Advance Authorization No. 0310664459 date
11.11.2011.
Decision:
The Committee decided to defer the case for seeking report from RA/EDI.
(Action: RA Mumbai/ EDI Section)
Case No.40. M/s. Bharat Rasayan. Ltd., New Delhi
F.No. 01/60/162/305/AM15/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: - Request for Revalidation of Advance Authorization No. 0510341684 date
27.12.2012.
Decision:
The Committee did not accept the justification that they had no idea about expiry date of import. Therefore, they could not utilize the Authorization. Justification is not acceptable to the Committee. Hence, the Committee did not accede to the request.
Case No.41. M/s. Fresenius Kabi Oncology Ltd. New Delhi
F.No. 01/60/162/357/AM15/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: - Revalidation of Advance Authorization No. 0510328338 dated 27.6.2012
Decision:
The Committee noted that RA has already allowed one revalidation for six months and despite of that the applicant has failed to complete all imports. The Committee, therefore, did not accede to the request.
Case No.42. M/s Aarti Industries Limited, Mumbai
F.No. 01/60/162/334/AM15/EFGC(PRC) Page 17 of 18
Subject: - Request for revalidation of Advance Authorization No. 0310713682 dt.
29.10.2012.
Decision:
The Committee decided to reject the request as the reasons cited by the applicant that they could not import due to high price is only commercial risk and not genuine hardship warranting relaxation under Para 2.5 of FTP.
Case No.43. M/s. Birla Tyres, Kolkata
F.No. 01/60/162/332/AM15/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: - Request for revalidation of Advance Authorization No. 0210170301 dt.
7.12.2011.
Decision:
The Committee did not find any cogent reason given by firm warranting relaxation. Hence, the Committee did not accede to the request.
Case No.44. M/s. Indmoda Exports (p) Ltd. Kolkata.
F.No. 01/60/162/373/AM15/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: - Request for revalidation of DFIA No. 0210146201 dt. 10.8.2010.
Decision:
The Committee decided to defer the case for seeking report from RA to verify whether the delay was on the part of RA in taking action?
(Action: RA Kolkata)
Case No.45. M/s Oil &Natural Gas Corporation Ltd., Mumbai
F.No. 01/60/162/336/AM15/EFGC(PRC)
Subject: - Request for revalidation of DFIA No. 0310665393 dt. 17.11.2011.
Decision:
The Committee observed that since there is no import duty on crude oil, therefore, the applicant is advised to surrender the DFIA. No purpose would be served by allowing revalidation of DFIA when there is no duty on input.
The meeting ended with a Vote of Thanks to the Chair.
Page 18 of 18
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 10529 --apply.