IN FORCE Policy Relaxation Committee Advance Authorisation 2021-10-01

DGFT Committee Minutes

Document text

Directorate General of Foreign Trade (PRC Section) Minutes of the Policy Relaxation Committee Meeting Held on 01.10.2021 under the Chairmanship of Shri Amit Yadav, Director General of Foreign Trade

Meeting No.13/AM22 held on 01.10.2021

The following members were present in the meeting: 1. Shri Vijay Kumar Addl. DGFT 2. Shri S.B.S. Reddy Addl. DGFT 3. Dr. Amiya Chandra Addl. DGFT 4. Shri AkashTaneja Addl. DGFT 5. Shri Hardeep Singh Addl. DGFT 6. Shri Anil Aggarwal Addl. DGFT

Following cases were discussed. The decision taken on the individual cases are as under:-

==> picture [455 x 248] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- [firm] [S.No _ Name of [the] || 4. |Ms. Krishna Textiles Prop Ashis Kandhari HUF, Punjab | [ 1to2] | |. 2. |M/s. Mohan Spintex India Limited, Vijayawada — ca | 34 . | M/s.M/s. ITCAtul Ll imite d,d, Anmedabad Secunderabad ——| [=65§to6] jn| | 5. |M/s. Axiom Cordages Limited, Boisar | 6. Ws. Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited, Jhanshi i | 7. |M/s. Rajguru Enterprises Pvt Ltd, Maharashtra a | 8.|M/s. Ankai International Pvt Ltd, Mumbai | 10 | 9. |M/s. Esquire Multiplast Private Limited, Kalamasse ||410.— |M/s. L&T Valves Limited, Chennai |42.44. |M/s. OM Shree International Private Limited, Mumbai x: a | — |M/s. Buildmet Fibres Private Limited, Bangalore | 13. |M/s. Saffron Apparels, Tirupur |15.14. — |M i/ s. TataIndian SteelProducts BSL Limited,Private NewLimited, DelhiBangalore ----- End of picture text -----

PH Case No. 01 M/s. Krishna Textiles Prop Ashis Kandhari HUF, Punjab F. No.HQRPRCAPPLY00124349AM22 Meeting No.13/AM22 held on 01.10.2021

Subject: To allow MEIS benefit against 3 Shipping Bills No.(i) 8955091 dated 28.09.2017, (ii) 9448585 dated 24.10.2017 and (iii) 9783501 dated 09.11.2017

Page 1 of 11

Com__.

against which MEIS Authorisation No.1219002480 dated 23.07.2018 was issued

instead and not utilized due to technical error.

Decision: The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP, 2015-2020, which was afforded on 01.10.2021, but no one appeared on behalf of the firm. The Committee decided to defer the case.

(Action: Applicant)

PH Case No. 02 M/s. Krishna Textiles Prop Ashis Kandhari HUF, Punjab F. No.HQRPRCAPPLY001246939AM22 Meeting No.13/AM22 held on 01.10.2021

Subject: To allow MEIS benefit against Bill of Export No.005340 dated 23.06.2017.

(Action: Applicant)

PH Case No.03 Mls. Mohan Spintex India Limited, Vijayawada F. No.HQRPRCAPPLY00123759AM22 Meeting No.13/AM22 held on 01.10.2021

Subject: To allow RoSCTL benefit against the export period 07.03.2019 to 31.12.2019.

(Action: Applicant)

PH Case No. 04 Mis. ITC Limited, Secunderabad F. No.HQRPRCAPPLY00125391AM22 Meeting No.13/AM22 held on 01.10.2021

Subject: To allow MEIS benefit against 2 Shipping Bill No.5766752 dated 23.06.2018 and 5765974 dated 23.06.2018.

The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-2015-2020, which was afforded on 01.10.2021. Shri Balu Mahender and Shri Sreenivaas Grandhi, Authorised Representatives appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions:

The applicant stated that their shipping bills for F.Y. 2018-19 were under MEIS scheme where against 2 shipping bills, the BRC value and currency was wrongly updated. They have followed up with the Bank for the same. Bank has revised the

(Q., om ___ —.

