DGFT Minutes

Date of Uploading 2///2 12022 Directorate General of Foreign Trade General of Foreign Trade (PRC Section) Minutes of the Policy Relaxation Committee Meeting of the Policy Relaxation Committee Meetin Held on Held on 13.12.2022 under the Chairmanship of under the Chairmanship of Shri Shri Santosh Kumar Sarangi, Director General of Foreign Trade Kumar Sarangi, Director General of Foreign Trade Meeting No.22/AM23 held on 13.12.2022 The following members were present in the meeting:

1. Shri S.B.S. Reddy Addl. DGFT
2. Shri Hardeep Singh Addl. DGFT
3. Shri Akash Taneja Addl. DGFT
4. Shri Anil Aggarwal Addl. DGFT
5. Dr. S.K. Bansal Addl. DGFT Following cases were discussed. The decision taken on the individual cases are as under:- | S.No | No Name of the firm | Case No. | No.

M/s. Shalco Industries Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai | 1 2 M/s. Fermenta Biotech Limited, Thane 0 | | 3. IMWs. Radnik Exports, Noida | 3s 4. M/s. Radnik Exports, Gurgaon nat wo ss] M/s. New India Cuprotec, Mumbai | 5 | {ei M/s. Sigma Laboratories Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai | 6 | iL M/s. Megha Investment Pvt. Ltd., Anmedabad | 7 | 18) | M/s. Wellknown Polyesters Ltd., Mumbai | 8d | 9. | M/s. Karamhans Foods Pvt. Ltd., Jammu | 9 | | 10. M/s. Deepak Novochem Technologies Ltd., Pune = ae a. M/s. Richa & Co., Haryana | 1 | 12. M/s. Master Garments, Tirupur | ५. 2] 13; M/s. NRC Industries Limited, Amritsar co | 14. | M/s. Kandoi Fabrics Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai | 14 | 15. M/s. Surya Roshni Ltd., New Delhi [15 Cd 16. M/s. Vikrant J Rawal, Mumbai | 16 | 1/, M/s.

3; M/s. NRC Industries Limited, Amritsar co | 14. | M/s. Kandoi Fabrics Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai | 14 | 15. M/s. Surya Roshni Ltd., New Delhi [15 Cd 16. M/s. Vikrant J Rawal, Mumbai | 16 | 1/, M/s. Jumbo Enterprises, Mumbai a ae [ 18. | 8. M/s. Swop Engineering Pvt. Ltd., Tamil Nadu | _ 18 | 8 19. M/s. Greenlam Industries Limited, New Delhi 19820 | 20, । M/s. Astral Limited, Anmedabad a a Fe Page 1 of 36 i

M/s. Maxop Engineering Company Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi 22 22. M/s. Jain Recycling Pvt. Ltd., Chennai 23 23. M/s. Chittor Polyfab Pvt. Ltd., Chittorgarh 24 24. M/s. Gulf Oil Lubricants India Limited, Mumbai | 25 | 25. M/s. Champa Purie-Chem Industries, Vadodara | 26 | 26, M/s. Nirma Limited, Anmedabad 2 21; M/s. N R Agarwal Industries Limited, Gujarat 28 28. M/s. Digitalcore Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Kerala 29 29. M/s. Glenmark Pharmaceutical Limited, Mumbai 30 30. M/s. Radhika Exports, Mumbai | 31 | 31. M/s. Komatsu India Pvt. Ltd., Kancheepuram 32 32. M/s. Lanxess India Pvt. Ltd., Thane 33 33; M/s. Sai Life Sciences Limited, Hyderabad 34 34. M/s. Onrise Barter Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata | 35 | 35. M/s. Clariant Chemicals (India Limited, Mumbai 36 to 38 36. M/s. Welspun Global Brands Limited, Gujarat 39 37, M/s. Super Grip Friction Products, New Delhi 40 38. M/s. Jsons Foundry Pvt. Ltd., Sangli 41 39. M/s. Reliance Industries Limited, Mumbai 42 to 44 | 40. | M/s. Bushrah Export House, Lucknow | 45 | 41. M/s. Imperial Readymade Garments Factory India Limited, hw aminadu 42. M/s.

Sangli 41 39. M/s. Reliance Industries Limited, Mumbai 42 to 44 | 40. | M/s. Bushrah Export House, Lucknow | 45 | 41. M/s. Imperial Readymade Garments Factory India Limited, hw aminadu 42. M/s. Anupam Port Cranes Corporation Limited, Gujarat 47 43. M/s. Ankur Udyog Limited, Gorakhpur | 48 | | _44. | M/s. BST Textile Mills Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai 49 45. M/s. Walia Auto Ancillaries Pvt. Ltd., Pune | 50 | | 46. | M/s. P and G Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi 51 47. M/s. Kalpataru Power Transmission Ltd., Gandhinagar 52 48. M/s. Gadre Marine Export Pvt. Ltd., Ratnagiri 53 49. M/s. Aqua World Exports Pvt. Ltd., Chennai 54 | 50. [TMA Cases (Total 32 Applications | 55 | Case No. 01 MIs. Shalco Industries Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai 7.10. HARPRCAPPLY00003555AM23 Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorisation No.0310837997 dated 31.08.2020. The applicant stated that they have imported around 85% of materials and the manufacturing process is also completed against subject licence but due to covid-19 situation they could not complete export obligation. They have | 18 month period and since Feb.2022 they have got export ord ost their export order in er and started exporting

ce but due to covid-19 situation they could not complete export obligation. They have | 18 month period and since Feb.2022 they have got export ord ost their export order in er and started exporting

balance quantity of the license and will complete the same by end of July 2022. Hence they are requesting to allow six month EOP extension against subject licence. Decision: The Committee examined the case on the basis of submission made by the firm and discussed the matter at length and it decided to accede to the request and allowed EOP extension of Advance Authorization No.0310837997 dated 31.08.2020 for a further period of 6 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. (Action: Applicant/RA-Mumbai) Case No. 02 M/s. Fermenta Biotech Limited, Thane F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00003577AM23 Meeting No.22/AM23 held on 13.:12;2022 Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorisation No.0310837217 dated 15.07.2020. The applicant stated that their factory located in remote area of HP and have imported the materials through Nhava Sheva port and have exported final product through New Delhi. Due to Covid-19 related restrictions in the last 2 years, the movement of cargo was hampered, frequent breakdowns in manufacturing schedules due to labour related issues resulted in production losses.

ue to Covid-19 related restrictions in the last 2 years, the movement of cargo was hampered, frequent breakdowns in manufacturing schedules due to labour related issues resulted in production losses. Russia and Ukraine war situation has directly hit the trade with Europe and US markets across the globe in rapid succession. They have fulfilled the EO of 31.72% and are unable to obtain 2" EO extension from RA. They are willing to pay composition fees for the 2 months extension from date of endorsement. Hence they are requesting to allow two month 507 extension against subject license. Decision: The Committee went through the statement made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and it decided to allow EOP extension against Advance Authorization No.0310837217 dated 15.07.2020 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. Case No. 03 Mis. Radnik Exports, Noida F.no. HARPRCAPPLY00003587AM23 Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorisation No.0510412820 dated 09.12.2019. yom Page 3 of 36 |XY NX

tes of meeting. Case No. 03 Mis. Radnik Exports, Noida F.no. HARPRCAPPLY00003587AM23 Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorisation No.0510412820 dated 09.12.2019. yom Page 3 of 36 |XY NX

