IN FORCE Advance Authorisation

DGFT Minutes

Reliability

In force — no superseding record on file.

Document text

| |

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

----- Start of picture text ----- , ----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [187 x 18] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- Date of Uploading oF 1 23 12023 ----- End of picture text -----

Directorate General of Foreign Trade {PRC Section) Minutes of the Policy Relaxation Committee Meeting Shri Held on 01.03.2023 under the Chairmanship of Santosh Kumar Sarangi, Director General of Foreign Trade

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

----- Start of picture text ----- | ----- End of picture text -----

Meeting No.33AM23 held on 01.03.2023

The following members were present in the meeting:

Shri S.B.S. Reddy Addl. DGFT 2. Shri Akash Taneja Addl. DGFT 3. Shri Anil Aggarwal Addl. DGFT 4. Dr. S.K. Bansal Addl. DGFT

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

==> picture [445 x 416] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- [S.No | Name of . | the firm | 1.2. __|M| is. StylamABA Apparel,IndustriK e s Limited,rala Chandigarh 3. Mis. Allround (India) Vegetable Processing Machines Pvt. 3 Ltd.. HR | 4. __|Mis. Scorodite Stainless India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai | 5. __|M/s. Optimus Drugs Pvt. Ltd.. Hyderabad | 6. __|M/s. Chintamani Lamination, Gujarat | gC | 7. _|M/s. BPE Biotree India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore | 8. |M/s. Richaco Exports Pvt. Ltd., Haryana | | 8S | 9. _|M/s. MVM Solar Private Limited, Bangalore | 9 | | 10. __|M/s. Harman Finochem Limited, Mumbai 10-14 | 11. _|M/s. Priyanka (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi | 15] | 12. |Mis. integrated Electric Co Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore | 13. __|M/s. Agrow Allied Ventures Private Limited, Gurgaon | 14. |M/s. Styrax Pharma Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad | 15. __|M/s. Vilas Transcore Ltd., Vadodara | [16.] |17.~ |M/s. Simplex Chemopack Pvt. Ltd., Nagpur 20-21 | _ |Ws. Buildmet Fibres Pvt. Ltd.. Taluk | 18. _|MWs. interpiex India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai | 2019 . _|M /i s. AlNi l iancekamal PolysacksLimited, MumbaiPvt.

Chemopack Pvt. Ltd., Nagpur 20-21 | _ |Ws. Buildmet Fibres Pvt. Ltd.. Taluk | 18. _|MWs. interpiex India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai | 2019 . |M /i s. AlNi l iancekamal PolysacksLimited, MumbaiPvt. Ltd, Rajasthan 24-2526-27 Page 1 of 36 {- i ----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [2 x 22] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- | ----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [442 x 347] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- | 2 1.2.__[MiM/ s. GlobalJubilant F I ngreviaBC Pvt. L td.,imited, MH Noida | 28 Baroda Mumbai | 42. |W/s.KautenKraft,NewDelhi TO ----- End of picture text -----

Case No. 01 Mis. Stylam Industries Ltd., Chandigarh F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00004119AM23

Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No.3010105019 dated 28.01.2020.

The applicant stated that they are recognized AEO-T2 and Three Star Status Export House and this license was issued to them for duty free import of input required for export of 20000 Nos. of Prelaminated MDF BOARD UNDER Para 4.7 of Chapter 4 of FTP. They had extended EOP up to 30.12.2022 from RA against subject license. Due to Covid-19 restrictions and amid rise in ocean freight charges by shipping line has made it impractical to export the material. The export item i.e. Prelaminated MDF Board is a very low value product and only 500 boards worth USD 20000 can be supplied in full container load shipment but the ocean freight for the same is USD 10000 for USA where the most of the export is being done which is very high and not viable for foreign buyer. Hence they are requesting to allow further six month EOP extension upto 30.06.2023 against subject licence.

==> picture [121 x 20] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- Page 2 of 36 (~* ----- End of picture text -----

30.06.2023 against subject licence.

==> picture [121 x 20] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- Page 2 of 36 (~* ----- End of picture text -----

Decision: The Committee examined the case on the basis of submission made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and it decided to allow EOP extension of Advance Authorization No.3010105019 dated 28.01.2020 for a further period of 6 months from the date of endorsement subject to payment of composition fees. No further import is allowed against subject Advance Authorisation. This is last and final EOP extension. The firm shall approach RA concerned within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/fRA-Ludhiana)

Case No. 02 M/s. ABA Apparel, Malappuram, Kerala F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00004155AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No.1011000036 dated 30.12.2020.

‘The applicant stated that the above authorization was obtained post Covid-19 period and the normal operations were just picking up in India. Buyer informed them that during the period 2022 also the aftermath of Covid was rampant in UAE and hence they found it difficult to give Shipping instructions for their existing order and on they were forced to cance! their order. They have again took up the matter with them and received fresh order dated 12.12.2022 for 110000 pieces of garments for exports within 9 months. Hence they are requesting to condone the 50% export condition and allow further EOP extension for six months to fulfill the balance export.

Decision: The Committee went through the statement made by the firm and discussed the matter at length and it decided to allow EOP extensionof Advance Authorization No.1011000036 dated 30.12.2020 for a further period of 6 months from the date of endorsement in the proportionate to the import already made subject to payment of composition fees. No further import is allowed against subject Advance Authorisation. This is last and final EOP extension. The firm shall approach RA concerned within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Cochin)

Case No. 03 M/s. Allround {India} Vegetable Processing Machines Pvt. Ltd., HR. F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00004166AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023 .

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No.3310030588 dated 06.09.2019.

The applicant stated that they had issued above license by Jt.DGFT, Panipat. As per new updated Advance Authorisation portal by DGFT now — required Page3 of 36 f 5 \ /

==> picture [2 x 13] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- 1 ----- End of picture text -----

modification‘amendment mandatory before apply E.O. extension/Redemption/Clubbing etc but when they try for modification AA on dated Oct. 2021 at DGFT server show type of Norms as “SION” and they have generated complained at DGFT portal which was not resoived timely. Further email dated 12.04.2022 DGFT Portal has resolved the problem on dated 25.04.2022. Due to this technical problem they cannot apply for E.O. extension timely. Hence they are requesting to allow further EOP extension to fulfill the balance export.

Decision: The Committee examined the case on the basis of submission made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length. The Committee decided to allow EOP extension up to 30.09.2021 against Advance Authorisation No.3310030588 dated 06.09.2019 only for regularization purpose subject to the payment of composition fees. The firm shall approach RA concerned within 30 days of the uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Panipat)

CaseF.No. No.HQRPRCAPPLY00004201AM2304 Mis. Scorodite Stainless India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai . Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: Extension of EOP against 08 Advance Authorization No.{i) 0310742969 dated 26.07.2013, (ii) 0310765128 dated 08.01.2014, (iii) 0310789656 dated 25.09.2014, {iv) 0310751690 dated 30.09.2013, (v) 0310744577 dated 08.08.2013, (vi) 0310740118 dated 03.07.2013, (vii) 0310715215 dated 20.11.2012 and (viii) 0310723863 dated 13.02.2013. The applicant stated that above 8 licenses had availed from RA Mumbai and also availed one year EO Extension by the PRC in its meeting No.04/AM22 held on 28.06.2021. Due to financial problem their company went to NCLT and NCLT approved their application and company slowly recovering in financially and exporting the goods. For pending above said advance licenses they have to invest huge amount on production and also due to Ukraine and Russia War, international Market is not stable on price. Investor are coming and they are investing the money in their company, but still they need another one year time to complete the export. They have completed 60% export obligation within extended E.O. period and still exporting. Hence they are requesting to allow further one year E.O.P. extension against above mentioned advance authorizations.

Decision: The Committee after discussing the matter on the basis of justification submitted by the application, decided to defer the case and ask RA to verify as to how much export made by the applicant after the earlier decision of PRC.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Mumbai)

Case No. 05 Mis. Optimum Drugs Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad.

Page 4 of 36 i D

Meeting[No.33/AM23][held][on][01.03.2023]

. .

F.No. HORPRCAPPLY00247868AM22

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No.0910066488 dated. 19.07.2018.