Page 2ofi1

value & currency but the same is still showing wrongly at DGFT portal. Hence, requested to allow manual MEIS application against 2 shipping bill no. (i) 5766752 dated 23.06.2018 & (ii) 5765974 dated 23.06.2018 in respect of RA Hyderabad.

Decision: The Committee heard and examined the case on the basis of submission made by the firm and discussed the matter at length. It observed that there is merit in the case and accordingly it decided to accede to the request and allowed MEIS benefit against 2 Shipping BilINo.5766752 dated 23.06.2018 and 5765974 dated 23.06.2018 without any late cut. The firm shall approach RA within 90 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Secunderabad/ EDI/NIC for necessary updation in the System)

PH Case No. 05 Mis. Atul limited, Anmedabad F. No.HQRPRCAPPLY00125940AM22 Meeting No.13/AM22 held on 01.10.2021

Subject: To allow MEIS benefit against 43 time barred shipping bills pertaining to the period 23.04.2015 to 30.03.2018.

The applicant stated that they are the member of Lalbhai Group which is a Three Star Export House & AEO Tier-2 Exporter and importers having speciality in chemicals since last 30 years. On an average they are generating revenues of USD 232.20 Mn. All their payments have been realised on time, however due to technical issues such as reward scheme “No”, data transmission has been delayed etc. Their industry has been going through lot of competition in the international market. While pricing their product in the international market, they have taken these export incentives into account. Hence, requested to allow the MEIS benefit against 43 time barred shipping bills pertaining to the period 23.04.2015 to 30.03.2018.

Decision:The Committee heard the case on the basis of submission made by the firm and discussed the matter at length. The Committee decided to allow MEIS benefit only against one Shipping Bill No.9186243 dated 24.04.2015 with 10% late cut, as there was delay in sending of S/bills from ICEGATE to DGFT Server.The Committee did not allow MEIS benefit against remaining 42 Shipping Bills as these shipping bills has been marked as ‘NO’ and such S/bills do not get transmitted over the automated system from ICEGATE to DGFT servers and therefore the request of the firm for same were found to be without any merit as mistake has been committed by the firm only. The firm shall approach RA within 90 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Ahmedabad/EDIINIC for necessary updation in the System)

SF ce —

Page 3 of 11

PH Case No. 06 Mis. Atul limited, F. No.HQRPRCAPPLY00125908AM22 Meeting No.13/AM22 held on 01.10.2021

Mis. Atul limited, Anmedabad

Subject: To allow MEIS benefit against 89 Shipping bills pertain to the period 13.04.2015 to 23.06.2018.

The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-2015-2020, which was afforded on 01.10.2021, Shri Vivek Gadre, President Commercial and Shri Vishan Khaitan, Joint Manager Commercial, Authorised Representatives appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions: The applicant stated that they are the member of Lalbhai Group which is a Three Star Export House & AEO Tier-2 Exporter and importers having specialty in chemicals since last 30 years. On an average they are generating revenues of USD 232.20 Mn. All their payments have been realised on time, however due to technical issues at the Bank’s level their e-BRCs were not uploaded. Their industry has been going through lot of competition in the international market. While pricing their product in the international market, they have taken these export incentives into account. Hence, requested to allow the MEIS benefit against 89 shipping bills pertaining to the period 13.04.2015 to 23.06.2018.

Decision: The Committee heard and went through the statement made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length. The Committee observed that due to delay in uploading of some of the BRC by the banker in DGFT Portal, the firm has faced the problem which was beyond their control. Accordingly it decided to allow MEIS benefit only for those shipping bills whose realization has happened within in 3 years from the date of let export and e-BRC have been uploaded by the bank after the expiry of three years from the date of let export. It also decided that no cut would be imposed on the entitlement. However no relaxation was given for other shipping bills. The firm shall approach RA within 90 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Ahmedabad/ EDI/NIC for necessary updation in the System)

PH Case No.07 Mls. Axiom Cordages Limited, Boisar F. No.HQRPRCAPPLY00097631AM21

Meeting No.13/AM22 held on 01.10.2021

Subject: Condonation of delay in filing MEIS application against 62 shipping bills due to delay in uploading of e-BRC by bank.