The applicant stated that due to cancellation of export order they could not utilize the imported fabric against subject licence and now they got fresh export order to utilise the imported fabric so they need EOP extension. The imported fabric is ready stock. Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension against subject licence. Decision: The Committee discussed the case at length and found no merit or hardship in the arguments made by the firm and hence decided to reject the request of the firm. (Action: Applicant) Case No. 04 M/s. Radnik Exports, Gurgaon F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00003592AM23

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorisation No.0510411761 dated

05.09.2019. The applicant stated that due to cancellation of export order they could not utilize the imported fabric against subject licence and now they got fresh export order to utilise the imported fabric so they need EOP extension. The imported fabric is ready stock. Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension against subject licence. Decision: The Committee discussed the case at length and found no merit or hardship in the arguments made by the firm and hence decided to reject the request of the firm. (Action: Applicant) Case No. 05 M/s. New India Cuprotec, Mumbai F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00002600AM23 Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorisation No.0310835253 dated 06.03.2020. The applicant stated that they have PRC letter regarding eligible for 2क्‍ EOP extension but RA office giving it from date of expiry of the licence secondly they required license number on PRC letter for eligibility which is issued letter dated 06.06.2022.

eligible for 2क्‍ EOP extension but RA office giving it from date of expiry of the licence secondly they required license number on PRC letter for eligibility which is issued letter dated 06.06.2022. Hence they are requesting to extension for further period of six months from the date of endorsement against subject Advance Licence to fulfil the EOP. Decision: The Committee having examined the case on the basis of submission made by the firm and discussed the matter at length and it decided to accede to the request and allowed EOP extension of Advance Authorization No.0310835253 dated 06.03.2020 for a further period of 6 months from the date of endorsement subject to payment of composition fee @ 1% per month of the extension period granted, as आस | Page 4 of 36 Ab an

above, on the unfulfilled FOB value. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting. Case No. 06 M/s. Sigma Laboratories Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00002611AM23 Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No.0310823689 dated 11.09.2018. The applicant stated that they could not fulfil the ६.0. within 12 months as some of the exports shipment were wrongly exported under duty drawback instead of Advance Licence scheme and Covid-19 Pandemic affected all global activities and lockdown was implemented everywhere because of which this final shipment was delayed Decision: The Committee went through the justification provided by the firm the along with the report received from RA-Mumbai and discussed the matter at length.

which this final shipment was delayed Decision: The Committee went through the justification provided by the firm the along with the report received from RA-Mumbai and discussed the matter at length. The No.0310823689 dated 11.09.2018 only for regularization Purpose subject to payment of composition fees @1% per month on the unfulfilled FOB value. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting. Case No. 07 M/s. Megha Investment Pvt. Ltd., Anmedabad F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00003569AM23 Subject: Extension of EOP against 5 Advance Authorisation No.(1) 0810145735 dated 18.07.2019, (2) 0810145736 dated 18.07.2019, (3) 0810145737 dated 18.07.2019, (4) 0810145738 dated 18.07.2019 and (5) 0810145739 dated 18.07.2019. The applicant stated that they could not export the pending quantity of garments as according to buyer requirement these were to be shipped during May-June 2020, but Authorization as mentioned in the subject. _ Ly 5 of 36

t they could not export the pending quantity of garments as according to buyer requirement these were to be shipped during May-June 2020, but Authorization as mentioned in the subject. _ Ly 5 of 36

Decision: The Committee examined the case in detail and in view of justification provided by the firm it decided to accede to the request and allowed EOP extension up to 31.12.2022 of 5 Advance Authorizations No.(1) 0810145735 dated 18.07.2019, (2) 0810145736 dated 18.07.2019, (3) 0810145737 dated 18.07.2019, (4) 0810145738 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/lextended EOP. The firm shall approach RA concerned within 30 days of the uploading of the minutes of meeting. (Action: Applicant/RA-Ahmedabad) Case No. 08 M/s. Wellknown Polyesters Ltd., Mumbai F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00000007AM23 Subject: Extension of EOP for regularization of inadvertent excess import under Advance Authorization No.0310818922 dated 06.02.201 8. This case was deferred at PRC Meeting No.19/AM23 held on 22.11.2022 (Case No.55). The applicant has stated that since the matter is pending for long time and they imports of PTA was reduced to 5360 MT. However, inadvertently direct import of 7360 MT PTA has been debited against this Authorization while 1988.890 MT had been domestically procured against invalidation.

of PTA was reduced to 5360 MT. However, inadvertently direct import of 7360 MT PTA has been debited against this Authorization while 1988.890 MT had been domestically procured against invalidation. Therefore, total duty-free procurement under the Authorization is 9348.890 MTs against total allowed quantity of 7360 MT. Therefore, there is an inadvertent excess import of 1988 MT of PTA. Since at the time of second amendment the fact of debit of 2000 MT for domestic procurement and the value adjustment, this fact was lost sight of at the time of clearance of goods, both by the Company and the Customs Authority as a large volume of PTA was being cleared under several authorisations within a short span of 12-13 days in May 2019 (from 187 to 317 May, 2019). Hence they are requesting to allow only three months time to export the additional quantity to regularize the inadvertent excess import of PTA. / wo of 36

Decision: The Committee went through the submission made by the firm along with the report received from RA, Mumbai and discussed the matter at length and observed that dated 06.02.2018 subject to payment of composition fee @ 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 0.5% 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. Case No. 09 M/s. Karamhans Foods Pvt.

xtension 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. Case No. 09 M/s. Karamhans Foods Pvt. Ltd., Jammu F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00116058AM21

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No.1810004337 dated

26.07.2019. months till the end of June 2020 their Operations were totally thrown out of function. It was a tough call to induce buyers to place their orders and this scenario continues till date with second and third wave of lock downs in major importing countries halting the Operation at their end. Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension upto 31.03.2022 against subject licence. Decision: The Committee examined the case on the basis of submission made by the firm and it decided to defer the case and ask the firm to submit the detail of import and export item for taking the decision. (Action: Applicant) Case No. 10 M/s. Deepak Novochem Technologies Ltd., Pune F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00308902AM22 Subject: Clubbing of 2 Advance Authorization No.3110066963 dated 15.01.2018 and 3111000142 dated 03.02.2021. ry \ Page 7 of 36 क्रम f NY

and they have taken another licence No.3111000142 dated 03.02.2021 of the same product. They exported 444.63 MT against this licence and balance 226.52 MT after fulfilled the EO in both the terms but due to Covid-19 pandemic they have made the export within 32 months in the Advance Authorisation. Hence they are requesting to allow clubbing of above two Advance Authorisation for redemption purpose only. Decision: The Committee discussed the case at length and found no merit or hardship in the arguments made by the firm and hence it decided to reject the request of the firm. (Action: Applicant) Case No. 11 M/s. Richa & Co., Haryana F.no.

ase at length and found no merit or hardship in the arguments made by the firm and hence it decided to reject the request of the firm. (Action: Applicant) Case No. 11 M/s. Richa & Co., Haryana F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00003560AM23 Subject: Clubbing of 5 Special Advance Authorization No.(1) 0510412674 dated 27.11.2019, (2) 0510413299 dated 10.01.2020, (3) 0510413398 dated 21.01.2020, (4) 0510415771 dated 06.11.2020 & (5) 0510415805 dated 09.11.2020. The applicant stated that they had applied three Advance Authorisations and imported the fabric under these licences for export of Ladies Trouser but due to Covid-19 buyer discussed the matter at length and it decided to allow clubbing of 5 Special Advance Authorization No.(1) 0510412674 dated 27.11.2019, (2) 0510413299 dated 10.01.2020, (3) 0510413398 dated 21.01.2020, (4) 0510415771 dated 06.11.2020 & (5) 0510415805 dated 09.11.2020 for regularization purpose only. The other terms and conditions for clubbing as laid down in Policy/HBP, including accountability of imported fabrics as per relevant SIONSs, shall be applicable in this case. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting. (Action: Applicant/ CLA-New Delhi) Case No. 12 M/s. Master Garments, Tirupur F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00166506AM22 Subject: Request to allow Exported Garments in fulfilment of EO as they were made using imported Collars and Fabrics under Special Advance Authorisation No.3210078841 dated 31.01.2019 and thus to issue EODC. (/P Page 8 of 36 Le. |

ed Garments in fulfilment of EO as they were made using imported Collars and Fabrics under Special Advance Authorisation No.3210078841 dated 31.01.2019 and thus to issue EODC. (/P Page 8 of 36 Le. |