The applicant stated that they had applied for 1** EOP extension of above ticense for a period of 6 months so that the EOP extension as granted vide DGFT PN No.67 dated 31.03.2020 read with Policy Circular No.35 dated 23.04.2020 wiil follow extending EOP of their licence from 19,.07.2020 to 19.01.2021. They have applied for EOP extension with a hope to use the time period of 100 days for export i.e. from 09.10,.2020 to 19.01.2021 so they can complete the exports. RA rejected their request and advised them to approach PRC. Hence they are requesting to allow 1°" EOP extension of 6 months from 19.01.2020 to 19.07.2020 followed by PN No.67 read with Policy Circular No. 35 dated 23.04.2020 EOP extension from 19.07.2020 to 19.01.2021.

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. 06 Mis. Chintamani Lamination, Mehsana (Gujarat) F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00004211AM23

Meeting No. /AM23 held on 01.03.2023 :

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No.0810143737 dated 24.10.2018.

The applicant stated that they had imported 98 MT CRGO Electricai Steel from COFID Sitahi, Germany in Oct 2018 against subject license and due to Covid-19 pandemic their order has been cancelled and the Commission had also even asked to submit revised ADEDC,best offerUAEbut thefor supplysame tenderof transformerswas cancelledbut theby commissionthem. They thenlater latergot adecidedPO fromto procure transformers locally to meet its urgent need. They are in receipt of other three POs from Ethiopia, Turkey and Oman against which they could supply this CRGO material imported against this license. Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension to fulfill the export obligation against subject license.

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. 07 M/s. BPE Biotree India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore. . F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00004116AM23 Meeting No. 33 /AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Page 5 of 36 kt

==> picture [37 x 23] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- NY ----- End of picture text -----

Subject: Clubbing of Advance Authorization No.0710117086 dated 01.10.2020 & 0710117046 dated 22.09.2020.

The applicant stated that they had one export order against which they had to import various raw materials from different vendors with different mode of transport like sea and air cargo. Therefore, they have applied for two licenses for transport of goods via Air and transport of goods via Sea by providing the same export order details in both the license and procured the goods for manufacturing of final product. While exporting the final product they could not give the consumption details of both licenses together in the S/Bills as they have only one export product consuming raw materials imported through both licenses. Since the consumption details could not be provided in the S/Bills they are unable to apply for the closure of the AA No.0710117086 Hence they are requesting to allow clubbing the above mentioned licenses for closures.

Decision: The Committee after discussing the matter on the basis of justification submitted by the firm, decided to defer the case and ask RA to submit a report after evaluating the PRC application within 21 days.

(Action: Applicant/ RA-Bangalore}

Case No. 08 Mis. Richaco Exports Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon, Haryana. F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00004105AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: Clubbing of 4 Special Advance Authorization No.(i) 0511000717 dated 12.01.2021, {ii} 0511000788 dated 14.01.2021, (iii) 0511002056 dated 01.04.2021 & (iv) 0511002044 dated 01.04.2021.

The applicant stated that they applied for 2 Advance Licenses No.0511000717 dated they12.1.2021 had appliedand 0511000788 for Ladies Blousedated 1148514.01.2021 pcs againstand first 22970license sqmagainst importedexport fabricS.No.(1) at an average of 2.00 sqm. Per garment and export S.No. (2) they had applied for Ladies Dress 6172 pcs against 27774 sqm. Imported fabric at an average of 4.50 sqm. And export S.No.(3) they had applied for Ladies Top 7498 pcs against 12747 sqm. Imported fabric at an average of 1.700 sq. In Second Liense against Export S.No.(1) they had applied for Ladies Dress 6248 pcs against 27491 sqm. Imported fabric at an average of 4.40 sqm. They imported the fabric under licence but in the meantime buyer cancelled theorderorders of exportdue productto spread againstof corona. importedIn orderfabrics.to Therefore theycompensate, buyer appliedgave2 Newthem Licensea new third and fourth license as mentioned above. RA informed them there is no provision of clubbing under Special Advance Authorization. Hence they are requesting to allow clubbing of all the four licenses to fulfill the export obligation.

| | |

A informed them there is no provision of clubbing under Special Advance Authorization. Hence they are requesting to allow clubbing of all the four licenses to fulfill the export obligation.

| | |

Decision: The Committee went through the justification submitted by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and it decided to allow clubbing of 4 Special Advance

Page 6 of 36 ( \ \ 7

==> picture [2 x 37] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- | ----- End of picture text -----

Authorization No.{i) 0511000717 dated 12.01.2021, (ii) 0511000788 dated 14.01.2021, (fii) 0511002056 dated 01.04.2021 & (iv) 0511002044 dated 01.04.2021 subject to all these four authorizations are special advance authorizations for regularization purpose only. All the terms and conditions for clubbing as taid down in Policy/HBP, including accountability of imported fabrics as per relevant SIONs, 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. 09 M/s. MVM Solar Private Limited, Bangalore F.No. HORPRCAPPLY00004182AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: Relaxation on realization from Foreign Currency account for the SEZ supplies made against the Advance Authorization No.0710111072 dated 03.02.2017.

The applicant stated that they had obtained subject license and made exports by supplying to the SEZ units towards fulfillment of E.O. At the time of redemption, RA required to submit proof of payment realization from Foreign currency account (FCA) as per the 4.21(ii) of FTP. All supply purchase orders are accepted to make payment using the FCA account as per Section 26(b) of SEZ act ready with SEZ rule 23 by our suppliers. Their payments have been realized in INR from the suppliers. They are requesting their buyer to produce proof of payment for having made from their FAC account but no response from their side on confirmation. Though purchase order issued to supplier is very clearly indicates to make the payment in FAC account and they are not sure from which account their buyer made the payment to them. They are facing difficulty in providing the documents as required. Hence they are requesting to allow relaxation on realization from FCA for the SEZ supplies made against subject license.

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. 10 M/s. Harman Finochem Limited, Mumbai F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00004129AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: To allow INR realized BRC for redemption of Advance Authorization No.0310821266 dated 28.05.2019.

Page 7 of 36 f }

The applicant stated that they have made the export to the SEZ Unit and have received the realization in INR instead of USD. Due to which they are in receipt of a DL letter from RA Mumbai for INR realization against SEZ exports which is not acceptable as per FTP. They have received the payment from the SEZ Unit through normal banking channels instead of the Vostro mechanism against the Invoices. Inadvertently their buyer transferred the payment through normal banking channels instead of the Vostro account and also made the payment INR instead of USD. Therefore, they are unable to consider these S/Bills towards the export obligations. Hence they are requesting to allow relaxation to consider the INR realized BRC for redemption of subject license.

Case No. 11 Mis. Harman Finochem Limited, Mumbai

F.No. HARPRCAPPLY6G0004138AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: To allow INR realized BRC for redemption of Advance Authorization No.0310816257 dated 10.10.2017.

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 12 Mis. Harman Finochem Limited, Mumbai F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00004137AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Page 8 of 36 ( if / A Ne

==> picture [2 x 13] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- | ----- End of picture text -----

Subject: To allow INR realized BRC for redemption of Advance Authorization No.0310818330 dated 09.01.2018.

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. 13 M/s. Harman Finochem Limited, Mumbai F.No. HQRPRCAPPLYO0004136AM23 , Meeting No. /AM23 heid on 01.03.2023

Subject: To allow INR realized BRC for redemption of Advance Authorization No.0310817418 dated 29.11.2017.

The applicant stated that they have made the export to the SEZ Unit and have received the realization in INR instead of USD. Due to which they are in receipt of a DL fetter from RA Mumbai for INR realization against SEZ exports which is not acceptable as per FTP. They have received the payment from the SEZ Unit through normal banking channels instead of the Vostro mechanism against the Invoices. Inadvertently their buyer transferred the payment through normal banking channels instead of the Vostro account and also made the payment INR instead of USD. Therefore, they are unable to consider these S/Bills towards the export obligations. Hence they are requesting to allow relaxation to consider the INR realized BRC for redemption of subject license.

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 14 M/s. Harman Finochem Limited, Mumbai F.No. HQRPRCAPPLYG0004135AM23

Page 9 of 36 (*

Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: To allow INR realized BRC for redemption of Advance Authorization No.0310812591 dated 19.04.2017.

