IN FORCE Advance Authorisation

DGFT Minutes

Reliability

In force — no superseding record on file.

Document text

Directorate General of Foreign Trade (PRC Section)

Minutes of the Policy Relaxation Committee Meeting Held on 11.05.2022 under the Chairmanship of : Shri Santosh Kumar Sarangi. Director General of Foreign Trade

Meeting No.04/AM23 held on 41.05.2022

The following members were present in the meeting:

Shri Vijay Kumar Addl. DGFT 2. Shri S.B.S. Reddy Addl. DGFT 3. Shri Hardeep Singh Addl. DGFT 4. Shri Anil Aggarwal Addl. DGFT 5. Shri Akash Taneja Addl. DGFT 6. Shri Amiya Chandra Addl. DGFT

==> picture [462 x 360] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- Following cases were discussed. The decision taken on the individual cases are as under:- SNe7 [Nameofthe firm Case No. 3 Hie-aie LETJohnsK o belosn ControlsMach in erydia Fvt.Ltd.,PunePrivate Limited., Tamil Nadu{| 1 —3—liie- Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited, Chirapali—[|-384_ —— We Bharat Heavy Electrical id, NewDelhi_ [8 —i—ive-Inwac Metals & Chemicals Pvt_Ltd., Vadodara |6 —3-— We Narayan Industries, Ahmedabad, Gujarat | 7 —3——ls Pinnacle Clothing Co,Noida | We Gulnar Plastios Pvt. Lid, Mumbai —3— Mie Appu Hotels Lid, Chennal Ld 70 Mis Orbit Lifescience Pvt Ltd, Mumba ft Wie Jagannath Exirusion India Lid, Gujarat 14to 47 _ Wwe Bet Olid,Mumba —ts— ie“ Kemwell Biopharma Pvt, Bangalore | 18 —is [Mis Raymond Ltd, Chhindwara | 20 Tee Hia Export, Mumbai 9s. Excel Printer Pvt Ltd, New Deihi 22 5 IMs The Highland Procduce Co. Lid,, Kerala 23 _ \Lantio ----- End of picture text -----

Page 1 of 20

Mis. L&T Kobelco Machinery Private Limited., Tamil

Nadu F. No. 01/60/162/7 12/AM19/PRC Meeting No.04/AM23 held on 41.05.2022 Subject: To consider the non-generation of Bill of export as an unintentional procedural lapse and ARE-1 endorsed by SEZ customs as the proof of export for their supply made for fulfillment of export obligation against Advance Authorization No.0410161651 dated 25.02.2016. The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-2015-2020, which was afforded on 41.05.2022. Shri Arul S., Shri Jojan Davis and Shri Ganesh Kamalanathan, Authorised Representatives appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions: This is review case of PRC Meeting No.02/AM20 dated 09.04.2019 (Case No.05), wherein the Committee decided to allow consideration of those bills of exports of goods filed under the claim for Drawback towards fulfillment of EO, subject to the condition that firm will get these bill of exports converted to bills of export under advance authorization from the concerned customs authorities. The applicant stated that they have applied and received advance authorization (AA) against an SEZ export order and imported parts using the AA, after completion of the assembly and testing we have exported the equipment to SEZ with 97% value addition. This export was done under the cover of invoice and ARE-1 but they have failed to apply for "Bill of export" (BOE) which was a mandatory document.

ported the equipment to SEZ with 97% value addition. This export was done under the cover of invoice and ARE-1 but they have failed to apply for "Bill of export" (BOE) which was a mandatory document. Subsequently they approached PRC for relaxation and in the personal hearing they have expressed to forego the drawback benefit which they are eligible against an export done to the same SEZ unit with valid "Bill of export under drawback" and surrender the original "BOE under drawback" as export obligation against the above said advance authorization. This submission was accepted by the respected PRC and below decision was issued. "The committee heard the submission made by the firm and discussed the matter at length. It reiterated that Bill of export is a mandatory document for discharge of EO of Advance Authorization in case of supplies to SEZ. However, in view of the submissions made by the firm in their representation and in the hearing, it decided to allow consideration of those Bill of export of goods filed under the claim for Drawback towards fulfillment of EO, subject to the condition that firm will get these Bill of exports convert to Bill of exports under Advance guthorization from the concernedBased on customsthe aboveauthorities.”said PRC decision their company has approached MEPZChennai for converting the "Bill of export under drawback" into “Bill of export under advance authorization".

dBased on customsthe aboveauthorities.”said PRC decision their company has approached MEPZChennai for converting the "Bill of export under drawback" into “Bill of export under advance authorization". But they have received reply from "AO SPICOT-SEZ Gangaikondan" stating that, "This issue was informed to NSDL through mail, they replied that once bill processed for the particular scheme, the system automatically blocked it for that particular scheme and thereby no amendment / change of the scheme can be made for that processed bill".

==> picture [84 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- \Pyont— ----- End of picture text -----

Page 2 of 20

Decision: furnished byThetheCommitteefirm and heardfound andno reviewedmerit in the the casrequ e onst of thethe basf i rms ofand justificationhence it decided to maintain the earlier decision of PRC in its Meeting No.02/AM20 dated 09.04.2019 (Case No.05).

(Action: Applicant)

PH Case No. 02 Mis. Johnson Controls India Pvt. Ltd., Pune E_ No. HQRPRCAPPLY00148790AM22 Meeting No.04/AM23 held on 11.05.2022

Subject: Waiver of non-submission of bills of exports towards fulfillment of EO against Advance Authorization No.3110051561 dated 21.11.2011.

Decision: The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP, 2015-2020, which was afforded on 11.05.2022, but no one appeared on behalf of the firm. The Committee decided to defer the case.

applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP, 2015-2020, which was afforded on 11.05.2022, but no one appeared on behalf of the firm. The Committee decided to defer the case.

(Action: Applicant) PH Case No. 03 Mis. Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited, Chirapalli F. No. HORPRCAPPLY00147422AM22 Meeting No.04/AM23 held on 11.05.2022 Subject: To consider the export made before the date of issue of Advance Authorization towards fulfillment of EO of Advance Authorization No.0410112741 dated 24.03.2010.