The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-2015-2020, which was afforded on 01.10.2021. Shri R.K. Patel, Senior Executive appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions:

The applicant stated that due to certain payment issues with the overseas customer, they realized their payment just after nearly 38 months periods from the date of Page 4 of 11 Ln———

exports and therefore they are not able to apply for MEIS benefit. The bank uploaded the e-BRC on 25.01.2021 and they have created the ECOM on 25.02.2021. While feeding the error message of shipping bills deletion is appearing as the application is time barred. The applicant is facing tremendous hardship as they were unable to apply for the MEIS for a situation which was beyond their control. Hence, the applicant is requesting to condone the delay in filing of MEIS claim against 62 shipping bills for the period 2017-18.

Decision: The Committee heard and examined the statement made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length. The Committee observed that due to delay in uploading of some of the BRC by the banker in DGFT Portal, the firm has faced the problem which was beyond their control. Accordingly it decided to allow MEIS benefit only for those shipping bills whose realization has happened within in 3 years from the date of let export and e-BRC have been uploaded by the bank after the expiry of three years from the date of let export. It also decided that no cut would be imposed on the entitlement. However, no relaxation was given for other shipping bills. The firm shall approach RA within 90 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA- Mumbai/EDI/NIC for necessary updation in the System) PH Case No. 08 M/s. Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited, Jnanshi F. No.HQRPRCAPPLY00126935AM22 Meeting No.13/AM22 held on 01.10.2021

Subject: Relaxation in cut off date for supplying goods to project fund by JICA under para 8 (2d) read with para 8 (3c) of FTP 2009-14. The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-2015-2020, which was afforded on 01.10.2021. Shri Navneet Bansal and Shri Zu Alvi, Authorised Representatives appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions: The applicant stated that the supplies of the 6 nos transformers was delayed solely due to customer M/s MPPTCL in rescheduling the contractual delivery due to their non-readiness. No delay, deficiency or default is there by BHEL. Both BHEL & MPPTCL has no knowledge of the deadline to TED refund being drawn as 31.03.2015. Both BHEL & MPPTCL are government bodies. The policy Circular 11/2015-20 dated 23.07.2018 has professedly been issued “To honor the commitment made in the erstwhile FTP-2009-14 to allow the refund of TED where exemption from payment of TED under relevant Excise notification was not available”. Relevant here to refer supreme court observation in Eicher Motors v/a HO! “When on the strengths of the rules available certain acts have been done by the parties concerned, incidents following thereto must take place in accordance with the scheme under which duty has been paid on the manufactured product’. Hence, requested TED refund deadline be considered to be relaxed as a special case under para 8 (2d) read with para 8 (3c) of FTP 2009-14. Decision: The Committee heard the submission made by the firm and discussed the matter at length and it decided to refer the issue to PC-6 Division for its examination and resolution. Qa ant_——

Page 5 of 11

(Action: Applicant/PC-6 Division)

PH Case No.09 Ms. Rajguru Enterprises Pvt. Ltd, Maharashtra F. No.HQRPRCAPPLY00126242AM22

Meeting No.13/AM22 held on 01.10.2021

Subject: Condonation of delay in submitting DFIA application within 30 days as per decision of PRC Meeting No.19/AM20 dated 24.09.2019.

The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-2015-2020, which was afforded on 01.10.2021. Shri Sumeet Bafna, Director appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions:

This is review case of PRC Meeting No.02/AM22 dated 04.06.2021 (Case No. 42) wherein the Committee rejected the case. The applicant stated that they have received the PRC approval for DFIA Transferability on 27.09.2020, but they were waiting for the other 2 files to be processed which were applied together. The applicant has received the deficiency letter dated 18.10.2019 stating that ANF 2D Form has to be submitted separately for the other 2 files and then the Director of the company was on Diwali vacations for a period of 15 days from 15.10.2019 to 02.11.2019. Therefore, they have submitted application on 06.11.2019 but RA Mumbai issued Deficiency letter for not submitted application within 30 days from the date of uploading of minutes. Hence, requested to consider their case and revise the minutes for taking DFIA transferability.