The applicant stated that they have made the export to the SEZ Unit and have received the realization in INR instead of USD. Due to which they are in receipt of a DL letter from RA Mumbai for INR realization against SEZ exports which is not acceptable as per FTP. They have received the payment from the SEZ Unit through normal banking channels instead of the Vostro mechanism against the Invoices. Inadvertently their — buyer transferred the payment through normal banking channels instead of the Vostro account and also made the payment INR instead of USD. Therefore, they are unable to consider these S/Bills towards the export obligations. Hence they are requesting to allow relaxation to consider the INR realized BRC for redemption of subject license.

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 15 Mis. Priyanka (india) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi F.No. HARPRCAPPLYOO0002769AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: To allow enhancement of import of 20993.00 kg of import item and proportionate export obligation against Advance Authorisation No.0510409899 dated 11.03.2019 for regularization purpose.

The applicant stated that they are manufacturer exporter of Stainless-Steel Utensils and other household articles and have imported the goods and completed the EO within the time but they have imported 20993 Kgs. Of excess material as allowed under the subject license due to wrong debiting at customs in the system at the time of import. However, they have made additional excess exports within validity to compensate the excess imports of 20993 Kgs. They applied for redemption to RA and they are not accepting their request and informed them that enhancement in the quantity of imports and exports cannot be allowed under para 4.39 of HBP as the validity of license has been expired. They required to pay duty and interest on the excess imports as compared to allowed in license. Hence they are requesting to allow enhancement of import and export quantity for regularization purpose.

Decision:The Committee after discussing the matter on the basis of justification submitted by the applicant, it decided to refer the case to EGTF - Division for examination and obtaining information from DG Systems as to how excess export got allowed and thereafter the same may be brought back before PRC.

Page 10 of 36 \a _

(Action: Applicant/ EGTF- division}

Case No. 16 Mis. Integrated F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00173387AM22 Meeting No.33/AM23 heid on 01.03.2023

Mis. Integrated Electric Co Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

Subject: Condonation of typo mismatch Export description on shipping bills against 3 Advance Authorization No.({i) 0710089388 dated 29.06.2012, (ii) 0710097662 dated 22.08.2013 & (iii) 0710103002 dated 19.03.2014 & also request to regularization for purposes of clubbing of their two Advance Authorization. The applicant stated that they applied AA under Norms and issued to import Copper Wire, Trivolthem NMN & Moulded Commutator and export of DC Motor of varies type model. They have imported the raw material and fulfilled EO and applied for EODC but RA issued DL regarding for repayment of duty for imported raw materials due to description mismatch on S/Bills against subject licenses. At the time of export on the 4 S/Bills they had mentioned description as per export order instead of “DC Motors 400 KW 750V frame ILD 450 | Machine No.20130171E-01 containing 1530 Kgs. Copper Wire Bard, 33 Kgs. Of Thrivoltherm should account in end product” Also they had mentioned consumption details on all the S/Bills of all export products. They have exported the products using the imported raw materials as per Buyer's Purchase order and the buyer had accepted the DC Motors and made payment in Foreign Currency which is a conclusive proof of having made the specified imported raw material made use in making of the DC Motors.

order and the buyer had accepted the DC Motors and made payment in Foreign Currency which is a conclusive proof of having made the specified imported raw material made use in making of the DC Motors. Hence they are requesting to condonation of typo mismatch export description on S/Bills against subject licenses to fulfillment of E.O.

Decision: The Committee went through the statements made by the firm and decided to withdraw the maiter as it is not a PRC issue. RA may re-examine in terms of details given in SBs.

{Action: Applicant/RA-Bangalore)

Case No. 17 M/s. Agrow Allied Ventures Private Limited, Gurgaon F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00004200AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: Waiver of Export Obligation in 2 Advance Authorization No.0510405163

dated 29.12.2017 & 0510405597 dated 09.02.2018.

==> picture [2 x 5] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- | ----- End of picture text -----

The applicant stated that they are manufacturer and exporter of Agro-Chemicals and exporting these products since 2017. Initially they they are exporting on payment of customs duty on inputs being used in the export product as there was little export but thereafter they started availing facility of Advance License to safe guard the capital of the organization on imported inputs use in the export product. They had applied for Advance License and being a new comer, they are not aware of procedure or familiar ~~ Page 11 of 36 _i;

with exim policy therefore they applied for two different AA for each import items specified in SION i.e. Phenol and Mono Chloro Acetic Acid which led to double liability of exports as both the import items were being used to fulfill EO of one of the above AA. They noticed the problem and approach RA for amendment by incorporating other import items i.e. Phenol in AA No. 0510405163 dated 29.12.2017 and Mono Chloro Acetic Acid in another license that would enable them to fulfill the E.O. of both the licenses. RA has been rejected their request hence it was not possible to full double FO against import made in both authorizations as inputs imported under both authorization had been used to manufacture of export product that could be exported in any one of the authorizations.

ouble FO against import made in both authorizations as inputs imported under both authorization had been used to manufacture of export product that could be exported in any one of the authorizations. Hence they are requesting to allow waiver of fulfillment of EO in one of the authorizations.

Decision:The Committee after discussing the matter on the basis of justification submitted by the application, decided to defer the case and ask CLA-New Delhi to submit a report in reference to PRC application within 21 days .

(Action: Applicant/ CLA-New Delhi)

Case No. 18 M/s. Styrax Pharma Pvt. Litd., Hyderabad F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00002678AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: To waive the Form-A condition for redemption of 2 Advance Authorization No.0910065895 dated 17.01.2018 & 0910066167 dated 23.04.2018. The applicant stated that they have completed the EO against both the advance licenses under para 4.27 of HBP and have submitted their request for closure of the above said two license in RA Hyderabad but RA had sought form-A which is not required for deemed export under the policy. The Form-A is the document which has to be given by buyer at the time of purchase order against the supplier under Customs Notification No.48 but the buyer had said that it is not a mandatory document to be -given to the firm for deemed exports. Hence they are requesting to waive Form-A condition for redemption of above mentioned 2 advance authorisation.They have submitted a certificate countersigned by Customs Authorities confirming supplies, and copies of TR6. Report of RA is on record.

Decision: The Committee discussed the case on the basis of statement made by the firm. and decided.to accede to the request of the firm to waive the condition of submission of Form-A for redemption of 2 Advance Authorisation No.0910065895 dated 17.01.2018 & 0910066167 dated 23.04.2018. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/fRA-Hyderabad}

Case No. 19 Mis. Vilas Transcore Ltd., Vadodara F.No. 01/60/162/554/AM15/PRC

==> picture [205 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- fr Page 12 of 36 \ ; a ----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [41 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- f oll / ----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [5 x 6] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- y ----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [1 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- | ----- End of picture text -----

Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: To consider EO fulfillment by making intermediate supplies against invalidation letter dated 24.8.2011 which was issued subsequent to issuance of AA No.3410027783 dated 25.8.2010 and (ii) Clarification on rejection by RA with reference to annual Advance Authorization which is issued in bulk once in a year and EO is fulfilled against invalidation letter.

7783 dated 25.8.2010 and (ii) Clarification on rejection by RA with reference to annual Advance Authorization which is issued in bulk once in a year and EO is fulfilled against invalidation letter.

This a defer case of PRC meeting No.10/AM19 (Case No.02) held on 09.08.2018 wherein Committee decided that Policy-4 Division shall examine the case. The applicant stated that they had obtained the subject authorization and made intermediate supplies to ultimate exporter against their invalidation letter dated 24.08.2011. All their supplies are made after invalidation letter dated 24.08.2011. They have submitted EO fulfillment documents to RA. However, rejected citing invalidation letter dated 24.08.2011 is issued subsequent to issue of the subject advance authorization date i.e.25.08.2010. Further stated that RA interpret that an exporter must take separate authorization after receipt of each invalidation letter. Whereas the import policy grants advance authorization and EO can be fulfilled by making direct export, SEZ or Deemed export (against invalidation letter issued prior to or after the date of authorization). Hence, they are requesting to allow redemption of the said advance authorization.

Decision: The Committee on the statements made by the firm along with the comments of PC-4 Division and 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. 20 Mis. Simplex Chemopack Pvt. Ltd., Nagpur F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00001255AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No.5010002330 dated 13.02.2017.