The applicant stated that they have been issued AA No.3210078841 dated 31.01.201 9 to import Fabrics and Collars duty free for effecting export of relevant Knitted under AA is ineligible for the Scheme. Hence they are requesting to condone the procedural lapses and allow them to avail the Advance Authorisation Scheme and issuance of EODC in the instance case. Decision: The Committee examined the case on the basis of submission made by the firm along with the report received from RA, Coimbatore and discussed the matter at length and it decided to regularize the import of Collars made against Special Advance Authorization No.3210078841 dated 31.01.2019 Subject to non availment of drawback minutes of meeting. (Action: Applicant/RA-Coimbatore) Case No. 13 M/s. NRC Industries Limited, Amritsar F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00003585AM23 Subject: Closure of Advance Authorization No.3010104885 dated 13.11.2019. The applicant stated that they has been issued AA with input item Natural Rubber falling under Appendix 4J with the Condition that period of E.O. fulfilment will be 6 months from the date of clearance of each consignment of Natural Rubber. They have fulfilled 100% 5.0. and pre-import condition has also been fulfilled for import of Natural Rubber but since 5.0.

6 months from the date of clearance of each consignment of Natural Rubber. They have fulfilled 100% 5.0. and pre-import condition has also been fulfilled for import of Natural Rubber but since 5.0. period has been reduced from 18 months to 6 months under Appendix 4J, some export shipments have been done beyond 6 months EOP but done within 9 months. Due to worldwide lockdown, some export orders could not be fulfilled in time or even cancelled and it became difficult to fulfil export obligation in just 6 months. Hence they are requesting to condone the delay and allow extension in EOP beyond 6 months against subject licence. Decision: The Committee discussed the case in detail and in view of justification provided by the firm it decided to accede to the request and allowed EOP extension up to 30.12.2020 of Advance Authorisation No.3010104885 dated 13.11.2019 only for regularization purpose subject to the payment of composition fees @1% per month on unfulfilled FOB value from the date of expiry. The firm shall approach RA concerned within 30 days of the uploading of the minutes of meeting. (Action: Applicant/RA-Ludhiana) Page’9 of 36 बट

onth on unfulfilled FOB value from the date of expiry. The firm shall approach RA concerned within 30 days of the uploading of the minutes of meeting. (Action: Applicant/RA-Ludhiana) Page’9 of 36 बट

Case No. 14 Mis. Kandoi Fabrics Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00334783AM22 Subject: Closure of Advance Authorization No.031 0825706 dated 18.12.2018. The applicant stated that they have obtained an AA from RA Mumbai and started export on 15.01.2019 and import on 18.01.2019, since the pre-import condition for IGST exemption imposed vide Notification 33 dated 13.10.2017 was removed by the DGFT Notification No.53 dated 10.01.2019 and their both import and exports transactions were started after removal of pre import condition on 10.01 .2019. After fulfilment of EO they had submitted for closure and RA are asking to pay the IGST on import stating that they have not maintained pre-import condition. Hence they are requesting to grant relaxation from IGST payment as per Notification No.53 dated 10.01.2019 against subject licence. Decision: The Committee went through the representation received from the applicant along with the report received from RA, Mumbai, and observed that there is no policy relaxation involved in this case. Accordingly it decided to withdraw this case from PRC. The issue is before the Hon’ble Court. Firm may approach PC-4 Division in the matter if (Action: Applicant) Case No. 15 M/s. Surya Roshni Ltd., New Delhi F.no.

ecided to withdraw this case from PRC. The issue is before the Hon’ble Court. Firm may approach PC-4 Division in the matter if (Action: Applicant) Case No. 15 M/s. Surya Roshni Ltd., New Delhi F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00016323AM22 Subject: Revalidation of DFIA No.0510411447 dated 06.08.2019 for a period of another 12 months. This case was last considered at PRC Meeting No.06/AM22 held on 13.07.2021 wherein Committee allowed revalidation of DFIA for a further period of 6 months from the date of endorsement. As per RLA, CLA New Dehhi letter dated 04.10.2022 informed uploading of the decision of the PRC. Hence they are requesting to allow revalidation of subject DFIA. "a बुला 10 of 36

it observed that due to technical problem the decision of PRC Meeting no.6/AM22 dated 13.07.2021 has not been implemented. Hence, it decided to allow revalidation of DFIA No.0510411447 dated 06.08.2019 for a further period of 6 months from the date of endorsement. (Action: CLA-New Delhi/Applicant) Case No. 16 MIs. Vikrant J Rawal, Mumbai F.no, HQRPRCAPPLY00003583AM23 Subject: Second Revalidation of Import Authorisation No.0319297637 dated 25.08.2020 for restricted item. The applicant stated that they have been issued the licence on 25.08.2020 during the Covid-19 and could not import the horses within the validity of the licence. They applied for the first revalidation and allowed upto 24.08.2022 and they have imported 04 Animals out of 12 on 22.07.2022.

d-19 and could not import the horses within the validity of the licence. They applied for the first revalidation and allowed upto 24.08.2022 and they have imported 04 Animals out of 12 on 22.07.2022. The balance of 08 Horses are still in the licence. Decision: The Committee examined the case in detail and in view of justification provided by the firm it decided to accede to the request of the firm and allowed revalidation for a period of 6 months from the date of endorsement against Import Authorisation No.0319297637 dated 25.08.2020 for restricted item. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting. Case No. 17 M/s. Jumbo Enterprises, Mumbai F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00003325AM23 Subject: Revalidation of DFIA No.0310837514 dated 30.07.2020. This case was deferred at PRC Meeting No.19/AM23 dated 22.11.2022 (Case No.14). The applicant stated that they had issued DFIA licence wherein the description of import correction in DFIA licence, once it is issued, and thus their licence got expired. Hence they are requesting to grant six month revalidation and necessary amendment in the subject DFIA. Page 11 of 36 Va

ection in DFIA licence, once it is issued, and thus their licence got expired. Hence they are requesting to grant six month revalidation and necessary amendment in the subject DFIA. Page 11 of 36 Va

Case No. 18 M/s. Swop Engineering Pvt. Ltd., Tamil Nadu F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00003392AM23 Meeting No.22/AM23 held on 13:12,2029 The applicant has stated that due to technical error in DGFT portal while transmitted in Customs ICEGATE and same time their license has been expired. They had obtained lead time of manufacturing takes considerable amount of time considering testing to be carried out postproduction. In order to achieve desired finished product, the lead time of manufacturing may take more than a year, hence EOP could not be fulfilled. Out of Seven Advance Authorisation they are seeking revalidation against Four Advance License to import the balance raw materials. Hence they are requesting to EOP extension against Seven Advance Licences and Revalidation in respect of 4 Advance Licences as mentioned in the subject. Decision: The Committee went through the submission made by the firm and discussed the matter at length and it decided to defer the case and ask the firm to submit any proof /evidence of technical error in DGFT Portal in support of their request for taking the decision. (Action: Applicant) Case No. 19 M/s. Greenlam Industries Limited, New Delhi 7.10. HARPRCAPPLY00003575AM23 Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No.0510414050 dated 22.04.2020. (
aa