The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-2015-2020, which was afforded on 11.05.2022. Shri J. Bala, Additional General Manager, Shri S. Yuvaraj, Manager, Ms. Nithya N., Manager, Ms. Sonia Dalal Dnankar, Manager, appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions: The applicant stated that they have obtained the subject authorization for importing materials for execution of NTPL Tuticorin, Tamil Nadu State — 2x500=1000 MW. The order from NLC is regarded as Deemed Export in terms of para 8.2(g) of FTP 9009-14. The norms were ratified by Norms Committee as per meeting No.31/11 dated 16.11.2010. The Thermal Power Projects are executed over a period of 36 to 48Aftermonths.receipt of order, foundation structural and other structural components like column and other associated components are supplied which are indigenous inputs. Import materials are mostly used in Pressure Part application whose materials and quantum can be arrived after detailed engineering and analysis.

components are supplied which are indigenous inputs. Import materials are mostly used in Pressure Part application whose materials and quantum can be arrived after detailed engineering and analysis. Thus, applications for Advance Authorisation are filed after detailed engineering. By the time, indigenous materials are dispatched to site for erection and start of execution of project at project site to meet their project schedule. The contract period is 42 months and 47 months from the date of letter of ward (28.01.2009). The indigenous and import material weight declared for 2 sets in the application is 13370.24 MTs and 31599.38 MTs respectively. Most of the import materials (raw materials, consumables & components) are used for manufacture and supply of pressure part Page 3 of 20 yom

components along with indigenous components. Some components are used as such in the project site during erection. Hence, they are requesting to consider the export made before the date of issue of subject Advance Authorization towards fulfillment of EO.

Decision: The Committee heard and examined the statements made by the firm and noted that in such cases last date of supply is co-terminus with the expiry of the contract and thus there is no justification to consider any supplies made before applying for the AA. It observed that the applicant has not submitted any cogent reason/ justification in support of any genuine hardship faced by them. Accordingly, the Committee decided to reject the request of the firm.

(Action: Applicant)

cant has not submitted any cogent reason/ justification in support of any genuine hardship faced by them. Accordingly, the Committee decided to reject the request of the firm.

(Action: Applicant)

PH Case No. 04 Mis. Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited, Chirapalli F. No. HORPRCAPPLY00148819AM22 Meeting No.04/AM23 held on 11.05.2022 Subject: To consider the export made before the date of issue of Advance Authorization towards fulfillment of EO of Advance Authorization No.0410124434 dated 27.05.2011. The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-2015-2020, which was afforded on 11.05.2022. Shri Karunakaran, General Manager, Ms. Priya Balaji, Sr. DGM, Ms. Sonia Dalal Dhankar, Manager, appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions:

The applicant stated that they have obtained the subject authorization for importing materials for execution of the Vallur SG 4*500MW Thermal Power Plant. The order is regarded as Deemed Export in terms of para 8.2(g) of FIP 2009-14. The Norms were ratified by Norms Committee as per Meeting No.18/80-ALC2/2011 dated 29.11.2011. The products are manufactured and supplied to site inline with the L2 schedule of the project. License for the item envisaged for Imports is obtained at a much later date by which time they would have already supplied the foundation materials/supporting structures/other materials to site and only subsequently. The imported materials are received those product for which the imported materials are used, are manufactured and supplied to the site.

rting structures/other materials to site and only subsequently. The imported materials are received those product for which the imported materials are used, are manufactured and supplied to the site. It is, therefore, impractical to commence the supply only after the date of issue of Import License. The contract period is 42 months from the date of letter of awards (28.07.2009). Structure erection starts from bottom to top whereas pressure parts erection starts from top to bottom as it is supported with the help of hangers and supports from top. Most of import materials are used for manufacture and supply of pressure part components. Some components are used as such in the project site during erection. Hence, they are requesting to consider the export made before the date of issue of subject Advance Authorization towards fulfillment of EO.

reason/ justification in support of any genuine hardship faced by them. Accordingly, the Committee decided to reject the request of the firm.

ant has not submitted any cogent Page 4 of 20 (Qoumt—

reason/ justification in support of any genuine hardship faced by them. Accordingly, the Committee decided to reject the request of the firm.

(Action: Applicant) PH Case No. 05 Mis. Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited, Delhi F. No. 01/60/162/485/AM21/PRC Meeting No.04/AM23 held on 11.05.2022 Subject: Acceptance of payment received in INR in Advance Authorization No.0610013597 dated 01.07.2008 and provide EODC. The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-2015-2020, which was afforded on 41.05.2022. Shri ZU Alvi, Additional General Manager, Shri C.P. Joshi, Deputy Manager, Ms. Sonia Dalal Dhankar, Manager appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions:

This is deferred case of PRC Meeting No.25/AM21 dated 15.03.2021 (Case No.24), wherein the Committee decided to call the firm for personal hearing. The applicant stated that they have obtained the subject authorization for importing raw material for execution of 3X14 MW Salma Afghanistan Project. As per authorization, 3 numbers of Transformers (Copper Wound) above 10,000 KVA up to and including 25,000 KVA, 3 phase, Oil Cooled (17.25 MVA) were required to be exported. The 3 Transformers of 17.25 MVA were dispatched vide Shipping Bill No.5495238 dated 13.04.2019, 5495239 dated 43.04.2019 and 5495240 dated 43.04.2009. Thereafter they have applied for redemption to RA, Kanpur in 2012. Payment have been received for 2 Transformers with Shipping Bill No.5495239 dated 13.04.2019 and 5495240 dated 13.04.2019.

.04.2009. Thereafter they have applied for redemption to RA, Kanpur in 2012. Payment have been received for 2 Transformers with Shipping Bill No.5495239 dated 13.04.2019 and 5495240 dated 13.04.2019. This payment was realized in INR and the original BRC copy issued by SBI for these two transformers was also submitted to RA, Kanpur in 2012 with request for redemption. The ocher Transformer exported against Shipping Bill No.5495238 dated 43.04.2019 could not reach the destination site in Afghanistan since same has fallen down during road transportation in Afghanistan. The transformer got damaged and due to political turmoil and terrorist attacks in Afghanistan in that period there was delay in return of damaged transformer into india. Finally, after 5 years the same was re-imported and brought back to India in 9014 for repair. After repairing successfully, it was re-exported vide shipping bill No.3130486 dated 02.03.2015. Since, Ministry of External Affairs had financed this project, the payment was realized in INR against the given license. However, RA, Kanpur had not accepted and advised to approach PRC. Hence, requested for acceptance of the payment received in INR against this project and redeem their license as they have already exported all the 3 transformers with a value addition of 21.26% in actual imports and exports. Decision: The Committee heard and discussed the case at length and decided to defer the case and ask the firm to submit copy of the line of credit issued by Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) for this project to take the final decision.

cussed the case at length and decided to defer the case and ask the firm to submit copy of the line of credit issued by Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) for this project to take the final decision. (Action: Applicant) (Ln,am__—

Page 5 of 20

Mis. Inwac Metals & Chemicals Pvt. Ltd.,

Vadodara F. No. HORPRCAPPLY00104677AM21 Meeting No.04/AM23 held on 41.05.2022 Subject: To consider the EOU supplies for fulfillment of EO against 2 Advance Authorization No.3410042547 dated 21.09.2016 and 3410042825 dated 06.01.2017.