Decision: The Committee having heard and reviewed the case on the basis of submission made by the firm and discussed the matter at length. The Committee decided to accede to the request of the firm for condonation of delay in submission of DFIA application within 30 days from the date of uploading of minutes of PRC Meeting No.19/AM20 dated 24.09.2019. The firm shall approach RA concerned within 30 days of the uploading of the minutes of this meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Mumbai)

PH Case No. 10 M/s. Ankai International Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai F. No.HQRPRCAPPLY00128564AM22 Meeting No.13/AM22 held on 01.10.2021

Subject:To condone the delay in filing of TMA application for the period 01.01.2020 to 31.03.2020 and 01.04.2020 to 30.06.2020

The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-2015-2020, which was afforded on 01.10.2021. Shri Dharmesh Mistry, Authorised Representatives appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions: The applicant stated that their 2 files of TMA applications are rejected by RA, Mumbai due to delay in submission of physical file at DGFT office beyond 30 days. (i) Quarter period 01.01.2020 to 31.03.2020 — File no. 03/21/102/51366/AM21 for which the online application has been submitted on 23.01.2021 and physical file Page 6 of 11 Ln om —___—

submitted on 10.03.2021. (ii) Quarter period 01.04.2020 to 30.06.2020 — File no. 03/21/102/51438/AM21 for which the online application has been submitted on 09.02.2021 and physical file submitted on 10.03.2021. They have provided necessary documents for processing but due to strict lockdown being implemented and travelling challenges in entire Mumbai region the same got delayed. Somehow, the applicant managed to visit RA, Mumbai during these days, but in many days the officials are also not available at the counter to accept the files. Many times system was down and not working, as the RA office were also maintaining government strict ordered and they too working with skeletal staff and hence the physical files were unable to be submitted to RA office. This has caused a challenging scenario for Agro exporters that are trying to capture, upload, prepare and submit the physical file submission of TMA applications. The applicant has been affected adversely due to the global pandemic. Looking into the current economic condition and international market, the survival of the business without the assistance from government is difficult. Hence, it is requesting to condone the delay in filing of 2 TMA applications.

Decision: The Committee heard and examined the case on the basis of justification submitted by the applicant and observed that due to various restrictions imposed on account of ongoing lockdown during the period of Covid-19 Pandemic, firm has faced the problem which was beyond their control. Accordingly, the Committee decided to accede to the request for condonation of delay in submission of physical copy of TMA application for the period 01.01.2020 to 31.03.2020 and 01.04.2020 to 30.06.2020 (File no. 03/21/102/51366/AM21and 03/21/102/51438/AM21). The firm shall approach RA concerned within 60 days of the uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Mumbai)

PH Case No. 11 M/s. Esquire Multiplast Private Limited, Kalamassery F. No.HQRPRCAPPLY001027057AM21

Meeting No.13/AM22 held on 01.10.2021

Subject: Revalidation of 2 Advance Authorization No.1010059995 dated 20.07.2018 and 1010060104 dated 14.01.2019.

The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-2015-2020, which was afforded on 01.10.2021. Shri Rajesh P., CFO appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions:

The applicant stated that the subject authorizations were submitted for bond waiver with pro-rata enhancement of quantity and CIF value based on excess exports made along with re-validation for completing import. However, due to delay in export realization as well as EBRC issuance, license period expired and RA rejected their request. They have completed exports within initial validity period, but due to Covid Pandemic situation, there were delay in getting and submission of documents. Apart from the delay in realization, there was a huge delay in getting EBRC uploaded by their Bank due to various reasons. Hence, they are requesting to condone the delay in submission of Bond waiver documents and grant a onetime six months revalidation from the date of endorsement of Bond waiver to complete the imports against these licenses. Ltn owL__—

Page 7 of 11

==> picture [1 x 2] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- . ----- End of picture text -----

Decision: The Committee heard the case on the basis of submission made by the firm and discussed the matter at length. It observed that there is merit in the case and accordingly decided to accede to the request and allowed revalidation of Advance Authorization No.1010059995 dated 20.07.2018 and 1010060104 dated 14.01.2019 for a further period of 6 months from the date of endorsement. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Cochin)

PH Case No. 12 M/s. L&T Valves Limited, Chennai F. No.HQRPRCAPPLY0011007AM22

Meeting No.13/AM22 held on 01.10.2021

Subject: To allow FPS benefit against 31 RA files.