The applicant stated that they have taken license for import of Raw materials and further they have taken TRA in favour of M/s. Reliance Industries Ltd. for the qty. of 1000 MTs and CIF Value $ 12,85,714/- vide TRA No.10/2018 dated 21.05.2018. They are unable to utilize the balance quantity wherein Customs department was unable to re-credit the same in the license due to system fault/error from Customs therefore they were unable to utilize the license for import of balance quantity. Further they have arranged certification of Non-Utilization of TRA from Customs Jamnagar SEZ and same to ICD Nagpur with a request to Re-Credit the balance quantity and value in the license to utilize. But due to the technical issue Customs unable to re-credit the same for import balance quantity. They have fulfilled 100% EO and even received EODC letter from RA. Hence they are requesting to allow re-credit the balance quantity with six month revalidation against subject license.

==> picture [205 x 43] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- ~~ . Page 13 of 36 ane ----- End of picture text -----

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. 21 Mis. Simplex Chemopack Pvt. Ltd., Nagpur F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00004194AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No.5010002756 dated 26.11.2020.

The applicant stated that they were not able to import the assigned quantity of raw materials as the price of the raw material has increased, due to which they have reached the value limit of the license. They are not able to enhance the value of the license as they have invalidated the authorization for domestic procurement from Reliance SEZ and there is no provision for value enhancement in the online portal. For importing the balance quantities they need more than Rs. 4 cr. CIF value limit and there is a provision to amend the value of the license in the FTP for invalidated licenses. Hence they are requesting to allow manual value enhancement of the license upto Rs. 4 cr and allow six months revalidation for completing the imports.

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 against Advance Authorisation No.5010002756 dated 26.11.2020. 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/(RA-Nagpur)

Case No. 22 M/s. Buildmet Fibres Pvt. Ltd., Taluk F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00004102AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No.0711000202 dated 31.12.2020.

The applicant stated that they are Two Star Export House and also authorized economic operator exporting of Flexible intermediate bulk containers to all Europein countries regularly. Due to slowdown in FIBC export, Corona pandemic and various reason they are unable to utilized the license with in validity period. Hence they are requesting to allow six month revalidation up to 30.06.2023 to complete the balance import against subject license.

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.

==> picture [176 x 22] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- Page 140f36—, eoJ ----- End of picture text -----

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 23 Mis. Interplex India F.No. HQRPRCAPPLYO0004103AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Mis. Interplex India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

Subject: Revalidation of 5 Advance Authorization No.{i) 3410045324 dated 29.07.2019, (ii) 3410045370 dated 14.08.2019, (iii) 3410045480 dated 25.09.2019, (iv) 3410046077 dated 19.05.2020 & (v) 3410044168 dated 24.05.2018. The applicant stated that they have fulfilled 100% EO against subject licenses from available raw materials and import was not made because during Covid-19 pandemic against 5 licenses being factory and office staff was not attending. Due to Covid-19 pandemic and lockdown their staff was not able to attend office/factory and were not able to prepare revalidation documents manually. There was no provision to apply online revalidation application during Covid-19 pandemic. They are going to purchase raw material against these licenses under invalidation from local manufacturer, therefore, they require 9 months to complete import under these licenses. Hence they are requesting to allow revalidation against subject licenses. 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. 24 _ Mis. Alliance Polysacks Pvt. Ltd., Rajasthan F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00004123AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No.1310049644 dated 11.08.2020.

The applicant stated that they had issued above license from RA Jaipur and they had made more than 100% EO against this license but not made import due to technical problem on line system. They had issued license of 670 MT for export and made export 676.668 MT They had issued COS of import quantity 730.3 MT but they had taken raw material only 563.300 MT out of this. Reliance had already issued NOC for balance quantity after that they tried to apply on line surrendered of balance quantity and issue fresh COS of balance quantity many time and apply for revalidation. But value shown Zero in the license due to COS was issued full value. They had unable to issue fresh COS or revalidation and had complained many times in the RA but problem was not resolved by the office. Hence they are requesting to allow six months revalidation against subject license.

==> picture [20 x 19] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- (~ ----- End of picture text -----

Page 15 of 36 a

Decision: The Committee examined the statement made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and it decided to defer the case for further examination.

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 25 Mis. Alliance Polysacks Pvt. Ltd., Rajasthan F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00004122AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No.1310049365 dated 23.07.2019.

The applicant stated that they had issued above license from RA Jaipur and they had made more than 100% EO against this license but not made import due to technical problem on line system. They had issued license of 500 MT for export and made export 500.583 MT They had issued COS of import quantity 545 MT but they had taken raw material only 375 MT out of this. Reliance had already issued NOC for balance quantity after that they tried to apply on line surrendered of balance quantity and issue fresh COS of balance quantity many time and apply for revalidation. But value shown Zero in the license due to COS was issued full value. They had unable to issue fresh COS or revalidation and had complained many times in the RA but problem was not resolved by the office. Hence they are requesting to allow six months revalidation against subject license.

Decision: The Committee examined the statement made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and it decided to defer the case for further examination.

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 26 Mis. Nilkamal Limited, Mumbai F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00004139AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No.0310838941 dated 16.10.2020.

The applicant stated that against this license they have completed export during the pandemic and partially utilized the authorization based on predicted realization as an outbreak of Covid-19 pandemic has shaken the entire world adversely and badly impact on global economy. The majority of their exports was to Russia and European countries and hence the payment was stuck due to sanctions specially OFAC which impact on timely realization. Hence they are requesting to allow six month revalidation against subject license to complete the import.

Decision: The Committee examined the statement made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and it decided to defer the case for further examination. (Action: Applicant) r™ Page 16 of 36 \ ‘

Case No. 27 Mis. Nilkamal Limited, Mumbai F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00004134AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No.0310832362 dated 22.10.2019.

Decision: The Committee examined the statement made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and it decided to defer the case for further examination.

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 28 Mis. Global FIBC Pvt. Ltd., MH F.No. HQRPRCAPPLYO0004229AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No.5011000007 dated

09.12.2020.

The applicant stated that they have obtained above license for import of PP Ganules, LDPE and UV Stabilizer for manufacture and export of FIBC, PP Woven Fabrics and they have completed EO against this license. Some of the raw material they have a short import and were unable to complete the imports in the specified time duration because of the supply chain disruptions caused all over the world due to the lock downs imposed because of Covid-19 pandemic. Since the supply chains were disrupted they have faced immense complications in importing the raw materials and their suppliers were not in a position to make the required supply. Hence they are requesting to allow six month revalidation against subject license.

Decision: The Committee examined the statement made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and it decided to defer the case for further examination.

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 29 Mis. Jubilant Ingrevia Limited, Noida F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00004168AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

==> picture [24 x 15] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- van ----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [181 x 66] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- Page 17of36 =. ee aN ----- End of picture text -----

Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No.0511000634 dated 07.01.2021.

The application stated that they have applied and got license against branch address in name of Jubilant Lifesciences Lid. (Now Jubilant Pharmova Limited). Later on due to demerger of company the AA was got transferred to Jubilant Ingrevia Ltd. in the light of TN 14 dated 4.8.2021 (to deal with merger or demerger case in the light of NCLT, High Court Order). While submitting the application for transfer of AA they inadvertently changed the branch code from “00” to “01” as their raw materials were intended to be imported there. Accordingly, the said license has been transferred from Jubilant Pharmova Ltd., to Jubilant Ingreview Ltd. and jurisdictional RA also changed from RA, New Delhi to RA, Kanpur. Subsequentiy, they made some partial imports under the license during the initial validity for imports. This license was valid up to 07.01.2023 after jurisdictional disagreement between two Regional Authorities. They do not have any import shipment of item SI.No.1 (Denatured Ethyl Alcohol) in coming months and the subject license has been expired for import. Hence they are requesting to allow six month revalidation to import the balance raw maierials.

I.No.1 (Denatured Ethyl Alcohol) in coming months and the subject license has been expired for import. Hence they are requesting to allow six month revalidation to import the balance raw maierials.