The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-2015-2020, which was afforded on 11.05.2022. Shri Ashwin Doshi, Authorised Representative, appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions:

The applicant stated that their supplies are made to EOU unit under above 2 advance authorisations which were issued under Notification No.18/2015 for discharge of EO imposed against said Licenses on the ground of deemed export supply under FTDR Act 1992. They have submitted all relevant documents to RA, Vadodara against fulfillment of the EOP as stated in both advance authorisations. RA, Vadodara objected that since advance authorization has grant under Notification No.18/2015 supplies to EOU cannot be considered for EO. While making application of advance authorisation, they have not shown any indication about Exports fulfilment and by default advance authorisation issued under Notification No.18/2015.

dered for EO. While making application of advance authorisation, they have not shown any indication about Exports fulfilment and by default advance authorisation issued under Notification No.18/2015. As per notification No.18/2015 exemption is granted from the whole of the duty of custom leviable thereon which is specified in the First schedule to the customs Tariff Act, 1975 and from the whole of the additional duty, safeguard duty, transitional product specific safeguard duty and anti-dumping duty leviable thereon, respective, under section 3, 8B, 8C and 9A of the said customs Tariff Act, subject to the conditions. And as per Notification No.21/2015 also stated all above exemptions. There is no revenue implications as regards the exemptions under both the Notifications. Hence, they are requesting to consider EOU supplies also for fulfillment of EO against said authorisations. During the PH firm mentioned that they have always been taking AAs for supplying to EoU only and never had faced any problem except in these 2 cases. Decision: The Committee heard the case on the basis of justification provided by the firm along with the report received from RA, Vadodara and discussed the matter at length. It also noted that such cases are considered in routine by the RAs. The Committee observed that there is merit in the case and accordingly, it decided to accept the supply of goods to 400% EOU and SEZ unit (Deemed Export) towards fulfillment of EO against 2 Advance Authorisation No.3410042547 dated 21.09.2016 and 3410042825 dated 06.01.2017.

ecided to accept the supply of goods to 400% EOU and SEZ unit (Deemed Export) towards fulfillment of EO against 2 Advance Authorisation No.3410042547 dated 21.09.2016 and 3410042825 dated 06.01.2017. The firm shall approach RA concerned within 30 days of the uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Vadodara)

PH Case No. 07 M/s. Narayan Industries, Ahmedabad, Gujarat F_ No. 01/60/162/224/AM21/PRC Meeting No.04/AM23 held on 11.05.2022 (2 .an\——

Page 6 of 20

Subject: Clubbing of 2 Advance Authorization No.0810135842 dated 43.08.2015 and 0810140139 dated 24.04.2017. The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-2015-2020, which was afforded on 11.05.2022. Shri Heminkumar Patel and Shri Hiteshbhai Gajjar, Authorised Representatives appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions:

This is review case of PRC Meeting No.19/AM21 dated 22.12.2020 (Case No.19), wherein the Committee decided to relax the condition of 18 months from the date of issue of first Advance Authorisation for clubbing of two Advance Authorization No.0810135842 dated 43.08.2015 and 0810140139 dated 24.04.2017 for regularization purpose only. The applicant stated that they approached RA with PRC decision and they have been informed that the Committee has decided to relax the condition of 18 months from the date of issue of first advance authorization and refused to implement the decision stating that this decision is as per policy which mentioned the condition of 18 months from the date of issue of first advance authorization however the import in second authorization has taken place after 30 months of earliest authorization. Hence they are requesting to relax import condition of 30 months in the second authorization for clubbing of said 2 authorisations for regularization purpose only.

0 months of earliest authorization. Hence they are requesting to relax import condition of 30 months in the second authorization for clubbing of said 2 authorisations for regularization purpose only. Decision: The Committee heard and reviewed the submission made by the firm along with the report received from RA, Ahmedabad and discussed the matter at length and decided to relax both the conditions as laid down in Para 4.38 (vi) of HBP 2015-20 as amended vide Public Notice No.70/2015-20 dated 30.01.2019 for clubbing of 2 Advance Authorizations No.0810135842 dated 13.08.2015 and 0810140139 dated 24.04.2017. Earlier the condition of only 18 months from the date of issue of first advance authorisation of subject authorizations was relaxed in its Meeting No.19AM21 dated 22.12.2020. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Ahmedabad)

PH Case No. 08 Mis. Pinnacle Clothing Co., Noida F_ No. HQRPRCAPPLY00145130AM22 Meeting No.04/AM23 held on 11.05.2022 Subject: Regularization of export already made beyond EOP against Advance Authorization No.0510403957 dated 07.09.2017. The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-2015-2020, which was afforded on 11.05.2022. Shri Manoj Kumar, Authorised Representative, appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions:

This is deferred case of PRC Meeting No.14/AM22 held on 26.10.2021 (Case No.02), wherein the Committee decided to call the firm for personal hearing. The applicant stated that regularization of export made beyond EOP (within 38 months 22 days) against the subject advance authorization. They have obtained the said advance authorization with the initial EO period of 18 months and obtained first EOP Page 7 of 20 Uyont—

extension from RA i.e. up to 24 months (07.09.2017). They have imported 100 percentage and completed 100 percentage export obligation within export obligation period i.e. up to 38 months 22 days. Within 24 months 57.12%, against Shipping Bill No.2408423 dated 24.01.2018, 2414251 dated 24.01.2018. Not any Goods Shipped due to Covid-19 & Lockdown. Buyer had postponed order. Balance 42.88% shipment had shipped within 38 months 22 days against Shipping Bill No.6830447 dated 28.11.2020. They have Completed 100% EOP within 38 Months 22 days on 28.11.2020. Hence, they are requesting to count the export made beyond EOP for regularization purpose only.

