IN FORCE Policy Relaxation Committee Advance Authorisation 2023-04-25

DGFT Committee Minutes

Document text

Directorate General of Foreign Trade (PRC Section) Minutes of the Policy Relaxation Committee Meeting Held on 25.04.2023under the Chairmanship of Shri Santosh Kumar Sarangi, Director General of Foreign Trade

==> picture [4 x 5] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- : ----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [452 x 589] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- Meeting No.01/AM24 held on 25.04.2023 The following members were present in the meeting: 1. Shri S.B.S. Reddy Addl. DGFT 2. Shri AkashTaneja Add!. DGFT 3. Dr. S.K. Bansal Addl. DGFT 4. Shri S. C. Agarwal Add|. DGFT 4 Following cases were discussed. The decision taken on the individual cases are as under:- S. No Name of the firm Case No. __1.__Ms. All Round India Pvt. Ltd., Haryana Ce Cane __3.___2 ___Mis. MilanLaboratories(India) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai | 2 4 |M/s.Mis. ArvindGujaratLimited, Ambuja ExportsAhmadabadLtd., Anmadabad See 5. M/s. RecipharmPharmaServices Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore| 5  6 __M/s. Rohan Industries, Rajasthan SG | 8 7. ____|M/s. Macleods Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Mumbai es | M/s. Rajdhani Crafts Industries Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur Te 8 |  9 M/s. Swop EngineeringPvt. Ltd., Tamil Nadu me el 10. _ Ws. Plastiblends India Limited, Mumbai os | __11. _ Mls. Metalloys Recycling Limited, Mumbai | 11 12.|Mls. Alliance Polysacks Pvt.Ltd. Rajasthan | 12 13. MIs. Nilkamal Limited, Mumbai ee 2 14.|Ms.Global FIBC Pvt. Ltd, MH Sina e eee Oe ___15. _|MIs. Dalas Biotech Limited, Rajasthan ea 16. M/s. SRF Limited,HR _ . kh ae ____18.__M/s.17. M/s.MBKaramtaraLaminators,EngineeringMumbaiPvt.Ltd, MumbaiSe | 19 = ___19. _|M/s. Mangal Industries Limited, Andhra Pradesh 20 20. ___|MVs. Airtek Compressors, Coimbatore Be eee 58 _21. |MW/s. Drill JigBushingCo. (Madras) Pvt. Ltd., TamilNadu| =. 22 22.|Mls. Texmo Precision Castings, Coimbatore St ae  23. __|M/s. TVS Upasana Ltd., Tamil Nadu ~ me 24 eee es. Plutus Exports, Delhi ld Page 1 of 18 sieV ----- End of picture text -----

’

==> picture [414 x 75] intentionally omitted <==

Case No. 01 M/s. Allround (India) Vegetable Processing Machines Pvt. Ltd., Haryana

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00004213AM23

Meeting No. 01/AM24 held on 25.04.2023

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 3310030570 dated 30.07.2019.

This is a deferred case of PRC Meeting No.34/AM23 held on 09.03.2023 (Case No.02) wherein Committee decided to defer the case and ask the firm to submit proper detail in the matter, including import/export made and why EO extension is required if export is more than 100% for taking the decision. Now they have stated j that they have exported more than 100% value wise, and they have imported all _ items as per Sr.No.1 to 83 (as per authorization) but they did not use all imported items therefore they want to do further export using all balance imported items. Hence they are requesting to allow further six months E.O. extension against subject Advance Authorization. Decision: The Committee went through the representation received from the applicant and it observed that no policy relaxation is involved in this case. Accordingly it decided to withdraw this case from PRC.

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 02 M/s. Milan Laboratories (India) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00004587AM23 Meeting No.01/AM24 held on 25.04.2023 Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance authorization no. 0311003631 dated 06.05.2021. The applicant stated that due to cancellation of export order from foreign buyer they were not able to fulfill export obligation in original and extended period in the subject Advance license. Hence they are requesting to allow E.O. extension against subject Advance Authorisation. Decision:The Committee discussed the case on the basis of submission made by the applicant and in viewofjustification provided by the firm it decided to accede to the request and allowed EOP extension for a further period of 6 months from the date of endorsement against advance authorisation No. 0311003631 dated 06.05.2021 subject to payment of composition fees as per policy provisions.( If it is Page | 2 of 18 Ts

under 4 J then as per applicable for 4 J cases.) The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Mumbai)

Case No. 03 M/s. Gujarat Ambuja Exports Ltd., Anmadabad

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00004589AM23

Meeting No.01/AM24 held on 25.04.2023

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization no. 0810148358 dated 18.08.2020.