Decision:The Committee examined the case in detail and in view of justification provided by the firm and it decided to allow revalidation for a period of 6 months from the date of endorsement against Advance Authorisation No.0511000634 dated 07.01.2021. This is last and finat 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. 30 Mis. Dalas Biotech Limited, Rajasthan F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY0O0004180AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: Revalidation of 2 Advance Authorization No.0510413810 dated 06.03.2020 and 0510413803 dated 06.03.2020.

The applicant stated that they have regularly exports Amoxicillin and company imports inputs/raw material such as GAPA, Para Hydoxy Phenyl Glycine base, Methanol etc. They avails exemption of Customs duties on import of inputs against above license. Since Amoxicillin is sold in Indian market as well, therefore inventory of duty paid raw materials | maintained by their company. They has done export sale and domestic sale in crores for last 3 years period for the item Amoxicillin. They has fulfilled the complete EO to the extent of 100% however, the import of 6APA one of the inputs was not completed as the export was made from duty paid raw material in stock. Due to Covid19 issues start hampering the international supply chain after the authorization was issued, the rising freight prices and unavailability of containers/vessels to India not only hit the supply chain hard but were aiso a drain on financial resources. Hence they are requesting to allow six months revalidation against subject licenses.

Decision: The Committee examined the statement made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and it decided to defer the case for further examination. im Page 18 of 36 }Yop.|

==> picture [2 x 12] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- ! ----- End of picture text -----

. | | |

Case No. 31 Mis. Metalloys Recycling Limited, Mumbai F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00004183AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No.(i) 0310833431 dated 16.12.2019, (ii) 0310833435 dated 16.12.2019 and (iii) 0310833905 dated 06.01.2020.

The applicant stated that presently they are engaged in the import of nonferrous metal scraps, processing, blending and the processed scraps are exported or domestically supplied to OEMs as their ready to use intermediate raw materials. Due to pandemic and lockdown restrictions of Govt. their office was closed for most of the time and Govt. Deptt. were also working with skeleton staff as a result they were unable to file EODC application and revalidation or any amendment with DGFT. Hence they are requesting to allow One year revalidation to import of balance raw materials.

Decision: The Committee examined the statement made by the applicant and discussed the maiter at length and it decided to defer the case for further examination.

{Action: Applicant)

;

Case No. 32. Mis. Prashi Pharma Pvt. Ltd., Vidyavihar, MH F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00004198AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: To resolve system error and EOP extension against Advance Authorization No.0310835589 dated 11.04.2020.

The applicant stated that above advance license was issued on 11.04.2020 and most of the import was already imported/invalidated before new online DGFT system. While submission of their request for amendment of UOM details from Packages to Numbers they did not change any of the quantity and value during such request. Subsequently, RA has issued an amendment sheet No.5 on dated 7.1.2021 while receipt of amendment sheet all import items are split as per individual exports products, also import Sr.No.7 showing 4000 Kgs. Of Paracetamol BP/EP/USP. Whereas import allowed as per authorization but there is an error in the said amendment sheet cannot be reflected on Custom server and therefore they are unable to export the shipment under the said license. They are regular follow up the matter RA but issue is still not resolved and due to which they are unable to export further under the said license. Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension against subject license and resolve the system error.

==> picture [16 x 8] intentionally omitted <==

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

Page 19 of 36 MO

se and resolve the system error.

==> picture [16 x 8] intentionally omitted <==

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

Page 19 of 36 MO

Decision: The Committee examined the case on the basis of submission made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and it decided to allow EOP extension of Advance Authorization No.0310835589 dated 11.04.2020 for a further period of 6 months from the date of endorsement subject to payment of composition fees. This is last and final EOP extension. The firm shall approach RA concerned within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Mumbai)}

Case No. 33 M/s. Wellspring Industries Pvt. Ltd., Nagpur F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00004202AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: Revalidation of 2 Advance Authorization No.5010002533 dated

04.07.2019 & 5010002407 dated 08.03.2018.

The applicant stated that they had obtained subject AA from RA Nagpur office and they have made some imports/exports under this license but due to slow down in international market, Covid-19 pandemic and some financial problems, they were unable to fulfill the export obligation during stipulated period. Hence they are requesting to allow revalidation of the above mentioned license. Decision:The Committee after discussing the matter on the basis of justification submitted by the application, decided to defer the case and ask the firm to submit proper details in the matter including imports and exports made, for taking the decision. .

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 34 Nis. Transasia Bio-Bedicals Ltd., Mumbai F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00004193AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: Revalidation of 4 MEIS Scrip No.(i) 2719016172 dated 13.12.2021, (ii) 2719016173 dated 13.12.2021, (iii) 2719016202 dated 13.12.2021, & (iv) 2719016104 dated 06.12.2021.

The applicant stated that their Unit located in SEEPZ SEZ and are engaged in manufacturing of In-Vitro diagnostics products in clinical Chemistry, Hematology, diabetes Management and Urinalysis having substantial export turnover of $ 36 Mn and they are contributing in a major way to the FOREX of this country. During the course of their business above referred MEIS License worth Rs. 44,78,562/- was issued to them having validity of one year and due to Covid-19 and employee leaving the organization abruptly, there was no proper handover by the old employee to the new joiner and therefore the MEIS utilization remained unattended. Hence they are requesting to allow revalidation of the above mentioned MEIS Scrip.

==> picture [176 x 39] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- Page 20 of 36 ( ! , Le ----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [2 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- | ----- End of picture text -----

! , Le ----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [2 x 26] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- | ----- End of picture text -----

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 35 Mis. Sumitomo Chemical india Limited, Mumbai F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00004128AM23

Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: Revalidation of MEIS Scrip No.0319327890 dated 01.10.2022.

The applicant stated that their MEIS Authorization issued by RA Mumbai which is valid till 30.09.2022 and the said authorization issued as per notification No.26/2015-2020 date 16.09.2021 with 12 month validity. Earlier the same scrips were valid for 18 months. The concerned manager who was dealing import clearances and with the _utilization of such export related benefits dies suddenly afflicted by Covid-19, due to which they could not access the data handled by him. Only when they got access to his computer and analyzed the information the realized that these scrips had remained unutilized. Due to compounding of both the reasons, these Duty Credit Scrips remained unutilized. Hence they are requesting fo allow revalidation of above mentioned MEIS Scrips.

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 36 M/s. Sumitomo Chemical India Limited, Mumbai F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00004127AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 heid on 01.03.2023

Subject: Revalidation of MEIS Scrip No.0319327830 dated 01.10.2021.

The applicant stated that their MEIS Authorisation issued by RA Mumbai which is valid till 30.09.2022 and the said authorization issued as per notification No.26/2015-2020 date 16.09.2021 with 12 month validity. Earlier the same scrips were valid for 18 months. The concerned manager who was dealing import clearances and with the utilization of such export related benefits dies suddenly afflicted by Covid-19, due to which they could not access the data handled by him. Only when they got access to his computer and analyzed the information the realized that these scrips had remained unutilized. Due to compounding of both the reasons, these Duty Credit Scrips remained

om”, Page 21 of 36 \ .

FyifYX

unutilized. Hence they are requesting to allow revalidation of above mentioned MEIS Scrips.

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. 37 M/s. Sumitomo Chemical India Limited, Mumbai F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY0O0004126AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: Revalidation of MEIS Scrip No.0319327884 dated 01.10.2021.

The applicant stated that their MEIS Authorization issued by RA Mumbai which is valid till 30.09.2022 and the said authorization issued as per notification No.26/2015-2020 date 16.09.2021 with 12 month validity. Earlier the same scrips were valid for 18 months. The concerned manager who was dealing import clearances and with the utilization of such export related benefits dies suddenly afflicted by Covid-19, due to which they could not access the data handled by him. Only when they got access to his computer and analyzed the information the realized that these scrips had remained unutilized. Due to compounding of both the reasons, these Duty Credit Scrips remained unutilized. Hence they are requesting to allow revalidation of above mentioned MEIS Scrips.

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 38 Mis. Sumitomo Chemical India Limited, Mumbai

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00004125AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 heid on 01.03.2023

Subject: Revalidation.ofMEIS Scrip No.0319327865 dated 01.10.2021.