(Action: Applicant) Case No. 19 M/s. Greenlam Industries Limited, New Delhi 7.10. HARPRCAPPLY00003575AM23 Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No.0510414050 dated 22.04.2020. (
aa

The applicant stated that they had issued Advance Authorisation from CLA New Delhi which was initially valid for import until 22.04.2021, since they had completed an excess EO in terms of quantity within 3 months of its issuance, they were required to import the enhanced quantity of the import items as amended after enhancement and whereas it is to be noted that the above said balance quantity which are yet to be imported are the within it revalidated period until 22.10.2021. Hence they are requesting to allow six month revalidation from the date of endorsement to import of essential raw materials. Decision: The Committee discussed the case on the basis of statement made by the firm and it decided to accede to the request of the firm and allowed revalidation for a period of 6 months from the date of endorsement to the extent of 100% export against the minutes of meeting. (Action: Applicant/CLA-New Delhi) Case No. 20 M/s. Greenlam Industries Limited, New Delhi Fangs, HQRPRCAPPLY00003546AM23 Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorisation No.0510414051 dated 22.04.2020. 13.09.2021 they were still left with almost 35 days time to complete imports. But unfortunately, the server at ICE Gate showed error under Master Error code, which means there was some data error. RA rectified the error in the meantime their 11 Revalidation got expired on 21.10.2021.

rtunately, the server at ICE Gate showed error under Master Error code, which means there was some data error. RA rectified the error in the meantime their 11 Revalidation got expired on 21.10.2021. Hence they are requesting to allow six month revalidation from the date of endorsement to import of essential raw materials. Decision: The Committee discussed the case on the basis of statement made by the firm and it decided to accede to the request of the firm and allowed revalidation for a la | 3 of 36

period of 6 months from the date of endorsement to the extent of 100% export against Advance Authorisation No.0510414051 dated 22.04.2020. This is last and final revalidation. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting. (Action: Applicant/ CLA-New Delhi) Case No. 21 M/s. Astral Limited, Anmedabad F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00003553AM23 Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No.0811002170 dated 30.07.2021. The applicant stated that due to higher pricing in international market they have not imported any items under subject Advance Authorisation. They have completed export obligation against this AA within the original EOP.

that due to higher pricing in international market they have not imported any items under subject Advance Authorisation. They have completed export obligation against this AA within the original EOP. Hence they are requesting to allow revalidation up to 30.07.2023 to import the quantity against subject licence. Decision: The Committee went through the justification submitted by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and it decided to accede to the request of the firm and allowed revalidation for a period of 6 months from the date of endorsement against Advance Authorisation No.0811002170 dated 30.07.2021. This is last and final revalidation. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting. (Action: Applicant/RA-Ahmedabad) Case No. 22 M/s. Maxop Engineering Company Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00002742AM23 Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No.0510397295 dated 14.01.2016. This case was deferred at PRC Meeting No.16/AM23 held on 28.10.2022 (Case No.13) wherein committee refer the issue to EGTF-Division for its examination and thereafter the matter will be brought back to PRC for taking final decision. EGTF Division asked some documents/tickets raised wherein the said firm has approached for resolution of the stated transmission failure.

atter will be brought back to PRC for taking final decision. EGTF Division asked some documents/tickets raised wherein the said firm has approached for resolution of the stated transmission failure. The applicant has stated that after correction of online transmission error in March 2020 they approached various times in CLA with various visitor passes for amendment in licence as per FTP but did not agree to make the amendment and asked to approach PRC in the year later 2021 after corona pandemics. In between they had forced to submit the redemption dox against their SCN which they have submitted on 16.07.2019. Hence they are requesting to allow revalidation against subject licence. ym” 4 of 36

Decision: The Committee examined the case on the basis of submission made by the firm along with the comments received from EGTF-Division and discussed the matter at length. The Committee noted 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) Case No. 23 M/s. Jain Recycling Pvt. Ltd., Chennai F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00003435AM23 Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No.3210079645 dated 18.08.2020. revalidation for import of Copper Scrap Druid Avg Copper Content 37.5% to 42.5% against their excess export, which is valid up to 18.08.2022. Since their import product Copper Scrap Druid Avg Copper Content 37.5% to 42.5% is demand in the current market.

r Content 37.5% to 42.5% against their excess export, which is valid up to 18.08.2022. Since their import product Copper Scrap Druid Avg Copper Content 37.5% to 42.5% is demand in the current market. They could not able to import proportionate to their exports made. Hence requesting for to allow revalidation of subject licence. Decision: The Committee discussed the case at length and found no merit or hardship in the arguments made by the firm and hence it decided to reject the request of the firm. (Action: Applicant) Case No. 24 Ms. Chittor Polyfab Pvt. Ltd., Chittorgarh F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00003433AM23 Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No.1310049149 dated 10.12.2018. PP Granules. Hence they are requesting to allow revalidation against the subject Advance Authorisation. Decision: The Committee went through the statements made by the firm and noted 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. po 15 of 36

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. po 15 of 36

(Action: Applicant) Case No. 25 M/s. Gulf Oil Lubricants India Limited, Mumbai F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00003563AM23 Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorisation No.0310838240 dated 14.09.2020. export and import quantity and FOB CIF value Since last 6 months but due to technical issue enhancement was not going through. The licence has been expired on 14.09.2022 after 1° revalidation. Hence they are requesting to allow revalidation of Subject Advance Authorisation for further period of six month. Decision: The Committee discussed the case on the basis of statement made by the firm and it decided to accede to the request of the firm and allowed revalidation for a period of 6 months from the date of endorsement to the extent of 100% export against Advance Authorisation No.0310838240 dated 14.09.2020. This is last and final revalidation. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting. Case No. 26 M/s. Champa Purie-Chem Industries, Vadodara F.no.

This is last and final revalidation. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting. Case No. 26 M/s. Champa Purie-Chem Industries, Vadodara F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00003434AM23 Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No.3410046469 dated 09.10.2020. The applicant has stated that Import is pending due to hardship in getting prior informed Consent (PIC) from MoEF& CC as the import of Mercury has been revised from Free to requesting to revalidate the licence for balance import. Decision: The Committee examined the case in detail and in view of justification provided by the firm it decided to allow revalidation for a period of 6 months from the date of endorsement against Advance Authorisation No.3410046469 dated 09.10.2020. This is last and final revalidation. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting. AY Page 16 of 36 \oe

(Action: Applicant/RA-Vadodara) Case No. 27 M/s. Nirma Limited, Ahmedabad F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00003567AM23 Subject: To allow export validity time 24 month instead of 12 month under DFIA File No.08/92/076/00009/AM20 dated 13.08.2019. The applicant has Stated that due to the prevailing coronavirus pandemic they could not complete the export imposed under DFIA file no. 08/92/076/00009/AM20 dated 13.08.2019 within 12 months from the date of filing the application as per para 4.29(ii) of FTP. They have exported after expiry of export allowed time as per para 4.29 (ii).