The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-2015-2020, which was afforded on 01.10.2021. Shri Vinay Khetan, Authorised Representatives appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions:

The applicant stated that they are one of the leading exporters of valves & recognized as Two Star Export House. They are requesting to consider their FPS application which was submitted by them on 31.12.2018 and the same was pending at RA, Chennai. Their case has been rejected by RA on the ground that the file number has been generated on 01.01.2019. They had approached High Court, Chennai and the Honourable High Court of Chennai in its order dated 10.02.2020 in W.P. No. 21447 of 2019 allowed the writ petition and directed DGFT to consider their case on merits. They are pursuing for their case with RA, Chennai for issuance of licenses but RA has rejected their application. Hence, they are requesting to consider their application for issuance of FPS licenses in terms of Para 3.11.9 read along with Trade Notice No.16/2018, as delay in generation of file number is beyond their control.

Decision: The Committee heard the submission made by the firm and discussed the matter at length and observed that there is no ground for relaxation. Accordingly, it decided to reject the request of the firm.

(Action: Applicant)

PH Case No. 13 M/s. OM Shree International Private Limited, Mumbai F. No.HQRPRCAPPLY00128517AM22 Meeting No.13/AM22 held on 01.10.2021

Subject: Condonation of delay in filling Physical copy of TMA Application.

The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-2015-2020, which was afforded on 01.10.2021, Shri Dharmesh Mistry, Authorised Representative appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions:

(Qa wy_

Page 8 of 11

The applicant stated that their 2 files of TMA applications are rejected by RA Mumbai due to delay in submission of physical file at RA beyond 30 days. (i) Quarter period 01.01.2020 to 31.03.2020 — File no. 03/21/102/51409/AM21 for which the online application has been submitted on 02.02.2021and physical file submitted on 12.03.2021. (ii) Quarter period 01.10.2020 to 31.12.2020 - File no. 03/21/102/51684/AM21 for which the online application has been submitted on 24.03.2021and physical file submitted on 26.04.2021. They have provided necessary documents for processing but due to strict lockdown being implemented and travelling challenges in entire Mumbai region the same got delayed. Somehow, the applicant managed to visit RA, Mumbai during these days, but in many days the officials are also not available at the counter to accept the files. Many times system was down and not working, as the RA Office were also maintaining government strict ordered and they too working with skeletal staff and hence the physical files were unable to be submitted to the RA office. This has caused a challenging scenario for Agro exporters that are trying to capture, upload, prepare and submit the physical file submission of TMA applications. This has affected them adversely due to the global pandemic. Looking into the current economic condition and international market, the survival of the business without the assistance from government is difficult. Hence, they are requesting to condone the delay in filing of 2 TMA applications.

Decision: The Committee heard and examined the case on the basis of justification submitted by the applicant and observed that due to various restrictions imposed on account of ongoing lockdown during the period of Covid-19 Pandemic, firm has faced the problem which was beyond their control. Accordingly, the Committee decided to accede to the request for condonation of delay in submission of physical copy of TMA application for the period 01.01.2020 to 31.03.2020 and 01.10.2020 to 31.12.2020 (File no. 03/21/102/51409/AM21 and 03/21/102/51684/AM21). The firm shall approach RA concerned within 60 days of the uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Mumbai)

PH Case No.14 Mls. Buildmet Fibres Private Limited, Bangalore F. No.HQRPRCAPPLY00128566AM22

Meeting No.13/AM22 held on 01.10.2021

Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No.0710115128 dated 03.07.2019. The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-2015-2020, which was afforded on 01.10.2021. Shri K. Janakiraman, Finance Manager appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions:

The applicant stated that they are a Two Star Export House and also Authorized Economic Operation exporting Flexible intermediate bulk containers to all European countries regularly. They always complete their export as well as import within the validity period of license. However, due to corona pandemic, they are unable to utilize the license within validity period in this case. They further declared and confirmed that the balance imported materials to be used only for execution of

Qo _

Page 9 of 11

further export order. Hence, the applicant is requesting for 6 months revalidation of said advance authorization.