The applicant stated that their MEIS Authorization issued by RA Mumbai which is valid til 30.09.2022 and the said authorization issued as per notification No.26/2015-2020 date 16.09.2021 with 12 month validity. Earlier the same scrips were valid for 18 months. The concerned manager who was dealing import clearances and with the utilization of such export related benefits dies suddenly afflicted by Covid-19, due to which they could not access the data handled by him. Only when they got access to his

. a ( \ ‘tf ra

Page 22 of 36

—

==> picture [39 x 16] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- oAfp~ ----- End of picture text -----

computer and analyzed the information the realized that these scrips had remained unutilized. Due to compounding of both the reasons, these Duty Credit Scrips remained unutilized. Hence they are requesting to allow revalidation of above mentioned MEIS Scrips.

Case No. 39 Mis. Sumitomo Chemical India Limited, Mumbai F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00004124AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: Revalidation of MEIS Scrip No.0319327787 dated 01.10.2021.

The applicant stated that their MEIS Authorization issued by RA Mumbai which is valid till 30.09.2022 and the said authorization issued as per notification No.26/2015-2020 date 16.09.2021 with 12 month validity. Earlier the same scrips were valid for 18 months. The concerned manager who was dealing import clearances and with the utilization of such export related benefits dies suddenly afflicted by Covid-19, due to which they could not access the data handled by him. Only when they got access to his computer and analyzed the information the realized that these scrips had remained unutilized. Due to compounding of both the reasons, these Duty Credit Scrips remained unutilized. Hence they are requesting to allow revalidation of above mentioned MEIS Scrips.

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 40 Mis. Sumitomo Chemical India Limited, Mumbai F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00004131AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: Revalidation of MEIS Scrip No.0319327819 dated 01.10.2021.

Page 23 of 36 {”

==> picture [88 x 39] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- of LSee as ----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [1 x 34] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- i ----- End of picture text -----

utilization of such export related benefits dies suddenly afflicted by Covid-19, due to which they could not access the data handled by him. Only when they got access to his computer and analyzed the information the realized that these scrips had remained _ unutilized. Due to compounding of both the reasons, these Duty Credit Scrips remained unutilized. Hence they are requesting to allow revalidation of above mentioned MEIS Scrips.

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 41 M/s. Sun Pharma Advanced Research Company Limited, Baroda

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLYOO0004130AM23 — Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: Revalidation of SEIS Scrip No.0310825593 dated 11.12.2018.

The applicant stated that they were granted extension against above SFIS duty scrip up to 03.06.2022 vide PRC Meeting No.07/AM22 and unfortunately they have not been able to utilize the duty scrip during the above extended period since there was a significant delay in recruiting the patients for clinical trials. This led to cost overruns for their various projects on account of Covid-19 pandemic situation and badly impacted the financial conditions of the company. Recently they has raised the fresh equity and expect to receive issue proceeds during this year and have allocated a CPEX budget for import of various Capital Goods/Equipment and plan to procure in current year 2023 wherein they would be able to utilize the DCS. Hence they are requesting to allow one year further revalidation against subject SEIS Scrip.

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 42 M/s. Catapharma Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., MH F.No. HQRPRCAPPLYO0004167AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: Revalidation of MEIS Scrip No.3119050067 dated 28.08.2020.

Page 24 of 36 | LLZ

;

/ \

The applicant stated that they had applied online for duty credit scrip license and RA Pune office had issued scrip with validity up to 27.08.2022. The system generated licenses issued by RA was supposed to be send to their CHA for registering the same at Nhava Sheva (INNSAI)} port location for utilizing against their imports. Due to covid19 they have not availed benefit of any relaxation in respect of MEIS License. Inadvertently their employee failed to send the license to CHA for registering the same with customs. After 4 months from the expiry of license, they checked their financial accounts that all the licenses have been utilized except the above license and immediately enquired with CHA about the same. Hence they are requesting to allow six month revalidation of the above mentioned MEIS Scrip. 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.

Case No, 43 M/s. Marelli Motherson Automotive Lighting India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00004190AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: Revalidation of MEIS Scrip No.0319322504 dated 28.09.2027.

The applicant stated that they have purchased a duty credit scrip from various suppliers but these are not fully utilized. Due to Covid19 pandemic situation all staff member were working from home and the main person who was handling the scrips record was on medical emergency leave and death of his father. When he has joined the office and tracked the license status, which already been expired. Hence they are requesting to allow six month revalidation of above mentioned scrip.

Case No. 44 M/s. Marelli Motherson Automotive Lighting India Pvt. Ltd.,

Mumbai

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00004189AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: Revalidation of MES Scrip No.1519017648 dated 29.09.2021.

Page 825 of 36 - NZ\

Case No. 45 Ni/s. Mareili Motherson Automotive Lighting India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00004187AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: Revalidation of MEIS Scrip No.0319322561 dated 28.09.2021.

The applicant stated that they have purchased a duty credit scrip from various suppliers but these are not fully utilized. Due to Covid19 pandemic situation ail staff member were working from home and the main person who was handling the scrips record was on medical emergency leave and death of his father. When he has joined the office and tracked the license status, which already been expired. Hence they are requesting to allow six month revalidation of above mentioned scrip.

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. 46 M/s. Marelli Motherson Automotive Lighting India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00004185AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: Revalidation of MEIS Scrip No.0711002213 dated 25.10.2021.

Page 26 of 36 (

==> picture [60 x 22] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- , o—x! 4 ----- End of picture text -----

tracked the license status, which already been expired. Hence they are requesting to allow six month revalidation of above mentioned scrip.

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

----- Start of picture text ----- | ----- End of picture text -----

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 47 Mis. Marelli Motherson Automotive Lighting India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai F.No. HQARPRCAPPLY00004184AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: Revalidation of MEIS Scrip No.1319037972 dated 01.10.2021.

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 48 M/s. Marelli Motherson Automotive Lighting India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00004188AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: Revalidation of MEIS Scrip No.0319322542 dated 28.09.2021.

Page 27 of 36 ~~

==> picture [56 x 11] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- \ At “a ----- End of picture text -----

| aaa

Case No. 49 M/s. Marelli Motherson Automotive Lighting India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLYO0004186AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: Revalidation of MEIS Scrip No.0319324385 dated 28.09.2021.

—

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 50 M/s. Sudrania Software LLP, Jaipur F.No. HQRPRCAPPLYOC004071AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: Revalidation of SEIS Scrip No.1311000733 dated 08.11.2021.

The applicant stated that they had issued duty credit scrip for Sudrania Software LLP on 8.11.2021 with license No.1311000733 and the validity of authorization was till 07.11.2022. They had put in a request on 04.04.20222 to RA Jaipur for Port change from INPJN6 TO INNSA1. As per OM received on 27" May, 2022, DGFT HQ served them with blocking/suspension of the SEIS scrip notice. Referring to the notice dated 26" July, 2022, they were instructed by RA Jaipur not to utilize the respective SEIS Scrip and to submit relevant documents for detailed examination. After several representations, requisite documents were accepted and submitted to RA Jaipur on 6" October, 2022 and they received the required approval on 28" October, 2022. In the meantime their scrip has been expired on 7™November, 2022. Hence they are requesting to allow revalidation of above subject Scrip.

Page 28 of 36 fn

;

Decision:The Committee examined the case in detail and in view of justification provided by the firm and it decided to allow revalidation for a period of 6 months from the date of endorsement against SEIS Scrip No.1311000733 dated 08.11.2021. 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-Jaipur)

Case No. 51 ~ Mis. Sonal Traders, Gujarat F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00002094AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: To allow MEIS benefit against 26 shipping bills.

The applicant stated that they have exported goods to Bangladesh in the year 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20 through hilly land custom station and Mahadipur land custom station. They had not realized their payment on time but their Bankers not able to issue the BRC in time and they issued it in the month of March, 2022. For this reason they could not able to make their MEIS Claim. They have furnished details of 26 S/Bills against which they requested for MEIS. Hence they are requesting to allow MEIS benefit against 26 Shipping Bills for the above mentioned period.