/92/076/00009/AM20 dated 13.08.2019 within 12 months from the date of filing the application as per para 4.29(ii) of FTP. They have exported after expiry of export allowed time as per para 4.29 (ii). They would request to allow them 24 months to exports to utilize the export made under the file. Decision: The Committee having 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 EOP extension up to 24 months from the date of filing the application against DFIA file no.08/92/076/00009/AM20 dated 13.08.2019 for issuance of DFIA license. The firm Shall approach RA concerned within 30 days of the uploading of the minutes of meeting. (Action: Applicant/RA-Ahmedabad) Case No. 28 M/s. N R Agarwal Industries Limited, Gujarat F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00003599AM23 Subject: Revalidation of 2 DFIA No.5210043328 dated 12.02.2020 and 524 0043413 dated 03.06.2020. Decision: The Committee went through the statement made by the firm along with the report received from the RA, Surat and discussed the matter at length and it decided to

4 0043413 dated 03.06.2020. Decision: The Committee went through the statement made by the firm along with the report received from the RA, Surat and discussed the matter at length and it decided to

merit. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting. (Action: Applicant/RA-Surat) Case No. 29 MIs. Digitalcore Technologies Pvt. Ltd., Kerala F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00003573AM23 Subject: Revalidation of MEIS Scrip No.1019035606 dated 03.06.2020. Decision: The Committee discussed the case at length and found no merit or hardship in the arguments made by the firm and hence it decided to reject the request of the firm. (Action: Applicant) Case No. 30 M/s. Glenmark Pharmaceutical Limited, Mumbai F.no. HQRPRCAPPL Y00219400AM22 Subject: Waiver of PC-18 condition against Advance Authorization No.0310805233 dated 06.06.2016. The applicant has stated that with reference to the Captioned subject, they hereby submit their application for grant of relaxation of provision of FTP/Procedure in terms of

para 2.58 of FTP

2015-2020, F urther, they would like to Clarify as under: a. They have obtained the above mentioned advance license from RA, Mumbai under PC-9 condition for import of MometasoneFuroate Micronized and imported qty. 48.40kgs. b. Out of actual imported qty. 48.40kgs. they have manufacture and exported the export qty. 44.318kgs., whereas balance imported qty. 4.082 kgs. Has been used in QC testing and n production loss. c. Accordingly they had been present their case in RA, Mumbai for Regulaxation and redemption of Advance license by submitting all required documents like import export Statement, clarification etc. with Document as per PC 11 dated 14.06.2019. d. But RA, Mumbai has issued DL asking provision under which they have claimed qty. consumed in QC testing & Production loss in excess import. e. They have met MR. DevendersinghAhelavat, DDG in RA, Mumbai and explained about the consumption other than production. Also they have shown Page/ia of 36 || / Veo - AY

tion loss in excess import. e. They have met MR. DevendersinghAhelavat, DDG in RA, Mumbai and explained about the consumption other than production. Also they have shown Page/ia of 36 || / Veo - AY

Same and suggested them to Present their case in PRC, DGFT f. In the above resent scenario, they hereby declare that they have not utilized import item MometasoneF uromate Micronized imported as per policy Circular 9 2002-2007 dated 30.06.2003 for local consumption and they do not have the balance import material for Destruction and re export Purpose. They have utilized g. They have also paid the custom duty and interest for exempted material used in QC testing and Production loss. h. So now they urge to accept the above Subject authorisation for regularization. Hence they are requesting for Waiver of destruction certificate and re-export in terms of P.C. 18 dated 30.10.2007 for Raw material consumed in QC Testing and Production loss in manufacturing process for regularization purpose. Decision: The Committee examined the statements made by the firm and noted 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) Case No. 31 M/s. Radhika Exports, Mumbai F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00290756AM22

Subject: Removal of late Cut against 8 DFIA files

No. (1) ARNDFIATRANS04 129510AM21(NA), (2) ARNDFIATRANS00734306AM21(NA), (3) ARNDF IATRANS00253623AM22(NA), (4) ARNDFIATRANS0O4 08651 4AM22(NA), (5)ARNDFIATRANS0121 5175AM22(NA), (6) ARNDF IATRANS02390565AM22(NA), (7) ARNDFIATRANSO1 687172AM22(NA) and (8) ARNDFIATRANS0263641 88122 (NA).

showing on website, that is, if late cut should be 2PCT. than system is showing 5PCT. Or 10 PCT. RA are not able to view late cut. And there was problem with Exchange rate also which were affecting their license amount by very huge amount. So they had to keep many licenses on hold till the system works properly. In old system, they had made many DFIA transferability drafts / application. When the system migrated, the shipping bill were hanged and they were not able to attach those Shipping bill in the new Decision: The Committee went through the statements made by the firm and noted 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) Case No. 32 M/s. Komatsu India Pvt. Eta, Kancheepuram F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00363874AM22 Meeting No.22/AM23 held on 13.12.2022) Subject: To allow drawback benefit of Drawback of Rs.1,05,73,534/- under deemed exports category to Komatsu Indian Pvt. Ltd., instead and against the desclaimer of Contract manufacturer L&T Construction Pvt. Ltd of Hydraulic Excavator for supply of goods under category 7.02 © Considering :- 1.

y to Komatsu Indian Pvt. Ltd., instead and against the desclaimer of Contract manufacturer L&T Construction Pvt. Ltd of Hydraulic Excavator for supply of goods under category 7.02 © Considering :-

1. Disclaimer certificate of L&T in favor of Komatsu to claim drawback benefit.
2. Komatsu and L&T were joint venture partner.
3. Contract manufacturing by L&T was only for transition period after exit of both partners from JV till manufacturing unit of Komatsu becomes operational in Tamil Nadu. The applicant has stated that Drawback under rule 6 or 7 allows claim of drawback either by manufacturer or an Exporter, all industry rate of drawback however can be tied up with merchant exporter. Brad rate of drawback in physical exports can also be claimed either by an exporter against disclaimer of a manufacturer or by manufacturer against disclaimer of exporter The custom duties have not been neutralized in this Page 20 of 36) , am

exported under deemed exports to the holder of n EPCG license. Hence they are requesting to allow drawback benefit of drawback of Rs.1,05,73,534/- under deemed exports category to Komatsu India Pvt. Ltd. instead and against the disclaimer of Contract manufacturer L&T Construction Pvt. Ltd., of Hydraulic Excavator for supply of goods under category 7.02 © considering :- 1.

y to Komatsu India Pvt. Ltd. instead and against the disclaimer of Contract manufacturer L&T Construction Pvt. Ltd., of Hydraulic Excavator for supply of goods under category 7.02 © considering :-

1. Disclaimer certificate of L&T in favour of Komatsu to claim drawback benefit. 2.Komastsuad L&T were joint venture parter. 3.Contract manufacturing by L&T was only for transition period after exit of both partners from JV till manufacturing unit of Komatsu becomes operational in Tamil Nadu. Decision: The committee examined the submission made by the applicant in its application and noted that the facts of the case have not been clearly specified by the firm and hence it decided to call the firm for Personal Hearing. (Action: Applicant) Case No. 33 Mis. Lanxess India Pvt. Ltd., Thane F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00003445AM23

Subject: To allow MEIS benefit against 06 shipping bill No.(1) 7241984 dated

27.09.2019, (2) 7257089 dated 28.09.2019, (3) 7962629 dated 31.10.2019, (4) 9784571 dated 21.01 -2020, (5) 6487400 dated 26.08.2019 and (6) 5650937 dated 18.07.2019. The applicant stated that due to E-BRC are not uploaded on DGFT server they were not able to file MEIS claim for these S/Bills. These S/Bills are time barred. Hence they are requesting to allow MEIS benefit with relaxation of policy. Decision: The Committee went through the statement made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length. The Committee observed that due to delay in uploading 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 time and e-BRC have been the minutes of meeting. (Action: Applicant/RA-Concerned/PC-3 division for necessary updation) Case No. 34 MIs. Sai Life Sciences Limited, Hyderabad Efe. HQRPRCAPPLY00003429AM23 a | _ See Page 21 of 36 x

nutes of meeting. (Action: Applicant/RA-Concerned/PC-3 division for necessary updation) Case No. 34 MIs. Sai Life Sciences Limited, Hyderabad Efe. HQRPRCAPPLY00003429AM23 a | _ See Page 21 of 36 x