The applicant stated that they have imported 77.720 MT of Refined Soya Bean Oil and fulfilled the export obligation for 42.280 MT. There is a shortfall of 31.739 MT and this shortfall they will fulfil once the extension of export obligation is granted. They had applied 2 E.O. on 11/02/2023 but the application was approved after the date of completion of 2"° E.O. extension and they are having export orders in hand and they can execute the dispatch within 10 days. Further person looking after DGFT work died all of the sudden and no other person was aware about this 6 authorisation and hence this licence was kept unattended due to ignorance. Hence they are requesting to allow Two Months E.O. extension to complete the balance export against subject license.

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 of Advance Authorization No.0810148358 dated 18.08.2020 for a further period of 6 months from the date of endorsement subject to payment of composition fees as per policy provisions. The firm shall approach RA concerned within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Ahmedabad)

Case No. 04 M/s. Arvind Limited, Anmadabad

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00004594AM23

Meeting No.01/AM24 held on 25.04.2023 Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization no. 0810148443 dated 28.08.2020. :

The applicant stated that they have fulfilled export obligation in terms of quantity 70.11% and value 76% against import made in terms of quantity 100%. There is shortfall comes to 29.89% i.e. 5979 Nos in terms of quantity. They have export 70.11% but due to Covid-19 recession they were not able to get further order within first extended period hence they have applied for 2nd _ extension till 28.02.2023. They further declare that unutilised imported inputs are available with them to fulfil balance export obligation. Hence they are requesting to allow six month extension in EOP against subject license. 2 Page 3 of 18 tn Vy

’

Decision: The Committee went through the submission made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and it decided to allow EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0810148443 dated 28.08.2020 for a further period of 6 months from the date of endorsement subject to payment of composition fee as per policy provisions. The firm shall approach RA concerned within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Ahmedabad)

Case No. 05 M/s. Recipharm Pharmaservices Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00004607AM23

Meeting No.01/AM24 held on 25.04.2023 Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0710113061 dated 06.04.2018.

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

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

The applicant stated that they have obtained subject license under pre-import condition and need to manufacture and export finished product within 18 months 4 _ from the date of import i.e. upto 27.10.2019. They could not be able to export three S/Bills within the validity period of 27.10.2019 due to Covid-19 increasing and expending all over the Globe, their customer requirement are re-scheduled and these three S/Bills are beyond EOP period exported. They have completed 81.73% export obligation within in EOP i.e. within 18 months period and balance 18.27% against only three S/Bill exported with the delay. Hence they are requesting to allow E.O. extension up to 04.05.2010 for regularize and redemption purposes only against subject license Decision: The Committee discussed the case on the basis of submission made by the applicant and in view of justification provided by the firm it decided to accede to the request and allowed EOP extension up to 04.05.2020 against advance authorisation No.0710113061 dated 06.04.2018 only for regularization purpose subject to payment of composition fees as per Policy provisions. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Bangalore) . Case No. 06 M/s. Rohan Industries, Rajasthan F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00004227AM23 Meeting No. 01/AM24 held on 25.04.2023 Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No.1310049485 dated 26.12.2019.

This a defer case of PRC Meeting No.34/AM23 held on 09.03.2023 (Case No.04) wherein Committee decided to defer the case and ask the firm to submit more detail in the mater, including import/export made why E.O. extension is required if export made is more than import, for taking the decision. Now they have stated that they have availed above license in December, 2019 and their entire exports obligation period of this license was elapsed due to Covid-19 pandemic and related various

Page4 of 18 ia

lockdowns, global recession, non-availability of labours, disturbed production activitiy and crisis in international market. Still they are managed to import 33.9% quantities of raw materials within validity of license and 17.81% within 1* revalidated period at a higher cost, they were unable to export finish product due to unavailability of foreign buyers and non-availability of shipment containers. They took first EOP extension and that obligation period also elapsed without exports, in addition prices of base product had went up by huge margin affecting export product prices and they are unable to get buyer at high prices. Hence they are requesting to allow extension in EOP to complete the balance 45.86% export obligation on the basis of import already done against subject license.