Decision: The Committee heard the case on the basis of submission made by the firm and discussed the matter at length. It is observed that there is merit in the case and accordingly it decided to accede to the request and allowed revalidation of Advance Authorization No.0710115128 dated 03.07.2019 for a further period of 6 months from the date of endorsement. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Bangalore)

PH Case No. 15 M/s. Saffron Apparels, Tirupur F. No.HQRPRCAPPLY00128669AM22 Meeting No.13/AM22 held on 01.10.2021

Subject:To allow ROSCTL benefit.

The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-2015-2020, which was afforded on 01.10.2021, Shri Pavan Jain, Authorised Representative appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions:

The applicant stated that they have applied for authorization issued with PC-9 dated 30.03.2003 condition, as amended, which allows 12 months period for applying ROSCTL. But they were unable to file the same before date and time limit for ROSCTL licenses applications for licenses due to Tamil Nadu government has issued lock down from 10.05.2021 for Covid-19 and not allowed to work. Hence, the applicant is requesting for filing of ROSCTL benefit.

Decision: During the course of personal hearing, the applicant intimated to the Committee that their case has already been settled and requested to withdraw their request from PRC. Accordingly, the case has been withdrawn.

(Action: Applicant)

PH Case No. 16 M/s. Tata Steel BSL Limited, New Delhi F. No.HQRPRCAPPLY00128759AM22 Meeting No.13/AM22 held on 01.10.2021

Subject: Request for Revalidation of MEIS Scrip No.0519176611 dated

03.07.2019.

(Action: Applicant)

PH Case No.17 _—‘Ms. Indian Products Private Limited, Bangalore F. No.HQRPRCAPPLY00128792AM22

Page 10 of 11

Meeting No.13/AM22 held on 01.10.2021

Subject: Extension of EOP for delay in export of finished goods in their 100% EOU in terms of para 6.06 (c ) (ii) & (iii) of HBP.

The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-2015-2020, which was afforded on 01.10.2021, Shri B. Chandra Sekhar, Deputy General Manager — Accounts and Ms. Saranya Ravindran, Assistant General Manager, appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions:

The applicant stated that they have imported goods into India from time to time in their EOU and all the goods imported are duly processed and exported. However certain products like Salt, Herbs, Cassia, Garlic, Cumin, Ginger and Nutmeg (in some quantities) are sold in Domestic market on payment of duties as applicable under the provisions of Foreign Trade Policy / DOR Notifications. The goods imported are seasonal in nature and to survive the competition in international business and earn marginal profits after meeting actual cost, exports are to be committed with the time beyond the export obligation specified. Another reason for delay in export obligation is that for some of the consignments received from July 2020 was due to second wave of Covid-19 pandemic. The export obligation period for value added spices has been stipulated as 120 days as per Para 6.06 (c)(iii) of the Hand Book of Procedure. In some cases, cancellation of export orders and subsequent efforts to get revised or new orders either with amended specifications or otherwise as per the respective buyer requirement also leads to delay in fulfillment of export obligation because such changes would need further manufacturing process. Hence, the applicant is requesting to condone the delay and regularize or extend the elongated period of fulfillment of export obligation or extend the EOP.

Decision: The Committee heard and went through the statements made by the firm. After thorough deliberation, the Committee noted that the applicant has not submitted any cogent reason/ justification in support of any genuine hardship faced by them warranting a policy relaxation. Accordingly, the Committee decided to reject the request of the firm.

(Action: Applicant)

==> picture [106 x 21] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- \ Quon _— ----- End of picture text -----

Page 11 of 11

Verbatim extracted text (OCR/PDF). Older scans and tables may show extraction artifacts — verify against the original for anything you act on.

Analysis

No analysis has been generated for this document yet.