Decision: The Committee having examined the case on the basis of the submission made by the firm and discussed the matter at length. The Committee observed that due to delay in uploading the BRC 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 uploaded by the bank after 01.01.2022. It also decided that no cut would be imposed on the entitlement. The firm ‘shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

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

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

(Action:Applicant/RA-Concerned/PC-3 division for necessary updation)

Case No. 52 M/s. Shree Mahalaxmi Psyllium Pvt. Ltd., Sidhpur F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00001462AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: To allow MEIS benefit against 9 Shipping Bill No.{i) 699943 dated 11.06.2019, (ii) 699499 dated 25.06.2019, (iii) 699938 dated 08.05.2019, (iv) 699075 dated 12.05.2019, (v) 699145 dated 29.09.2018, (vi) 699024 dated 13.06.2019, (vii) 699983 dated 06.08.2019, (viii) 699031 dated 08.12.2018 and (ix) 699097 dated 15.06.2019.

The applicant stated that they have exported goods to Bangladesh in the year 2018-19 and 2019-20 through Mahadipur land custom station (INMHDB). They had not realized their payment on time but their Bankers not able to issue the BRC in time and they issued it in the month of 25.02.2022. For this reason they could not able to make their

. |

Page 29 of 36 nN ,f\ ‘}

MEIS Claim. They have furnished details of 09 S/Bilis against which they requested for MEIS. Hence they are requesting to allow MEIS benefit against 09 Shipping Bills for the above mentioned period.

EIS Claim. They have furnished details of 09 S/Bilis against which they requested for MEIS. Hence they are requesting to allow MEIS benefit against 09 Shipping Bills for the above mentioned period.

Decision: The Committee went through the submission made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length. The Committee observed that due to delay in uploading the BRC 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 uploaded by the bank after 01.01.2022. It also decided that no cut would be imposed on the entittement. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: ApplicantfRA-Concerned/PC-3 division for necessary updation)

Case No. 53 Mis. Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Anmedabad F.No. HORPRCAPPLY00357042AM22 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: To allow MEIS benefit against 13 shipping bills.

This is defer case of PRC Meeting No.03/AM23 (Case No.49) held on 22.04.2022 and 05.05.2022 wherein Committee decided to defer the case to seek a detailed report from DC, Dahej SEZ before taking the final decision in the matter. The applicant stated that consideration of their export shipping bills for issue of duty credit scrips under MEIS scheme under chapter-3 of FTP 2015-20 have wrong LEO date 09.09.2020. They would like to inform that certain shipping bills for the year 2020-21 were updated with incorrect LEO date by Dahej customs. Due to this reason they were not in a position to claim MEIS benefit online. They therefore, submitted manual! appiications for the same in KSEZ office 31.12.2021. Since they have already claimed the MEIS for the period 01.09.2020 for Rs. 2 Cr. Hence they are requesting to allow the MEIS benefits against 13 Shipping bills No.(1) 4003559 dated 19.03.2020, (2) 4004734 dated 02.05.2020, (3) 4004733 dated 02.05.2020, (4) 4005319 dated 18.05.2020, (5) 4005051 dated 11.05.2020, (6) 4006969 dated 17.06.2020, (7) 4007801 dated 30.06.2020, (8) 4007802 dated 30.06.2020, (9) 4007800 dated 30.06.2020, (10) 4004732 dated 02.05.2020, (11) 4008524 dated 16.07.2020, (12) 4008524 dated 16.07.2020 and (13) 4008524 dated 16.07.2020.

0.06.2020, (8) 4007802 dated 30.06.2020, (9) 4007800 dated 30.06.2020, (10) 4004732 dated 02.05.2020, (11) 4008524 dated 16.07.2020, (12) 4008524 dated 16.07.2020 and (13) 4008524 dated 16.07.2020.

Decision: The Committee on the justification submitted by the applicant along with report received from Dahej SEZ and discussed the matter at length. The Committee examined the case on the basis of justification furnished by the firm. The matter was discussed at length and the Committee observed that due to technical error, the firm has faced the problem which was beyond their control and accordingly decided to accede to the request of the firm for grant of MEIS benefit against 13 shipping bills without any late cut. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

| |

==> picture [127 x 24] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- Page 30 of 36 (~: ----- End of picture text -----

(Action:Applicant/RA-Concerned/PC-3 division for necessary updation)

—

Case No. 54 M/s. Fiat India Automobiles Pvt. Ltd., Shirur F.No. HQRPRCAPPLYOO004100AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: To allow MEIS benefit against Shipping Bill No.2730040 dated 31.08.2015.

The applicant stated that they are unable to apply MEIS against Shipping Bill No.2730040 dated 31.08.2015 due to technical error, though they are eligible for the MEIS incentive for this product but DGFT system is showing error as “ ITCHS Code/Country of export is not eligible for MEIS Benefit’ . Due to this they are unable to apply the MEIS in stipulated period. Hence they are requesting to allow MEIS benefit against subject Shipping Bills.

Decision: The Committee went through the submission made by the firm and discussed the matter at length and decided to refer the issue to PC-3 Division for its examination and resolution.

’ {Action: Applicant/PC-3 division)

Case No. 55 M/s. Maneesh Pharmaceuticals Limited, MH F.No. HQRPRCAPPLYOO0004118AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: Re-Submission of MEIS application for the shipping bills covered against Reactivation letters issued by RLA.

The applicant stated that they are enclosing reactivation Jetters for MEIS Shipping Bills issued by RLA, Mumbai which were initially submitted online before the last date of submission of application i.e. 28.02.2022 as per Notification No.53 dated 01.02.2022 and 58 dated 07.03.2022. As stated in the reactivation letter, S/Bills for which shipments made from EOU Unit were mixed up with DTA S/Bills while submitting MEIS application to RA. RA issued MEIS authorizations for DTA S/Bills and issued Reactivation letter for EOU S/Bills after disallowing the same from the application and in-order to enable them to apply MEIS applications with the respective regional authority. Hence they are requesting to allow permission to re-apply for MEIS Authorizations for the S/Bills covered under these reactivation letters in terms of Trade Notice No.36 dated 09.10.2019 issued by DGFT.

Decision: The Committee went through the submission made by the firm and discussed the matter at length and decided to refer the issue to PC-3 Division for its examination and resolution.

(Action: Applicant/PC-3 division}

==> picture [121 x 21] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- Page 31 of 36 va ----- End of picture text -----

Case No. 56 Mis. Druck Media Pvt. Ltd., Delhi F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00004121AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

Subject: To allow MEIS benefit against 77 shipping bills.

The applicant stated that they are manufacturer cum exporter and an export for individual communication solutions and it offers the production of high quality periodicals, magazines or educational resources. They had received contract from Ministry of Education, Ethiopia as funded by the World Bank, for Printing and Distribution of Grade 1-2 Grade Textbooks and Teachers Guide as a second language and received L/C for this tender. They have started the shipments and made appropriate arrangements to supply the books within contractual period. In the African countries the distribution of printed books to all over school at multiple locations are very challenging and as per payment clause, the payment to be received after 100% completion of text books distribution over six hundred schools. Due to this reasons they unable to file MEIS claim within stipulated time period for export made during 2016-17 because of non-fulfillment of EO against Advance Authorization which were regularized later. Their company name was put under DEL which was withdrawn on 03.06.2020 and there was complete lock down in the country due to Covid-19 pandemic. Hence they are requesting to allow MEIS benefit against 77 S/Bills.

was put under DEL which was withdrawn on 03.06.2020 and there was complete lock down in the country due to Covid-19 pandemic. Hence they are requesting to allow MEIS benefit against 77 S/Bills.

|SLNo._—([S/ill<br>ee <br>B<br>«8104027<br>5<br>Ss=«iB178082<br>7<br>SSC«*i311927<br>Q@s=«*diB517499|date<br>ISLNo.[S/bill<br> a TB<br>eee <br>(06.06.2016<br>fog.06.2016 6<br>(8201878<br>16.06.2016 IB<br>f8428658<br>27.06.2016 108540991|date<br>ISLNo.[S/bill<br> a TB<br>eee <br>(06.06.2016<br>fog.06.2016 6<br>(8201878<br>16.06.2016 IB<br>f8428658<br>27.06.2016 108540991|ate<br> bees<br>10.06.2016<br>22.06.2016 _|<br>(28.06.2016_||
|---|---|---|---|
|po<br>SS=Ci629933<br>Bise92gse4|23.08.2016 <br>b0.12.2016|Bo<br>fo705342_——B7.08.2016|<br> B2<br>2990693<br>212.2016 |||
|bo<br>«238914|401.2017|fo<br>8255220|04.01.2017|