Bill No.6830447 dated 28.11.2020. They have Completed 100% EOP within 38 Months 22 days on 28.11.2020. Hence, they are requesting to count the export made beyond EOP for regularization purpose only. Decision: The Committee heard the case on the basis of justification submitted by the applicant and discussed the matter at length. The Committee decided to allow EOP extension up to 28.11.2020 of Advance Authorization No.0510403957 dated 07.09.2017 only for regularization purpose subject to the payment of composition fees @ 0.5% per month on the unfulfilled FOB value, if exports are fulfilled more than 50% within initial /extended EOP or @ 1% per month where exports have been made less than 50% within initial/extended EOP. The firm shall approach RA concerned within 30 days of the uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/CLA-New Delhi)

PH Case No. 09 Mis. Gulnar Plastics Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai E No. HQRPRCAPPLY00132799AM22 Meeting No.04/AM23 held on 11.05.2022 Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No.0310817236 dated 23.11.2017. The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-2015-2020, which was afforded on 11.05.2022. Shri Sunil Nair, Export Manager appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions: This is the review case no. 23/AM21 dated 18.02.2021 (Case No.14), wherein the Committee had rejected the case. The applicant stated that as per ETP/HBP, minimum of 50% export obligation needs to be fulfilled in quantity as well gs in value as pro-rata basis to get 2nd EO Extension. However continuous delay of orders from their buyer due to poor market condition, they have not been able to fulfill the 50% condition. They are hereby attaching a copy of Email communication with the buyer highlighting the same. EO completed in terms of Qty pro-rata basis - 43.93% EO completed in terms of Value pro-rata basis - 88.67% However, now they have got confirmed export orders in hand from M/s Reese Wholesale, Indianapolis (USA), for Qty - 580 MT (Approx), which will help them to fulfill the entire export obligation in terms of Qty and value as well. The export production for the same as already been started and they hereby declare that unutilised imported inputs are available with them.

entire export obligation in terms of Qty and value as well. The export production for the same as already been started and they hereby declare that unutilised imported inputs are available with them. They would also like to inform that during the Jan 2020 to Aug 2020 [Outside the extended EO period] they have already exported 690 MT of the said product worth around 2104481.800 USD. (Statement attached). They are 400% sure to export the pending quantities in the next six months with more than sufficient orders in hand. Hence, they are requesting to for 2nd EO extension. \ Quon —

Page 8 of 20

Decision: The Committee reviewed the case on the basis of submission made by the firm during PH and discussed the matter at length and decided to accede to the request and allowed EOP extension of Advance Authorization No.0310817236 dated 23.11.2017 for a further period of 3 months from the date of endorsement subject to payment of composition fee @ 1% per month of the extension period granted, as above, on the unfulfilled FOB value. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

mposition fee @ 1% per month of the extension period granted, as above, on the unfulfilled FOB value. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Mumbai) PH Case No. 10 Mis. Appu Hotels Ltd., Chennai F. No. HORPRCAPPLY00149572AM22 Meeting No.04/AM23 held on 11.05.2022 Subject: EOP extension of 2 years to fulfill the remaining EO and re-fixation of annual average export obligation against 78 EPCG Authorizations. Decision: The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP2015-2020, which was afforded on 11.05.2022, but vide mail dated 09.05.2022 informed for an adjournment of personal hearing. The Committee decided to defer the case.

(Action: Applicant) PH Case No. 11 Mis. Orbit Lifescience Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai F. No. HORPRCAPPLY00152562AM22 Meeting No.04/AM23 held on 11.05.2022 Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No.0310805747 dated 28.06.2016. The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-2015-2020, which was afforded on 41.05.2022. Shri A.A. Patel, Authorised Representative appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions:

sonal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-2015-2020, which was afforded on 41.05.2022. Shri A.A. Patel, Authorised Representative appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions:

The applicant stated that they have obtained the subject advance authorisation on Adhoc Norms ratified by the NC to export 5000 Kgs Cefuroxime Axetil Amorphous. They have fulfilled the entire export obligation within initial validity of EOP without taking any EOP extension. However, they have taken one revalidation for six months. Unfortunately, due to reduction in inputs quantities in adhoc Norms by the Norms Committee and 600 Kgs goods returned by their buyer exported vide Shipping Bill No.5907102 dated 06.05.2017, There is an excess import of 377 Kgs. They have decided to make export of 478 kgs in order to cover shortfall on prorate basis. Their supporting manufacturer M/s Parabolic Drugs Ltd. manufacturing facility is completely shut down and they are under NCLT. Due to Covid-19 pandemic lockdown all the activities were at stand still and they were unable to locate new supporting manufacturer. However, now, they have appointed a supporting manufacturer M/s Covalent Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. who is going to manufacture | Vom

Page9 of 20

Cefpodoxime Proxetil on their behalf. Hence they are requesting for extension of EOP at least 3 months from the date of approval.

atories Pvt. Ltd. who is going to manufacture | Vom

Page9 of 20

Cefpodoxime Proxetil on their behalf. Hence they are requesting for extension of EOP at least 3 months from the date of approval.

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 EOP extension of Advance Authorization No.0310805747dated 28.06.2016 for a further period of 3 months from the date of endorsement subject to the payment of composition fees @ 0.5% per month on the unfulfilled FOB value, if exports are fulfilled more than 50% within initial /extended EOP or @ 1% per month where exports have been made less than 50% within initial/extended EOP. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Mumbai) PH Case No. 12 Mis. Maxop Engineering Co. Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi F. No. HORPRCAPPLY00149987AM22 & HORPRCAPPLY00099261AM21 Meeting No.04/AM23 held on 11.05.2022 Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No.0510392341 dated 09.12.2014. The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-2015-2020, which was afforded on 41.05.2022. Ms. Kamla Joshi, and Shri Anil Arora, Authorised Representatives appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions:

of Para 2.59 of FTP-2015-2020, which was afforded on 41.05.2022. Ms. Kamla Joshi, and Shri Anil Arora, Authorised Representatives appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions:

This is review case of PRC Meeting No.12/AM21 dated 29.09.2020 (Case No.02), wherein the Committee decided to allow final extension of EOP up 31.03.2021. The applicant stated that against this Licence, they have got EOP extension by PRC Committee Meeting No. PRC Meeting No.12/AM21 dated 29.09.2020 to ship export items of 11,14,775 pes. The extension is granted till 31/03/21, however they are still in the process of shipping pending quantities and will not be able to complete it within this time line of 31/03/21 due to following reasons: - (1). Their Customer has informed them engineering change in the Parts and advised them to first submit new samples for approval first and after sample approval start shipping the goods. As per revised drawings submitted by the customer, new samples were submitted and got approved by November end. Subsequently they started shipping from December 2020 onward only. (2). They tried to export in Dec 2020, but due to HSN Code mis-match, their 6 export invoices got rejected by the Customs. As Licence was issued on 09.12.2014, HSN Code was applied 76169990. But after GST, their products HSN Code has been revised to 85030029/85099000/87089900 and (3). Therefore, they applied for amendment in HSN code to the DGFT and got amended on 18.02.2021. Now they are ready to start exporting from this month.