Subject: To allow MEIS benefit against 5 Shipping bills No.(1) 1105479 dated (2) 1787948 dated 04.02.2019, (3) 4651737 dated 04.05.2018, (4) The applicant stated that Scrip No.3919015663 dated 03.05.2021 was rejected by the Customs Authorities as One of the S/Bill had been utilized inadvertently in an earlier MEIS scrip. The other S/Bills for which benefit could not be received have been re- activated by DGFT. Hence they are requesting to allow MEIS benefit without late cut against subject Scrip. Decision: The Committee examined the submission made by the firm and noted that there is merit in the Case and accordingly it decided to allow MEIS benefit to the firm 19 5 Shippi i issued and cancelled due to technical error). Concerned DC, SEZ may accept the application and process the case. Late cut, if any, on the entitlement will be decided taking the date of submission of original application as the date of application. The firm Shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting. (Action: Applicant/RA-SEZ, Cochin/PC-3 division for necessary updation) Case No. 35 M/s. Onrise Barter Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata F.no., HQRPRCAPPLY00002540AM23 Subject: Revalidation of MEIS Scrip No.0219079236 dated 13.09.2019. This is a review of PRC Meeting No.22/AM22 held on 22.03.2022 & 29.03.2022 (Case No.20) wherein Committee reject the case.

540AM23 Subject: Revalidation of MEIS Scrip No.0219079236 dated 13.09.2019. This is a review of PRC Meeting No.22/AM22 held on 22.03.2022 & 29.03.2022 (Case No.20) wherein Committee reject the case. They have stated that due to office shifting kept on office system which could not access the data. Hence they are requesting to allow MEIS benefit. Decision: The Committee 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 rejection of the earlier decision of PRC in its Meeting No.22/AM22 dated 22.03.2022 & 29.03.2022 (Case no.20). (Action: Applicant) Case No. 36 Ms. Clariant Chemicals (India) Limited, Mumbai Page 2of 36 a ae

F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00003350AM23 Subject: To allow MEIS benefit against 44 time barred shipping bills. firm and discussed the matter at length. The Committee noted 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) Case No. 37 M/s. Clariant Chemicals (India) Limited, Mumbai F.no. HQRPRCAPPL Y00003348AM23 Subject: To allow MEIS benefit against 05 time barred shipping bills. Decision: The Committee examined the case on the basis of submission made by the firm and discussed the matter at length. The Committee noted that the applicant has not submitted any cogent reason/ justification in support of any genuine hardship faced by them.

ission made by the firm and discussed the matter at length. The Committee noted 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) Case No. 38 MIs. Clariant Chemicals (India) Limited, Mumbai F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00003349AM23 Subject: To allow MEIS benefit for the export made during the period 2015-16 vide 16 time barred shipping bills. Decision: The Committee examined the case on the basis of submission made by the firm and discussed the matter at length. The Committee noted that the applicant has not के Page 23 of 36 go fi

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) Case No. 39 M/s. Welspun Global Brands Limited, Gujarat F.no, HQRPRCAPPLY00086774AM21 Subject: To allow MEIS benefit against shipping bills for the period from February, 2017 to September, 2017. received the EBRC from the Bank but they have received the payment against export made. Hence they are requesting to allow MEIS benefit against the S/Bills. Decision: The Committee went through the statements made by the firm and noted that the licant 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) Case No. 40 MIs.

ubmitted 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) Case No. 40 MIs. Super Grip Friction Products, New Delhi F.no, HQRPRCAPPLY00003586AM23 Subject: To allow MEIS benefit against 4 shipping bills. The applicant stated that in respect of 4 S/Bills they could not claim MEIS benefit due to some error in the DGFT window and due to corona pandemic their staff not attended office regularly. Hence they are requesting to allow MEIS benefit against the 4 S/Bills. Decision: The Committee having examined the Statements made by the firm and noted 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) Case No. 41 Ms. Jsons Foundry Pvt. Ltd., Sangli F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00073147AM21 Subject: Condonation of delay for filing MEIS application due to delay in reactivation of shipping bills. poe of 36

) Case No. 41 Ms. Jsons Foundry Pvt. Ltd., Sangli F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00073147AM21 Subject: Condonation of delay for filing MEIS application due to delay in reactivation of shipping bills. poe of 36

benefit is availed against these shipping bills. They have received reactivation from RA, Pune in May 2019. Ecom No.:03/90/026/1 5800/0505/6313, File Decision: The Committee went through the statements made by the firm and noted 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) Case No. 42 Mis. Reliance Industries Limited, Mumbai F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00282377AM22

Subject: To allow MEIS benefit due to transmission of provisional shipping bill

data instead of finalized data from Custom server to DGFT server. This is deferred case of PRC Meeting No.19/AM22 held on 30.12.2021 (Case No. 18), The applicant stated that they are exporting liquids namely Benzene, Cyclohexane, Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether (MTBE), ethylene, Paraxylene, Di-Ethylene Glycol and shipping bills. Therefore, the shipment is initially provisionally assessed and upon finalization of value and quantity, they approached to Customs for finalization of provisional shipping _ bill. Further stated that in custom module through which transmission of finalized data can be made available to DGFT server for making MEIS application.Based on the availability of provisional Shipping bill data in DGFT server they won't be able to claim the correct MEIS incentive as finalized value is sometime Page 25 of 36 i

to the request of the firm and allowed MEIS benefits based on finalized data from Customs instead of earlier electronically transmitted Provisional Shipping bill data. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting. (Action: Applicant/RA-Mumbai/PC-3 division for necessary updation) Case No. 43 M/s. Reliance Industries Limited, Mumbai F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00282136AM22 Subject: To allow MEIS benefit due to transmission of provisional shipping bill data instead of finalized data from Custom server to DGFT server. This is deferred case of PRC Meeting No.19/AM22 held on 30.12.2021 (Case No.17).

fit due to transmission of provisional shipping bill data instead of finalized data from Custom server to DGFT server. This is deferred case of PRC Meeting No.19/AM22 held on 30.12.2021 (Case No.17). The applicant stated that they are exporting liquids namely Benzene, Cyclohexane, Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether (MTBE), ethylene, Paraxylene, Di-Ethylene Glycol and Orthoxylene from various Customs EDI Port in India to various customers provisional shipping bills. Therefore, the shipment is initially provisionally assessed and upon finalization of value and quantity, they approached to Customs for finalization of provisional shipping bill. Further Stated that in custom module through which transmission of finalized data can be made available to DGFT server for making MEIS

meeting. (Action: Applicant/RA-Mumbai/PC-3 division for necessary updation) Case No. 44 M/s. Reliance Industries Limited, Mumbai F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00202363AM22 Subject: To allow MEIS benefit against 3 Shipping bills no. 2085290 dated 12.03.2020, 2089332 dated 12.03.2020 & 2090892 dated 13.03.2020. Decision: The Committee examined the statements made by the firm along with the comments received from PC-3 division and noted 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) Case No. 45 M/s. Bushrah Export House, Lucknow F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00003561AM23 ry | ae 27 bf 36 नस िp3ेफो......

rdingly, the Committee decided to reject the request of the firm. (Action: Applicant) Case No. 45 M/s. Bushrah Export House, Lucknow F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00003561AM23 ry | ae 27 bf 36 नस िp3ेफो......