Decision: The Committee examined the statements made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and observed that the applicant has not submitted any cogent reason/justification in support of any genuine hardship faced by them. Accordingly, the Committee decided to reject the request.

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 07 M/s. Macleods Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Mumbai

6 F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00004656AM23

Meeting No. 01/AM24 held on 25.04.2023

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization no. 0310812615 dated 19.04.2017.

The applicant stated that they had obtained subject license and E.O. was fulfilled 100% quantity-wise and value-wise. Full export proceeds are realised and value addition achieved is 187.72% in FFE terms. Since their buyer has cancelled the export order they could not fulfil export within the validity of export obligation and last export was made on 10.01.2020. Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension upto 10.01.2020 against subject license for regularisation purpose only. Decision: The Committee discussed the case in detail and in view of justification provided by the firm and it decided to allow EOP extension up to 10.01.2020 against Advance Authorisation No.0310812615dated19.04.2017 only for regularization purpose subject to the payment of composition fees as per Policy Provisions. The firm shall approach RA concerned within 30 days of the uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Mumbai)

Case No. 08 M/s. Rajdhani Crafts Industries Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00004575AM23

Meeting No.01/AM24 held on 25.04.2023

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization no. 1310049565 dated 28.04.2020.

==> picture [5 x 7] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- V ----- End of picture text -----

The applicant stated that they had exported 621.17 out of 1429 cbm and import 1444371 out of 2000 cbm against this license. Due to custom staff problem they had not made balance export within time. They had not allowed shipment under the ITC code 94038900 but they had already made export 621.17 cbm under the same HS Code. They want to change the ITC code from 94038900 to 94036000 which is not possible because they had already made export under the 94038900. They had approached to RA in this regard but they advised that change of code is not possible in this stage because they have already made export under the said code. Hence they are requesting to allow six month E.O. extension to complete the balance export as per import made against subject license.

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 accede to the request and allowed EOP extension of Advance Authorization No.1310049565 dated28.04.2020for a further period of 6 months from the date of endorsement subject to payment of composition fee as per policy provisions. The firm shall approach RA concerned within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

$ (Action: Applicant/RA-Jaipur)

Case No. 09 M/s. Swop Engineering Pvt. Ltd., Tamil Nadu F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00003392AM23 Meeting No.01/AM24 held on 25.04.2023 Subject: Revalidation of 7 Advance Authorization No.(1) 0410166862 dated 06.07.2020, (2) 0410166864 dated 06.07.2020, (3) 0410166909 dated 22.07.2020, (4) 0410166979 dated 21.08.2020, (5) 0410166996 dated 26.08.2020, (6) 0410167019 dated 02.09.2020 and (7) 0410167251 dated 06.11.2020.

This is defer case of PRC Meeting No.32/AM23 held on 24.02.2023 (Case No.15) wherein Committee decided to defer the case and ask the firm to submit a clear request in detail for taking the decision. Now they have stated that they have bagged export orders for manufacturing and export of “BOP Assy” and these BOP assemblies are critical components for their buyer located in Free Trade Warehousing Zone. These BOP are specialized value, used to seal, contro! and monitor oil and gas wells to prevent blowouts, the uncontrolled release of crude oil or natural gas from a well. Since these BOPs were further to be sold by their foreign buyer located in FTWZ to an Indian Entity wno bagged the deemed export orders for , manufacturing and supply of Oil Rigs to ONGC. Their finished product BOPs are meant to be finally installed in Oil Rigs to be supplied to ONGC by final buyer located in India. These BOPs are to be installed after complete installation of OIL RIGS and hence supplies were linked with the manufacturing and installation of OIL RIGs. Due to Covid restrictions not only in India but globally, their imports and manufacturing processes were on hold and delayed beyond anyone's control. By the time, things are settled and imports are started, the export obligation period and import validity of advance authorisations are expired. Due to the expiry of import validity and export obligation period they are neither able to import components for manufacturing the

Page 6 of 18Lo

| |

resultant export product nor able to supply the finished goods to their buyer located in FTWZ. Hence they are requesting to allow revalidation upto 31.12.2023 for Advance Licenses at SI.No. 3 to 7 and allow extension in EOP up to 31.03.2024 for Advance Licenses at SI.No. 1 to 7 against above mentioned 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.