been revised to 85030029/85099000/87089900 and (3). Therefore, they applied for amendment in HSN code to the DGFT and got amended on 18.02.2021. Now they are ready to start exporting from this month. But since pending quantities of 761246 PCS cannot be supplied within 31.03.2021, they are request to grant the extension till 30.06.2021. . Decision: The Committee heard and reviewed the case on the basis of submission made by the firm and discussed the matter at length and observed that there is merit in the case. Accordingly it decided to accede to the request and allowed EOP Page 10 of 20 (Pom

extension of Advance Authorization No.0510392341 dated 09.12.2014 for a further period of 3 months from the date of endorsement subject to the payment of composition fee @ 1% per month of the extension period granted, as above, on the unfulfilled FOB value. This is last and final EOP extension. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: ApplicantiCLA-New Delhi)

PH Case No. 13 M/s. Maxop Engineering Co. Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi F_ No. HQRPRCAPPLY0071837AM21 Meeting No.04/AM23 held on 41.05.2022

Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No.0510407726 dated

10.09.2018. The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-201 5-2020, which was afforded on 11.05.2022. Ms. Kamla Joshi, and Shri Anil Arora, Authorised Representatives appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions: The applicant stated that CLA, New Delhi has made the 2" Revalidation in 159 days for 180 days. It means they got only 21 days for updating in custom and release the material. So they could not make the same in just 21 days. Hence, they are requesting for revalidation of Advance Authorization No.0510407726 dated 40.09.2018 for a further 6 months. Decision: The Committee heard and went through the submission made by the firm along with the report received from CLA, New Delhi and discussed the matter at length. The Committee decided to accede to the request and allowed revalidation for a period of 6 months from the date of endorsement against Advance Authorisation No.0510407726 dated 10.09.2018. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/CLA-New Delhi)

PH Case No. 14 M/s. Jagannath Extrusion India Ltd.,Gujarat EF. No. 01/60/162/517/AM21/PRC Meeting No.04/AM23 held on 11.05.2022

Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No.3410043892 dated 15.02.2018.

The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-2015-2020, which was afforded on 11.05.2022. Shri Ramkrishna Dorik, Director appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions:

The applicant stated that they had obtained the above mentioned advance authorization under SION norm 63/241. CIF value of advance authorization is US$ 7,39,658.59 for import of 3,69,929.30 kgs. i.e. PP Granules against which export obligation imposed is US$ 8.74,141.97 for export of 336,208.45 kgs Flexible intermediate Bulk Containers with value addition 18.18%. The actual imports made Page 11 of 20 \ayom—

is 1,75.000 Kgs. (47.31%) in quantity terms and hence in proportion to actual imports made, they are required to fulfill EO for 1,59,090.091 kgs. with FCB value USS 4,13,636.36. However, their total exports under the said authorization is 335,309.51 kgs (210.77%) and value wise US$ 5,67,189.77 (137.12%) which resulted in excess exports of 110.77% in quantity terms & 37.12% in value terms. The export proceeds have also been realized in FFC thorough normal banking channel and earned substantial foreign exchange for their country. Hence they are requesting for revalidation of at least 3 months from the date of endorsement, so that they can import the balance inputs duty free to wipe out the losses

exchange for their country. Hence they are requesting for revalidation of at least 3 months from the date of endorsement, so that they can import the balance inputs duty free to wipe out the losses

Decision: The Committee heard and examined the case on the basis of statement made by the firm and discussed the matter at length. The Committee decided to accede to the request of the firm and allowed revalidation of Advance Authorisation No.3410043892 dated 45.02.2018 for a period of 3 months from the date of endorsement along with pro-rata enhancement in quantity and value as per provisions of FTP/HBP. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Vadodara) PH Case No. 15 Ms. Jagannath Extrusion India Ltd.,Gujarat FE. No. 01/60/162/518/AM21/PRC Meeting No.04/AM23 held on 11.05.2022 Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No.3410043583 dated 02.11.2017.

The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-2015-2020, which was afforded on 41.05.2022. Shri Ramkrishna Dorik, Director appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions:

sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-2015-2020, which was afforded on 41.05.2022. Shri Ramkrishna Dorik, Director appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions:

The applicant stated that they had obtained the above mentioned advance authorization under SION norm 63/241. CIF value of advance authorization is US$ 1,98,733.50 for import of 1,98,733.59 kgs. i.e PP Granules against which export obligation imposed is US$ 2,30.616/-for export of 180,666.90 kgs PP woven sacks with/without liner with value addition 46.04%. The actual imports made is 69.000 Kgs. (34.72%) in quantity terms and hence in proportion to actual imports made, they are required to fulfill EO for 62,727.27 kgs. with FOB value US$ 80.069.52. However, their total exports under the said authorization is 1,30.669.90 kgs (288.02%) and value wise US$ 2.83 714 82 (360.58%) which resulted in excess exports of 188.02% in quantity terms & 260.56% in value terms. The export proceeds have also been realized in FFC thorough normal banking channel and earned substantial foreign exchange for our country. Hence they are requesting for revalidation of at least 3 months from the date of endorsement, so that they can import the balance inputs duty free to wipe out.

ial foreign exchange for our country. Hence they are requesting for revalidation of at least 3 months from the date of endorsement, so that they can import the balance inputs duty free to wipe out.

endorsement along with pro-rata enhancement in quantity and value as pef . provisions of ETP/HBP. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Vadodara) PH Case No. 16 Ms. Jagannath Extrusion india Ltd.,Gujarat F. No. 01/60/162/520/AM21/PRC Meeting No.04/AM23 held on 11.05.2022 Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No.3410043216 dated 22.05.2017 and enhancement in both quantity and value of export & import item consequent to the excess exports made. The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-201 5-2020, which was afforded on 41.05.2022. Shri Ramkrishna Dorik, Director appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions:

sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-201 5-2020, which was afforded on 41.05.2022. Shri Ramkrishna Dorik, Director appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions:

The applicant stated that they had obtained the above mentioned advance authorization under SION norm 63/241. CIF value of advance authorization is USS 735,643.00 for import of 6,05,276. 10 kgs. i.e. PP Granules against which export obligation imposed is US$ 8,83,575.00 for export of 550,251.00 kgs PP woven sacks with/without liner with value addition 20.11%. The actual imports made is 4,31,460.00 Kgs. (71.28%) in quantity terms and hence in proportion to actual imports made, they are required to fulfill EO for 3,92,236.36 kgs. with FOB value US$ 6,29,840.28. However, their total exports under the said authorization is 6,15,508.95 kgs (156.92%) and value wise US$ 9,44,837.77 (150.01%) which resulted in excess exports of 56.92% in quantity terms & 50.01% in value terms. Hence they are requesting for revalidation of at least 3 months from the date of endorsement, so that they can import the balance inputs duty free to wipe out.

antity terms & 50.01% in value terms. Hence they are requesting for revalidation of at least 3 months from the date of endorsement, so that they can import the balance inputs duty free to wipe out.