The applicant stated the above mentioned 4 shipping bills are not showing on DGFT keeping in mind the premium of incremental license under Chapter-3 of FTP. They undertake to provide all documents viz. landing certificate, bill of landing, shipping bills and BRC ete once the window is open. Hence they are requesting to allow ROSCTL against 4 Shipping Bill No.(i) 2529767 dated 01 -05.2020, (ii) 2529754 dated 01.05.2020, (1) 2613816 dated 11.05.2020 and (iv) 2605154 dated 09.05.2020. Decision: The Committee went through the statement made by the firm in its application and noted that the facts of the case have not been clearly specified by the firm and hence it decided to call the firm for Personal Hearing. (Action: Applicant) Case No. 46 Mls. Imperial Readymade Garments Factory India Limited, TamInadu Fano: HQRPRCAPPLY00003566AM23 Subject: To allow RoSCTL against 7 Shipping Bill No.(1)4329216 dated 07.08.2020, (2) 5538425 dated 30.09.2020, (3) 6331361 dated 04.11.2020, (4) Decision: The Committee went through the statement made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length.

329216 dated 07.08.2020, (2) 5538425 dated 30.09.2020, (3) 6331361 dated 04.11.2020, (4) Decision: The Committee went through the statement made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length. The Committee observed that there is merit in the case. Accordingly, it decided to allow ROSCTL benefit against 7 shipping bill No.(1)4329216 dated 07.08.2020, (2) 5538425 dated 30.09.2020, (3) 6331361 dated 04.11.2020, (4) 7332031 dated 19.12.2020, (5) 7396032 dated 22.12.2020, (6) 7500767 dated हिv ge 28 0136 we

28.12.2020 and (7) 7500764 dated 28.12.2020. The firm Shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting. (Action: Applicant/RA-Concerned/ EDINIC for necessary updation in the System) Case No. 47 M/s. Anupam Port Cranes Corporation Limited, Gujarat F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00000444AM23

Subject: Refund of TED under Deemed export Chapter 7 of FTP

FTP 2015-20. The applicant stated that the Supply of cranes made to NPT, Customs Mumbai against scheme of Deemed Export (EPCG License No.0330032287 dated 29.03.2012) and the total invoice amount was 90.06 crores. Based on the scheme, they are entitled for the TED claim amounting to Rsl.9,27,61,800/-. After a portion of payment received, there was a contractual dispute and litigation with the Customer on various quality issues of the product and accordingly balance Payment got withheld. The first claim of Rs.2,57,98,848/- was released on 27.09.2016. However, meanwhile, the contractual Supplementary claim of Rs.1,20,50,039/- was granted and released on 14.05.2019. Finally during March 2021, after long interval and continuous legal fight, they were able to received final and balance amount, pending against the supply made. Accordingly, they filed the claim on 05.02.2021. It may be appreciated that they have lodged the paid to them was to the extent of periodic realization made. They had effect, fully adhered to requirements under Para 7.03(f) of HBP 2015-20. However, they are in already sanctioned, which goes with the CAG audit objection.

xtent of periodic realization made. They had effect, fully adhered to requirements under Para 7.03(f) of HBP 2015-20. However, they are in already sanctioned, which goes with the CAG audit objection. Hence, they are requesting to grant necessary policy relaxation for the reimbursement of TED claim as it Decision: The Committee examined the justification provided by the firm along with the comments received from PC-6 division and noted that due to qualities issues and disputes, the firm has faced the problem which was beyond their control, but final payment has now been received from JNPT. Accordingly, it decided to allow relaxation of the Para 7.03(f) of HBP and regularize the TED benefits already granted to the firm on part basis. The Committee also decided to allow reimbursement of balance TED claim already applied after receipt of the final payment with applicable late cut as per Page 29 of 36

Provisions of HBP/FTP. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting. (Action: Applicant/RA-Vadodara) Case No. 48 M/s. Ankur Udyog Limited, Gorakhpur F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00003281AM23 Subject: Regularization / Redemption of EPCG authorization against export made after the expiry of EOP to complete the 100% EO of EPCG Authorization No.1530001008 dated 27.08.2013. which is just one month beyond the relief deadline of 31.07.2021. They had paid the hefty amount of composition fee of Rs.4,15,502/- for the EOP extension from 6 to 8 years. They have now completed the 100% EO in the month of June, 2022.

ief deadline of 31.07.2021. They had paid the hefty amount of composition fee of Rs.4,15,502/- for the EOP extension from 6 to 8 years. They have now completed the 100% EO in the month of June, 2022. Hence, they are requesting to allow regularization /redemption of above EPCG authorization without any composition fee. Decision: The Committee went through the statement made by the firm and discussed the matter at length and it decided to allow EOP extension up to June 2022 against EPCG Authorisation No.1530001008 dated 27.08.2013 only for regularization Purpose, subject to payment of composition fee equal to 2% of Proportionate duty saved (Action: Applicant/RA-Varanasi) Case No. 49 M/s. BST Textile Mills Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai F.no, HQRPRCAPPLY00003497AM23 Subject: Acceptance of installation certificate issued by Chartered Engineer instead of Central excise in respect of 12 EPCG Authorization No.(1) 0330025837 dated 26.04.2010, (2) 0330026581 dated 12.07.2010, (3) 0330028625 dated 08.02.2011, (4) 0330032819 dated 06.06.2012, (5) 0330035254 dated 06.03.2013, (6) 0330036891 dated 26.09.2013, (7) 0330044740 dated 05.07.2016, (8) 0330025220 dated 16.02.2010, (8) 0330032093 dated 14.03.2012, (10) 0330033917 dated

» Page 30 of 36 हे Past

ed 06.03.2013, (6) 0330036891 dated 26.09.2013, (7) 0330044740 dated 05.07.2016, (8) 0330025220 dated 16.02.2010, (8) 0330032093 dated 14.03.2012, (10) 0330033917 dated

» Page 30 of 36 हे Past

11.10.2012, (11) 0330023722 dated 03.09.2009 and (12) 03300337587 dated 21.09.2012. certificate from chartered engineer instead of central excise authority to close the subject EPCG authorizations. Decision: The Committee examined the statement made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and it decided to defer the case. (Action: Applicant) Case No. 50 M/s. Walia Auto Ancillaries Pvt. Ltd., Pune F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00003428AM23 Subject: EOP in first and second block EOP upto 9" year and consideration of Same and similar export produces in terms of manufacturing HS code 87085000 and 85381010 against EPCG authorization No.3130004086 dated 19.06.2009. The application stated that they could not fulfill the EOP in first and second block in time for the reasons that they have to first send Samples for testing and approval by foreign requesting to allow extension of EOP in first and second block EOP upto 9" year and consideration of same and similar export produces in terms of manufacturing HS code 87085000 and 85381010 against EPCG authorization No.31 30004086 dated 19.06.2009.

\ Page 31 of 36

and consideration of same and similar export produces in terms of manufacturing HS code 87085000 and 85381010 against EPCG authorization No.31 30004086 dated 19.06.2009.