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 10 M/s. Plastiblends India Limited, Mumbai

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00003277AM23

Meeting No.01/AM24 held on 25.04.2023 Subject: Revalidation of 13 Adv. Authorization nos: (1) 0310823485 dated 04.09.2018, (2) 0310827142 dated 19.02.2019, (3) 0310827144 dated 19.02.2019, (4) 0310830748 dated 01.08.2020, (5) 0310830750 dated 01.08.2019 (6) 0310831358 dated 04.09.2019, (7) 0310831554 dated 16.09.2019, (8) 0310831590 4 dated 17.09.2019 (9) 0310832275 dated 17.10.2019, (10) 0310832276 dated 17.10.2019 (11) 0310833488 dated 18.12.2019, (12) 0310833670 dated 24.12.2019, (13) 0310832716 dated 13.11.2019.

This is a defer case of PRC Meeting No.20/AM23 held on 29.11.2022 (Case No.22) wherein Committee defer the case and seek a report from RA, Mumbai regarding percentage-wise export made against each authorisation for taking the decision. The applicant stated that due to pandemic & lockdown restrictions of Government their office was closed for most of the time from 21.03.2020 to 31.07.2021 and Govt. Dept. were also working with less staff at below 50% capacity as a result they were unable to file EODC Application and revalidation. The subject AA have been issued on the basis of fixed Norms on net to net basis and at time of obtaining AA they are not aware about the specific grade of master batch that they will export so as matter of practical working they first export the goods, obtain EODC/amendment in values/quantities and after endorsement of exact item of import based upon actual export, they import the raw materials Due to the above they were not in a position to apply for EODC within time limits and obtain amendment for permission to import actual quantities as per actual exports as per policy provisions. Hence they are requesting to allow six months revalidation against 13 subject licences under para 250 01 FIP,

Decision: The Committee examined the case on the basis of submission made by the applicant along with the report received from RA, Mumbai and discussed the matter at length and found no merit or hardship in the arguments made by the firm. Accordingly, it decided to reject the request of the firm.

(Action: Applicant)

==> picture [179 x 65] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- Page 7 of 18ey ----- End of picture text -----

Case No. 11 M/s. Metalloys Recycling Limited, Mumbai F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00004183AM23 Meeting No. 01/AM24 held on 25.04.2023 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.

This a defer case of PRC Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023 (Case No.31) wherein Committee decided to defer the case for further examination. 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.

4 Decision: The Committee having examined the case on the basis of justification furnished by the firm and observed that there is no merit in firm’s contention and decided to reject the request of the firm.

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 12 M/s. Alliance Polysacks Pvt. Ltd., Rajasthan F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00004122AM23 Meeting No.01/AM24 held on 25.04.2023 Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No.1310049365 dated 23.07.2019.

This a defer case of PRC Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023 (Case No.25) wherein Committee decided to defer the case for further examination. 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 went through the submission made by the firm and discussed the matter at length and decided to defer the case and ask the RA,

Page 8 of 18 Loo

concerned whether the applicant has applied for fresh COS & if so, why it was not issued and any other relevant input from RA in the matter for taking the decision.

(Action: Applicant/RA- Jaipur)

Case No. 13 M/s. Nilkamal Limited, Mumbai

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00004139AM23

Meeting No. 01/AM24 held on 25.04.2023 Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No. 0310838941 dated 16.10.2020. This a defer case of PRC Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023 (Case No.25) wherein Committee decided to defer the case for further examination. 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 4 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 statements made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and observed that the applicant has not submitted any cogent reason/ justification in support of any genuine hardship faced by them. Accordingly, the Committee decided to reject the request.