Decision: The Committee heard and examined the case on the basis of statement made by the firm and discussed the matter at length. The Committee decided to accede to the request of the firm and allowed revalidation of Advance Authorisation No.3410043216 dated 92.05.2017 for a period of 3 months from the date of endorsement and pro-rata enhancement in quantity and value as per provisions of FTP/HBP. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Vadodara) PH Case No. 17 Mis. Jagannath Extrusion India Ltd., Gujarat F, No. 01/60/162/51 9/AM21/PRC Meeting No.04/AM23 held on 11.05.2022 Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No.3410043702 dated 48.12.2017 and enhancement in both quantity and value of export & import item consequent to the excess exports made.

Page 13 of 20

The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-2015-2020, which was afforded on 41.05.2022, Shri Ramkrishna Dorik, Director appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions:

sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-2015-2020, which was afforded on 41.05.2022, Shri Ramkrishna Dorik, Director appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions:

The applicant stated they had obtained the above mentioned advance authorization under SION norm 63/241. CIF value of advance authorization is US$ 281,938.00 for import of 2,15,600.00 kgs. ie. PP Granules against which export obligation imposed is US$ 3.50,000.00 for export of 1,96,000.00 kgs PP woven sacks with/without liner with value addition 24.14%. The actual import made is 1,97,000.00 Kgs. (91 37%) in quantity terms and hence in proportion to actual imports made, they are required to fulfill EO for 1,79,090.91 kgs. with FOB value US$ 319,305.19. However, their total exports under the said authorization is 3,42,862.41 kgs (191.45%) and value wise US$ 6,35,757.19 (198.80%) which resulted in excess exports of 91.45% in quantity terms & 98.80% in value terms. Hence they are requesting for revalidation of at least 3 months from the date of endorsement, so that they can import the balance inputs duty free to wipe out.

antity terms & 98.80% in value terms. Hence they are requesting for revalidation of at least 3 months from the date of endorsement, so that they can import the balance inputs duty free to wipe out.

Decision: The Committee heard and examined the case on the basis of statement made by the firm and discussed the matter at length. The Committee decided to accede to the request of the firm and allowed revalidation of Advance Authorisation No.3410043702 dated 18.12.2017 for a period of 3 months from the date of endorsement and pro-rata enhancement in quantity and value as per provisions of ETP/HBP. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Vadodara)

PH Case No. 18 Mis. Betul Oil Ltd., Mumbai F. No. 01/60/162/189/AM18/PRC Meeting No.04/AM23 held on 11.05.2022 Subject: Revalidation of 5 Advance Authorization No.(i) 31002899 dated 22.12.1988, (ii) 2313378 dated 22.12.1998, (iii) 31002874 dated 07.12.1998, (iv) 03028241 dated 01 03.1999 and (v) 2313379 dated 22.12.1998.

applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP, 2015-2020, which was afforded on 11.05.2022, but no one appeared on behalf of the firm. The Committee decided to defer the case.

(Action: Applicant) PH Case No. 19 M/s. Kemwell Biopharma Pvt., Bangalore F. No. HORPRCAPPLY00149711AM22 Meeting No.04/AM23 held on 11.05.2022 Subject: To count the export of 3 Drawback Shipping Bill No.(i) 9594432 dated 22.08.2016, (ii) 9418750 dated 12.08.2016 and (iii) 2203380 dated 44.11.2016 under the Advance Authorization No.0710109957 dated 15.06.2016 for regularization & discharge of EO.

Page 14 of 20

The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-201 5-2020, which was afforded on 41.05.2022. Shri B.N. Murali, Deputy Manager appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions:

This is review case of PRC Meeting No.32/AM20 dated 25.02.2020 (Case No.02), wherein the Committee decided to count the export of 5 EOU shipping bills and did not approve to count the export of 2 Drawback shipping bills. The applicant stated their Request for accounting of Shipping Bills filed under Duty Drawback Scheme into Advance Licence towards regularization and discharge of export obligation. They, Kemwell Biopharma Pvt Ltd, 34th KM, Tumkur Road, T Begur, Nelamangala, Bangalore-562123 are engaged in business of contract manufacturing of pharmaceutical products and Exporter. They have converted their unit from EOU to DTA with effect from 01.08.2016.

r, Nelamangala, Bangalore-562123 are engaged in business of contract manufacturing of pharmaceutical products and Exporter. They have converted their unit from EOU to DTA with effect from 01.08.2016. Based on Stock available as on 31.03.2016 they have submitted the details of Central Excise as well as CSEZ and taken approval for transfer of stock from EOU Scheme to Advance License Scheme. They have applied Advance License vide File No. 07/21/040/0017 1/AM17 Dt. 23.05.2016 and they have got the Advance License No. 0710109957 dtd. 45.06.2016. Also they have executed the Ex-Bond Bill of Entry as on 30.06.2016 for stock available with them and approved from the Customs authorities. Final EOU exit letter received by them on 99.07.2016 from Central Excise and Final approval of Excise Registration amendment, they have started DTA transaction from 01.08.2016. During the time of conversion from EOU into DTA, all raw materials stock are debonded under Advance authorization to avail customs duty benefits. immediately after converting EOU to DTA, they could not able to file shipping bills under advance authorization as the Authorization Number was not linked ‘n the Customs portal. Hence they could able to file some shipping bills under EOU shipping bill and 3 Shipping Bills under duty draw back scheme. They have filed below listed shipping bills under Draw back scheme instead of Advance License Scheme shipping Bill due to debonding Advance License Number details was not listed in the Customs portal to select the same.

w listed shipping bills under Draw back scheme instead of Advance License Scheme shipping Bill due to debonding Advance License Number details was not listed in the Customs portal to select the same. They are a pharmaceutical contract manufacturer and their products are highly sensitive and to be stored into an agreed temperature controlled situations throughout the movements. Since the shipment moved to Bangalore Airport for Customs clearances and while selecting Shipping Bill options, Advance License Number not reflected in ICEGATE Server. Due to important, urgency and also product storage conditions, they have selected one of the available options, since they don't have any other Advance Licence for that product and they choose as Duty Drawback Scheme and filled the Shipping Bills and moved the consignments to meet the customers time line and also to avoid the delay. Later they have approached Customs for amendments, but customs authorities rejected their request and suggested them to approach DGFT, Bangalore. In return DGFT Bangalore suggested them to approach PRC Committee. Surprisingly, PRC vide Meeting No.32/AM20 dated 25.02.2020 did not approve to account their request to convert DBK Shipping Bill filed during that period has not been taken into consideration. They have also remitted back the Drawback amount received for the below said shipping Bills along with applicable interest to Customs Authorities. Payment reference TR 06 Challan attached along with the application for your perusal.