\ Page 31 of 36

Decision: The Committee went through the submission made by the firm and discussed the matter at length and noted that there is merit in the case. Therefore, it decided to accede to the request of the firm for allowing additional export product of Switch Gears (HS Codes 85381010) manufactured from the Same EPCG Machinery against EPCG Authorisation No.31 30004086 dated 19.06.2009 Subject to the submission of Nexus Certificate to RA. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting. (Action: Applicant/RA-Pune) Case No. 51 M/s. P and G Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00003594AM23 Subject: To allow filing of MEIS Application for FY 201 9-20. the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting. f) Page 32 of 36 है आल है

erprises Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00003594AM23 Subject: To allow filing of MEIS Application for FY 201 9-20. the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting. f) Page 32 of 36 है आल है

(Action: Applicant/ CLA-New Delhi/ EDI/NIC for necessary updation in the System) Case No. 52 M/s. Kalpataru Power Transmission Ltd., Gandhinagar F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00003570AM23 Subject: Relaxation in PN No.28/2019-20 dated 05.08.2019 for grant of additional claim under MEIS for enhanced rate for project exports (ITC HS 9801) for exports from 01.11.2017 to 31.12.2019. The applicant stated that the enhanced rates of 5% for project exports were enhanced vide PN 44 dated 05.12.2017. Guidelines for filing /Processing MEIS application for project exports was announced vide Trade Notice No.14 dated 30.05.2018. Procedure to claim MEIS at enhanced rate of 5% for project export was announced vide Trade Notice No.30 dated 11.09.2018. They inadvertently missed out on the procedural part. Decision: The Committee went through the statements made by the firm and noted 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) Case No. 53 M/s. Gadre Marine Export Pvt. Ltd., Ratnagiri F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00000582AM23 a / Page 33 of 36 ole Uf

ingly, the Committee decided to reject the request of the firm. (Action: Applicant) Case No. 53 M/s. Gadre Marine Export Pvt. Ltd., Ratnagiri F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY00000582AM23 a / Page 33 of 36 ole Uf

Subject: Relaxation of Para 7A(01)(d)and(h) of HBP 2015-20 of time limit for filing of TMA application for the export period July, 2020 to September, 2020. This is review case of PRC Meeting No.21/AM22 held on 10.03.2022 (Case No.16), wherein the Committee rejected the case. The applicant stated that they are facing error while preparing TMA application for the period 01.07.2020 to 30.09.2020 since last month when the new module of TMA introduced. In the month of July, August and September till 27.09.2021 the old module of TMA application was closed in DGFT site which unable them to Process their TMA application for the above period so it means there is no delay from their Side. Now, after introduction of new module they are facing the error of not applied in prescribed time limit. There is No sufficient time to file their TMA application for the mentioned period. Hence, they are requesting for relaxation in terms of Para 7A 01(d) and (h) of HBP 2015-20. Decision: The Committee reviewed the case on the basis of justification furnished by the firm along with the comments received from EGTF-division and discussed the matter at length. The Committee observed that applicant has not submitted any cogent reason/ justification in Support of any genuine hardship faced by them.

eived from EGTF-division and discussed the matter at length. The Committee observed that applicant has not submitted any cogent reason/ justification in Support of any genuine hardship faced by them. Accordingly, it decided to maintain rejection of the earlier decision of PRC in its Meeting No.21/AM22 dated 10.03.2022 (Case No.16). (Action: Applicant) Case No. 54 M/s. Aqua World Exports Pvt. Ltd., Chennai F.no. HQRPRCAPPLY000000233AM23 Subject: To allow TMA claim for period 01.10.2020 to 31.12.2020. approach PRC and to get approval to file their TMA claim for the said period. Hence, they are request to allow TMA claim for the period 01.10.2020 to 31.4 2.2020. (Action: Applicant) Case No. 55 TMA Cases Page 34 of 36 A

Subject: Condonation

applications. of delay Following TMA applications were received for condonation of delay in submission of hard copy of TMA onli No.21/2022-23 dated erstwhile ‘Transport and Marketing Assistance (TMA) in this regard. Accordingly, it was decided to withdraw these cases from PRC and applicants are advised to follow the instructions of above Trade Notice. in submission of physical Pa: ee Name of the firm No. ii. ee no. lt M/s. Unipick Foods Pvt. Ltd., Taluk, Karnataka HQRPRCAPPLY00297829AM22 Pie | M/s. Sheesh Spices, MP HQRPRCAPPLY00003839AM23

5 | M/s. Lubi Gel Limited, Jodhpur HQRPRCAPPLY00003853AM23 4. M/s. Aquarious Marketing Pvt. Ltd., HQRPRCAPPLY00003844AM23 Kolkata ia M/s. Biking Food Products Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad HQRPRCAPPLY00003938AM23 हिv 5 डा M/s. Noorsons Exports, Mumbai HQRPRCAPPLY00003933AM23 7, M/s. Koeleman India Pvt. Ltd., Bangaluru HQRPRCAPPLY00003722AM23 | 8. | Mis. R. K. Industries, Gujarat HQRPRCAPPLY00003931 AM23 | 9. | M/s. Sai Siddihi Impex, Mumbai HQRPRCAPPLY00003947AM23 copy of TMA |e, | 0. M/s. Shiddhi Industries Bhuj HQRPRCAPPLY00003431AM23 a. He नल Biscutt Pvt. Ltd, HQRPRCAPPLY00003332AM23 | 12. | M/s. Kiran Doke Fruit Supplier, MH HQRPRCAPPLY00003378AM23 | 13. | 3. M/s. Kiran Doke Fruit Supplier, MH HQRPRCAPPLY00003376AM23 | 14. |! M/s. Kiran Doke Fruit Supplier, MH HQRPRCAPPLY00003375AM23 | 15. | 6. M/s. Kiran Doke Fruit Supplier, MH HQRPRCAPPLY00003374AM23 | 16. | M/s. Kriti Nutrients Limited, MP HQRPRCAPPLY00003572AM23 ht M/s. Parasmal Jasraj, Jodhpur HQRPRCAPPLY00003423AM23 18. M/s.

M/s. Kiran Doke Fruit Supplier, MH HQRPRCAPPLY00003374AM23 | 16. | M/s. Kriti Nutrients Limited, MP HQRPRCAPPLY00003572AM23 ht M/s. Parasmal Jasraj, Jodhpur HQRPRCAPPLY00003423AM23 18. M/s. Brij Honey Pvt. Ltd., Bharatpur HQRPRCAPPLY00003421AM23 | 19. | M/s. Excel Drug House, Kolkata HQRPRCAPPLY00003452AM23 | | M/s. Exotic Fruits Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai HQRPRCAPPLY00003436AM23 | 21, | M/s. West Coast Foods, Gujarat HQRPRCAPPLY00003564AM23 | 22. | M/s. Aryan International, New Delhi HQRPRCAPPLY00003393AM23 | 20. | | M/s. Prestige Feed Mills Limited HQRPRCAPPL Y00003364AM23 | 24. || M/s. J 8 L Enterprise, Kolkata HQRPRCAPPLY00003336AM23 | 25. | M/s. Rapid Overseas HQRPRCAPPLY00003360AM23 Page 35 of 36

M/s. Blue Craft Agro Pvt. Ltd HQRPRCAPPLY00003358AM23 | 27, | M/s. Spices & More HQRPRCAPPLY00003609AM23 | 28. | M/s. Spices & More HQRPRCAPPLY0000361 0AM23 | 29. | M/s. Spices & More HQRPRCAPPLY00003612AM23 | 30. | M/s. TKV Marketing India Pvt. Ltd, HQRPRCAPPLY00003614AM23 | 31. | M/s. Sunita Hydrocolloids Ltd. HQRPRCAPPLY00003639AM23 | 32 | M/s. Tender and Tremendous HQRPRCAPPLY00003554AM23 (Action: Applicant/RA-Concerned) RRRKK Page 36 of 36