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 14 M/s. Nilkamal Limited, Mumbai

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00004134AM23 Meeting No.01/AM24 held on 25.04.2023 Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No.0310832362 dated 22.10.2019.

This a defer case of PRC Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023 (Case No.27) wherein Committee decided to defer the case for further examination. 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 statements made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and observed that the applicant has not submitted

Page 9 ofve

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

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 15 M/s. Global FIBC Pvt. Ltd., MH

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00004229AM23

Meeting No.01/AM24 held on 25.04.2023 Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No.5011000007 dated 09.12.2020.

This a defer case of PRC Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023 (Case No.28) wherein Committee decided to defer the case for further examination. 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 4 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 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. 16 M/s. Dalas Biotech Limited, Rajasthan

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00004180AM23

Meeting No.01/AM24 held on 25.04.2023 Subject: Revalidation of 2 Advance Authorization No. 0510413810 dated 06.03.2020 and 0510413803 dated 06.03.2020.

This a defer case of PRC Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023 (Case No.30) wherein Committee decided to defer the case for further examination. 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 Covid-19 issues start hampering the international supply chain after

Page 10 of—_

the authorization was issued, the rising freight prices and unavailability of containers/vessels to India not only hit the supply chain hard but were also a drain on financial resources. Hence they are requesting to allow six months revalidation against subject licenses.

Decision: The Committee examined the statements made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and observed that the applicant has not submitted any cogent reason/ justification in support of any genuine hardship faced by them. Accordingly, the Committee decided to reject the request.

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 17 M/s. SRF Limited, Haryana

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLYO0004686AM23

Meeting No.01/AM24 held on 25.04.2023 Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization no. 0510410372 dated 25.04.2019.

4 The applicant stated that PRC Committee in its meeting No.31/AM23 held on 23.02.2023 (Case No.22) have not allowed revalidation of AA No.0510410372 dated 25.04.2019 considering EO of 27.51% fulfilled. They have stated that they have fulfilled EO of 99.06% corresponding to imports as per statement of exports. During the Covid-19 pandemic situation many of the Governments closed their economy and had imposed lockdown during 2020 and badly affected their business. Due to this they could not fully utilize the said Advance License. They were granted revalidation up to 25.10.2020 as per Notification No.57 and PN No.67 both dated 31.03.2020. They could not import the ordered imported inputs to replenish the imported material used from other concurrent Advance Authorisation. Unfortunately, there was a 2"? wave surge in Covid-19 cases in 2021, as a result they could not even utilize the extended import period allowed and had expired. Hence they are requesting to allow three months revalidation for imports of only 1 items at SN 2 against subject license.

Decision: The Committee examined the statements made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and observed that the applicant has not submitted any cogent reason/ justification in support of any genuine hardship faced by them. Accordingly, the Committee decided to reject the request.

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 18 M/s. M B Laminators, Mumbai

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY0O0003700AM23

Meeting No.01/AM24 held on 25.04.2023 Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization no. 0310838174 dated 19.09.2020.

This is a defer case of PRC Meeting No.24/AM23 held on 27.12.2022 (Case No.21) wherein Committee decided to defer the case and seek detailed report from RA

==> picture [216 x 74] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- Page 11 of 18 y— ----- End of picture text -----