Drawback amount received for the below said shipping Bills along with applicable interest to Customs Authorities. Payment reference TR 06 Challan attached along with the application for your perusal. They also confirm and undertake that they have not considered below said Shipping Bills for any of the other Advance License and they will considered above said Shipping Bill only for EODC of Debonding Advance License No.0710109957 dated 45.06.2016 for export obligation discharge. Hence, they are requesting to allow Page 15 of 20 \Qa out

accounting of above said 3 shipping Shipping Bills under Advance License No. 0710109957 DTD.15.06.2016 for regularization and discharge of export obligation. Decision: The Committee heard and reviewed the case on the basis of justification furnished by the firm and found no merit in the request and hence it decided to maintain the earlier decision of PRC in its Meeting No.32/AM20 dated 25.02.2020 (Case No.02).

(Action: Applicant)

PH Case No. 20 M/s. Raymond Ltd., Chhindwara F. No. HOQRPRCAPPLY00086568AM21 Meeting No.04/AM23 held on 11.05.2022

Subject: Allow relaxation of Pre-Import condition for Silk in any form listed at Serial Number 6 in Appendix 4J against Advance Authorization No.0310820234 dated 03.04.2018 for regularization purpose only.

The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-2015-2020, which was afforded on 11.05.2022. Shri Vinod Patil, Authorised Representative appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions:

onal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-2015-2020, which was afforded on 11.05.2022. Shri Vinod Patil, Authorised Representative appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions:

The applicant stated that the export product in question is special designed innovative fabrics i.e. Silk Wool Blended Fabrics which are manufactured by us for our reputed customer i.e. Peerless, USA who sources these fabrics from them as they are the only manufacturer of this product in India. In this case, as per the normal practice, due to urgent need of fabrics by the recipient, they have exported the material under Advance Authorisation scheme by using duty paid materials (Tussar Silk Tops) which they had imported earlier. They have not diverted away quantity to domestic market as it is meant for particular export product for particular buyer. They. have mentioned the relevant Advance Authorisation Number on the shipping bill. On completion of export supplies they approached Mumbai ADGFT for redemption of our Advance Authorisation for Bond waiver as per para 4.47 (a) of HBP, 2015-20. They were informed by them that import items listed in Appendix 4 -J are subject to pre-import condition as per para 4.13 (ii) of FTP 2015-20. Our import item falls at sr. no.6 "Silk in any form" of Appendix 4-J. They had to export first as the customer was in urgent need of fabrics for conversion to Readymade Garments and they did the same by using duty paid material. They request you to allow us one time relaxation of pre-import condition for Silk in any form listed at Sr. No.

for conversion to Readymade Garments and they did the same by using duty paid material. They request you to allow us one time relaxation of pre-import condition for Silk in any form listed at Sr. No. 6 in Appendix 4J for Advance Authorisation No.0310820234 dated 03.04.2018. They wish to inform you that they have already fulfilled the export obligation in full (73.68%) and this request for relaxation in policy/procedure is only for regularisation purpose. They do not want to do any further export since they have already fulfilled their export obligation commitment. There will be no revenue loss to the Government for allowing the relaxation for redemption of Advance Authorisation as per para 4.47 (a) Bond waiver for their import item "Silk in any form" listed in Sr. no. 6 of Appendix 4-J. In light of the reason stated above, they are requesting to allow relaxation of Pre-import Condition for Silk in any form listed at sr. no. 6 in Appendix 4 J and allow them to import the Raw materials to the extent of export obligation is fulfilled.

==> picture [86 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- Usain ----- End of picture text -----

Page 16 of 20

Decision: During the course of hearing, the applicant stated that they have already surrendered the subject advance authorisation in the RA and requested to withdraw their case from PRC. Accordingly, committee allowed the case to be withdrawn.

(Action: Applicant)

PH Case No. 21 Mis. Hia Export, Mumbai F. No. 01/60/162/51/AM21/PRC Meeting No.04/AM23 held on 11.05.2022

Subject: Replenishment of Gold under Appendix — 4(0). The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-2015-2020, which was afforded on 11.05.2022. Shri K.K. Duggal, Authorised Representative from GJEPC, and Shri Amit Chordia and Ms. Ravina Ladva, Authorised Representatives appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions: This is deferred case of PRC Meeting No.27/AM21 dated 31.03.2021 (Case No.26), wherein the Committee decided to call the firm as well as GJEPC for personal hearing. The applicant stated that they had participated in International Exhibition in terms of Para 4.46 of Foreign Trade Policy 2015-2020 read with Para 4.80 (C) of the Handbook of Procedures 2015-2020 after complying with all the terms and conditions of the aforesaid Para's. As per para 4.60 of the HBP 2015-2020 the minimum value addition required to be achieved is 7% on Gold and studdings (i.e. Diamonds and stones). The requisite value addition was achieved by us on exports and payment thereof was also received in Convertible Foreign Exchange. The Bank cleared the transaction. At the time of export the gold rate was US$ 4557.60 per troy ounce. However, due to a very steep and unprecedented rise in the Gold price due to covid and economic problems today it is quoting about USS 4940.00 per troy ounce. The value addition at the time of exports, as prescribed under para 4.60 of HBP , was duly achieved by them as stated above.

nd economic problems today it is quoting about USS 4940.00 per troy ounce. The value addition at the time of exports, as prescribed under para 4.60 of HBP , was duly achieved by them as stated above. However, they have to take Appendix AO from GJEPC to get replenishment of Gold at International rates as per Para 4.80 (e) (ii) of HBP. The GJEPC says that since gold cost has increased our value addition goes below 7% and as such Appendix 4(0) cannot be issued. Now if we study Appendix 4(0) it clearly says in Column 16 which pertains to value addition that value addition is to be worked out on Column 13 which is cost of Gold. Nowhere does the Appendix 4(0) say that value of studdings at column 10 have to be taken into account for working out the value addition. If this be so as is evident from Appendix 4(0) which is the main document for claiming replenishment of metal then value addition will have to be worked out on cost of metal and in their current case will work out to more than 7%. A copy of Appendix 4(0) is attached for your ready reference. in view of the above they are requesting that necessary directives be issued to GJEPC to issue Appendix 40 and to MMTC Limited / Diamond India Limited (DIL) to book gold under replenishment scheme by working out value addition on cost of gold only. Without prejudice to the above we would like to submit if the above reasoning though legally sound is not acceptable GJEPC may be asked to issue Appendix 4(0)on the basis of NFE being positive on current cost of gold rather than taking the 7% value addition norm.

ove reasoning though legally sound is not acceptable GJEPC may be asked to issue Appendix 4(0)on the basis of NFE being positive on current cost of gold rather than taking the 7% value addition norm. There is no loss to the Government as at the time of export the requisite value addition of 7% had duly been achieved. They have got an Page 17 of 20 \ Quon

extension of six months to take replenishment of gold from nominated agencies vide addition to para 4.80 of HBP and the said extension is going to expire soon. Hence they are requesting to issue of Gold under Replenishment Scheme from Nominated agencies under para 4.80 of HBP 2015-20.