Page 32 of 36 ~,

|43<br>277823<br>05.01.2017<br>(44<br>3302264<br>06.01.2017||
|---|---|
|45<br>8341447<br>(09.01.2017 46<br>3335413<br>09.01.2017 |<br>473324335<br>07.01.2017, KB<br>8354274<br>09.01.2017 |<br>49354178<br>fo9.01.2017_ 60<br>f8379653__—f10.01.2017 |<br>513404071<br>11.01.2017, 23431261<br>12.01.2017||
|BS<br>478191<br>[16.01.2017 66<br>3489831<br>(16.01.2017||
|po<br>«8565855<br>19.01.2017 feo<br>8590076<br>(20.01.2017_||
||||
|65<br>8747136<br>(28.01.2017 6<br>8777660<br>80.01.2017<br>67<br>«8799758<br>B1.01.2017_ 68<br>(8901293<br>(04.02.2017_<br>69<br>8992413<br>f9.02.2017_[70899241**7**<br>09.02.201 |||
|77518643<br>f3.03.2017,|||

1.2017 6 8777660 80.01.2017 67 «8799758 B1.01.2017_ 68 (8901293 (04.02.2017_ 69 8992413 f9.02.2017_[708992417 09.02.201 ||| |77518643 f3.03.2017,|||




. 

Decision: The committee examined the statements made by the firm and discussed the maiter at length and noted that there is merit in the case. Accordingiy, it decided to allow the benefit of MEIS to the firm against the above mentioned 77 Shipping Bills with 10% late cut. The firm shail approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

## {Action:Applicant/RA-Concerned/PC-3 division for necessary updation) 

Case No. 57 M/s. Saraswati International, Mumbai F.No. HQRPRCAPPLYOOCO0900AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023 

.

## Subject: To allow MEIS benefit against 34 Shipping Bills during the year 2016-17 

& 2017-18. ; 

. 

The applicant stated that they have made exports during the years 2016-17 and 201718 out of which they were not able to claim MEIS against 34 Shipping Bills and 95% of their payments have been realized within 3 years from the date of shipment. Only in few cases the payments were delayed on account of some quality and quantity related issued between the buyer and seller. The Bank BRCs against all these shipment have ‘been received after the expiry of 3 years as a result they were unable to file claim for MEIS in time. Hence they are requesting to allow MEIS claim against their shipment made during the above mentioned period. 

. 

**==> picture [161 x 30] intentionally omitted <==**

**----- Start of picture text -----**<br>
Page 33 of 36 (—~ |<br>**----- End of picture text -----**<br>


. 

Shipping bilis for (2016-17) -— (1) 6992447 dated 11.04.2016, (2) 7969057 dated 30.05.2016, (3) 2382216 dated 23.11.2016, (4) 2514985 dated 29.11.2016, (5) 2599983 dated 02.12.2016, (6) 2600010 dated 01.12.2016, (7) 2600192 dated 02.12.2016, (8) 2808435 dated 14.12.2016, (9) 2817233 dated 14.12.2016, (10) 2817463 dated 14.12.2016, (11) 2976835 dated 22.12.2016 and (12) 2977161 dated 22.12.2016.

01.12.2016, (7) 2600192 dated 02.12.2016, (8) 2808435 dated 14.12.2016, (9) 2817233 dated 14.12.2016, (10) 2817463 dated 14.12.2016, (11) 2976835 dated 22.12.2016 and (12) 2977161 dated 22.12.2016. 

Shipping bills for (2017-18) — (1) 5162869 dated 01.04.2017, (2) 5369248 dated 12.04.2017, (3) 5502614 dated 18.04.2017, (4) 5545136 dated 20.04.2017, (5) 5545089 dated 20.04.2017, (6) 5848220 dated 04.05.2017, (7) 5922017 dated 08.05.2017, (8) 5958455 dated 09.05.2017, (9) 6105368 dated 16.05.2017, (10) 6106351 dated 16.05.2017, (11) 6401360 dated 30.05.2017, (12) 7200034 dated 07.07.2017, (13) 7200306 dated 14.07.2017, (14) 7342627 dated 14.07.2017, (15) 75105311 dated 21.07.2017, (16) 7790662 dated 03.08.2017, (17) 7804087 dated 03.08.2017, (18) 7807717 dated 03.08.2017, (19) 7916658 dated 09.08.2017, (20) 7997505 dated 14.08.2017, (21) 8005812 dated 14.08.2017 and (22) 8035339 dated 16.08.2017. 

. 

. 

Decision: The Committee went through the statement made by the applicant and discussed the matter at lengih. The Committee observed that due to delay in uploading of 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 3 years from the shipment and e BRCs have been uploaded after 3 years of shipment. It also decided that no cut would be imposed on the entitlement. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting. . 

~

## {Action: Applicant/RA-Concerned/PC-3 division for necessary updation) 

Case No. 58 M/s. Viswaat Chemicals Ltd., Mumbai F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00004209AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

## Subject: To allow MEIS benefits for the export made in the year 2015-16. 

The applicant stated that they have received DL issued by RA Mumbai against MEIS application and since claim was for the period 2015-20 and complete required documents were not available during validity of BRC claim period. There was delay in arranging required documents from records and submission for claim. Hence they are requesting to allow MEIS claim for the period 2015-16. 

> Decision:The Committee after discussing the matter on the basis of justification submitted by the application, decided to defer the case and seek a detailed report from RA concerned in the matter for taking the decision.

## (Action: Applicant/ RA-Mumbai) 

**==> picture [160 x 28] intentionally omitted <==**

**----- Start of picture text -----**<br>
Page 34 of 36 { {<br>J<br>**----- End of picture text -----**<br>


, 

Case No. 59 M/s. Haldia Petrochemicals Ltd., Kolkata 

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00004212AM23 

Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

## Subject: To allow MEIS benefit against Shipping Bill No.7277974 dated 41.07.2017. 

The applicant stated that they had executed an export consignment of Benzene to Indonesia under S/Bill No.7277974 dated 11.07.2017 and had declared their intent to claim the MEIS benefit on the same. The CHA checklist and the exporter copy of the S/Bill correctly shows the intent as “Yes” as well as the declaration. However, due to an error in the Electronic Data Interchange system while generation of Export Promotion the declaration read as “Intend to claim reward under MEIS “no”. Due to this error in the computer processing and hence the S/Bills has not been transmitted to the DGFT server and their application for MEIS cannot be filed. They had applied to PRC for manual failing of MEIS which was rejected by PRC on 12.03.2019. Hence they are requesting to reconsider their request and allow MEIS benefit against above mentioned S.Bills. 

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. 60 M/s. Kauten Kraft, New Delhi F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00004210AM23 Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023

## Subject: To allow RoSCTL benefit against 23 Shipping Bills. 

The applicant stated that they exported readymade garments in different H.S. Codes under Chapter 61,62 & 63 of Textiles and Customs cleared from [GI Airport, New Delhi. As per EXIM Policy their export product readymade garments which exported under above chapter fall under MEIS/ROSCTL Scheme export made during 2015-2020. Export made during 2015-2020 they get MEIS Authorization a Duty Credit Scrip from Addl.DGFT, New Delhi. They could not able to take benefit of Scrip because the Scheme code mentioned wrongly due to clerical error 19 instead of 60 by CHA. They requested the customs to modify/amendment of S/Bills which was showing scheme code then they issue a Certificate of Amendment. However, they tried hard to prepare online application issuance of Scrip under ROSCTL scheme till late date of filling but unable to attached the S/Bills. Hence they are requesting to allow ROSCTL benefit against 23 shipping Bills. 

| 

**==> picture [170 x 78] intentionally omitted <==**

**----- Start of picture text -----**<br>
Page 35 of 36 a<br>\ |<br>AN”<br>‘J<br>**----- End of picture text -----**<br>


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) 

**==> picture [98 x 44] intentionally omitted <==**

**----- Start of picture text -----**<br>
yO<br>**----- End of picture text -----**<br>


Page 36 of 36

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 10672 --apply.