concerned in the matter for taking the decision. The applicant stated that they had obtained AA and have completed exports within 3 and half months and applied for EODC on 12.04.2022. They have imported balance quantity against the AA which was revalidated up to 09.09.2022 vide amendment sheet No.1 dated 26.11.2022 showing CIF value of Rs.2,75,88,925/- instead of Rs. 3,28,37,500/Even though they had applied for EODC with request to amend CIF value, incorrect CIF has been reflected in EODC letter. In the meantime the validity of license expired on 09.09.2022. Hence they are requesting to allow three months revalidation against subject Advance Authorisation. Decision: The Committee discussed the case on the basis of justification provided by the applicant along with the report received from RA, Mumbai and decided to accede to the request of the firm and allowed revalidation for a period of 3 months from the date of endorsement to the extent of 100% export against Advance Authorisation No.0310838174dated19.09.2020. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting. (Action: Applicant/RA-Mumbai) : Case No. 19 M/s. Karamtara Engineering Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY0O0004603AM23 Meeting No.01/AM24 held on 25.04.2023 Subject: Request for condonation of 30 days time period for submission to RA for endorsement of Revalidation for Advance authorization nos. 0310821301 dated 29.05.2018. | ! | |The applicant stated that the request for the aforesaid second revalidation should | inadvertently have been submitted by their then Senior Executive-Exim which was | not to the cognizance of the Management as procedural routine that a request for a further revalidation has to be submitted within the validity period of the Granted Revalidation. The said request was made by him on date 28.12.2021 which was eventually approved vide Meeting dated 24.05.2022. Their Senior Executive-Exim suddenly submitted his resignation on date 04.04.2022 with the request to relieve him of his services at the earliest. Thus the email id allotted to him for company correspondence purposes was discontinued with immediate effect, coincidentally the case was approved by DGFT in meeting held just a day before i.e. 24.05.2022. Due to the above circumstances they could not submit their request to RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes online which was 14.07.2022. Hence they are requesting to allow condonation of 30 days time period stipulated in the minutes 4 of the meeting and grant them appropriate reasonable time period for submission to RA for endorsement of revalidation of the said advance license.

Decision: The Committee went through the statements made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and observed that the applicant has not submitted any cogent reason/ justification in support of any genuine hardship faced by them. Accordingly, the Committee decided to reject the request.

(Action: Applicant)

==> picture [191 x 57] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- Page 12 of 18yw ----- End of picture text -----

’

Case No.20 M/s. Mangal Industries Limited, Andhra Pradesh F.No.HQRPRCAPPLYOO0004606AM23

Meeting No.01/AM24 held on 25.04.2023 Subject: Revalidation of MEIS Scrip no. 0919017939 dated 20.03.2019.

The applicant stated that they are one of the leading exporters of Mango Pulp and regularly exporting their products to Iran under Escrow rupee trade. Due to change in management, issues related to the non-linking of S/bills and shifting of RLA office from Vijayawada to Vizag, they missed out submission of their MEIS claims against exports. Due to management change they missed out on registration of the license with the customs port and utilize the same. During the course of their internal aduit, it is found the above license is not utilized and is expired. They have obtained a confirmation letter from their Bank for the realization of export proceeds in INR through an Escrow account for the shipment made to Iran. Hence they are requesting to allow six months revalidation against subject MEIS Scrip.

Decision: The Committee discussed the case at length and found no merit or 4 hardship in the arguments made by the firm and hence decided to reject the request of the firm.

(Action: Applicant)

Case No.21 Mls. Airtek Compressors, Coimbatore

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00004253AM23

Meeting No. 01/AM24 held on 25.04.2023

Subject: Revalidation of MEIS 4 Scrip Nos. (i) 3219106629 dated 05.10.2021, (ii) 3219106623 dated 05.10.2021, (iii) 3219077796 dated 06.01.2020, & (iv) 3219077797 dated 06.01.2020. The applicant stated that they have availed four MEIS authorization and have partly utilized and could not use the balance duty saved in the authorisation within the validity period. Due to Covid-19 pandemic time they have very low importation and the usage of authorization are not that as they expected. If they could get the revalidation of said authorisation to another six months from the date of order they can utilize the same for the current importation of consignments. Hence they are requesting to allow six month revalidation against subject MEIS.

Decision: The Committee examined the submission made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and observed that the applicant has not submitted any cogent reason/ justification in support of any genuine hardship faced by them. Accordingly, the Committee decided to reject the request.

(Action: Applicant)

Page 13 of 18 bie

Meeting No.01/AM24 held on 25.04.2023

Case No.22 Mis. Drill Jig Bushing Co. (Madras) Pvt. Ltd., Tamil Nadu F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00004611AM23

Subject: Revalidation of MEIS Scrip No. 0419095862 dated 05.10.2021.