Decision: The Committee heard the applicant along with representative from GJEPC and the case was discussed at length on the basis of submission made by the applicant and GJEPC. After discussion, it was decided to ask the GJEPC to issue a certificate (Appendix-4(O), as is being done by them to other applicants, for replenishment of Gold, keeping in view of fulfillment of minimum value addition as prescribed in the provisions of FTP/HBP (entitlement can be worked out keeping in view minimum value addition norms as per FTP/HBP).

(Action: Applicant IGJEPC, Mumbai)

PH Case No. 22 M/s Excel Printer Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi F. No. HQRPRCAPPLY00049850AM22 Meeting No.04/AM23 held on 11.05.2022

Subject: Extension in EOP against EPCG License No.0530156384 dated 01.09.2011.

The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-2015-2020, which was afforded on 41.05.2022. Shri Paramveer Jain, Authorised Representative appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions:

The applicant stated that they have been issued 2 EPCG licenses (i) 0530156384 dated 01.09.2011 and (ii) 0530157583 dated 08.02.2012. In the second license they have fulfilled and redeemed vide No.05/34/021/01309/AM12 dated 30.01.2012 after fulfillment of EO. However, the first EPCG license has remained unfulfilled because they were busy in meeting EO of their second license having more value. They have no other EPCG license or consequential EO pending at the moment. They have availed only aforesaid 2 EPCG licenses during last ten years. They have been granted extension of 2 years in respect of the subject license, but could not do the needful. Now, they have sufficient export orders in hand including some orders with part advance payment and are capable of fulfilling EO within a year. They assure that within a year, they shall fulfill their EO in full and get the EPCG license redeemed as per terms and conditions.

rt advance payment and are capable of fulfilling EO within a year. They assure that within a year, they shall fulfill their EO in full and get the EPCG license redeemed as per terms and conditions.

Decision: The Committee heard and examined the case on the basis of justification submitted by the applicant and observed that there is merit in the case and accordingly decided to accede to the request and allowed EOP extension of EPCG Authorization No.0530156384 dated 01.09.2011 for a period of 6 months from the date of endorsement subject to payment of composition fee equal to 2% of proportionate duty saved amount on unfulfilled export obligation. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: ApplicantiCLA-New Delhi)

Page 18 of 20

PH Case No. 23 Mis. The Highland Produce Co. Ltd., Kerala F. No. HQRPRCAPPLY00249300AM22 Meeting No.04/AM23 held on 11.05.2022

Subject: Condonation for procedural lapse of not mentioning the EPCG license number and date in the shipping bills relating to exports by the group company for fulfillment of EO against EPCG Authorisatioin No.1030001279 dated 09.01.2008. The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP-2015-2020, which was afforded on 11.05.2022. Dr. Neeraj Varshney and G. Hari Gopalakrishnan, Authorised Representatives appeared on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions:

This is deferred case of PRC Meeting No.22/AM22 held on 22.03.2022 & 29.03.2022 (Case No.36), wherein the Committee decided to call the firm for PH. The applicant stated that they have made efforts to discharge its EO but despite its best efforts, they could execute exports only to the tune of 25.89% within the EOP due the adverse operating conditions. As there was no minimum threshold of direct export fulfillment requirement stipulated in the FTP as on 09.01.2008, they opted to avail the alternate stipulated mode of exports fulfillment, that is, consider the option of the exports made by its group company as specifically permitted vide para 5.4(i) of FTP 2004-09. Considering the eligibility, they aggregated the exports of its group company M/s AVT Leather & Allied Products P Ltd, including exports made in excess of the average to be maintained by the group company as stipulated.

ibility, they aggregated the exports of its group company M/s AVT Leather & Allied Products P Ltd, including exports made in excess of the average to be maintained by the group company as stipulated. The average exports for the group company for the years 2005-08 was 167.46 Cr. and the excess exports available during the year 2008-09 was 46.97 Cr. Accordingly, they have applied for EODC to RA, Cochin requesting them to include group company’s exports. However, they were issued DL dated 12.08.2020, inter alia requiring endorsement of the alternate products on the EPCG authorization by the EPCG Committee. In compliance, they approached EPCG Committee, but rejected vide EPCG Meeting dated 25.11.2020. They had filed for review application however, the Committee decided to maintain the rejection vide EPCG Meeting dated 04.08.2021. Further stated that the requirement of endorsing the EPCG Authorisation number on the shipping bills essentially was to establish the correlation between the export product and the machinery imported under the EPCG authorization. Since the FTP categorically permits consideration of other products exported by the group company towards discharge of EO, which naturally wasn’t produced from the machinery imported under the EPCG authorization, mentioning of the EPCG authorization details on the relevant shipping bills would not have established the correlation between the product exported and the capital goods imported.

EPCG authorization, mentioning of the EPCG authorization details on the relevant shipping bills would not have established the correlation between the product exported and the capital goods imported. Hence, they are requesting to condone the procedural lapse of not mentioning EPCG License Number and date on the shipping bills relating to exports by the group company for fulfillment of EO.

==> picture [81 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- \L-et— ----- End of picture text -----

Page 19 of 20

Decision: The Committee heard and went through the submission made by the firm and discussed the matter at length. The Committee decided the following:-

RAneeds to apply the provisions of FTP/HBP existing at the time of issue of subject EPCG authorisation and then decide.
Regarding EPCG number not mentioned on the Shipping bills, decision may be taken as per existing instructions, provided shipping bills are not free shipping bills.

3 The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Cochin)

KRREKE

==> picture [107 x 23] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- \Qawn— ----- End of picture text -----

Page 20 of 20

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 generated for this document yet (analysis runs over brief docs + on-demand). Run build_analysis.py --ids 10643 --apply.