The applicant stated that they are manufacturers of Bushes and Auto componenet parts catering to leading automobile industries within India and across the world. They have been availing the export incentives offered by the Government in the form of MEIS Scrip and due to Covid-19 situation they could not utilize some scrips. They are issued with MEIS Scrip for Rs. 5,44,820/- with validity period up to 04.10.2022 against exports done during 2020-21. Due to their accounts closure and continuous pooja holidays they inadvertently failed to notice the validity date and could not utilize the same against imports which got delayed from supplier end and shipped at later date. Hence they are requesting to allow revalidation of above mentioned ME|Sscrip.

Decision: The Committee went through the statements made by the firm and discussed the matter at length and observed that the applicant has not submitted 6 any cogent reason/ justification in support of any genuine hardship faced by them. Accordingly, the Committee decided to reject the request.

(Action: Applicant)

Case No.23 M/s. Texmo Precision Castings, Coimbatore F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00004233AM23

Meeting No. 01/AM24 held on 25.04.2023 Subject: Revalidation of MEIS 3 Scrip Nos. (i) 3219108075 dated 20.10.2021, (ii) 3219108084 dated 20.10.2021,& (iii) 3219108086 dated 20.10.2021.

The applicant stated that they have availed four MEIS scrip and partly utilized and could not use the balance duty saved in the authorisation within the validity period. Due to Covid-19 pandemic time they have very low importation and the usage of authorisation are not that as they expected. If they could get the revalidation of said authorization to another six months from the date of order they can utilize the same for the current importation of consignments. Hence they are requesting to allow six months revalidation of above mentioned MEIS scrip.

Decision: The Committee discussed the case on the basis of justification provided by the applicant 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)

Page14 of 18a

Case No.24 M/s. TVS Upasana Ltd., Tamil Nadu

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00004579AM23

Meeting No.01/AM24 held on 25.04.2023

Subject: Revalidation of MEIS 5 Scrip Nos. (i) 0419098840 dated 02.11.2021, (ii) 0419098842 dated 02.11.2021, (iii) 0419098843 dated 02.11.2021, (iv) 0419098844 dated 02.11.2021, & (v) 0419098841 dated 02.11.2021. The applicant stated that they are the major exporter of spokes and nipples to White Drive, Germany, White Drive Poland, White Drive USA, DonfossDenmkark and other countries. Their raw material are importing from Saarstahi, Germany and few from other countries for which they are utilising MEIS duty credit scrip towards payment of customs duty. They are planned to reduce their raw material imports and started procuring the same in DTA units to promote the local manufacturers and make in India Scheme. Compare to previous year imports their current imports drastically reduced as confirmed in their above paraph. Which leads to lapse of MEIS scripts and also they understand that the person who is handling the MEIS Licenses was suddenly passed away due to heart attack it happened few months back. After appointment of new person for the post they found that some of MEIS Script was 4 partially utilised. Hence they are requesting to allow revalidation of above mentioned MEIS Scrip.

Decision: The Committee examined the statements made by the firm and discussed the matter at length and observed that the applicant has not submitted any cogent reason/ justification in support of any genuine hardship faced by them. Accordingly, the Committee decided to reject the request.

(Action: Applicant)

Case No.25 M/s. Plutus Exports, Delhi

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00004370AM23

Meeting No. 01/AM24 held on 25.04.2023 Subject: Revalidation of MEIS Scrip.

The applicant stated that their firm exported goods in June, 2017 of which the payments were received within the time period of 3 years but due to the unlikely event of Covid-19, the BRCs updated by the Bank was approximately one month late and because of that the MEIS application could not be filed. All the payments received are within 3 years time period. Hence they are requesting to allow revalidation of the above mentioned MEIS Scrip.

Decision: The Committee examined the statement made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and it decided to defer the case to PC-3 division for its examination.

(Action: Applicant/PC-3 Division)

Page 15 of 18 a!J

Case No.26 M/s. Tokyo Plast International Ltd., Gandhidham

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00340287AM22

Meeting No.01/AM24 held on 25.04.2023

Subject: Revalidation of MEIS Scrip.

The applicant stated that they were unable to apply for MEIS benefits for several S/Bills because of Lockdown; they were all working from Home during the Covid-19 pandemic and due to restrictions in their area could not communicate and scrutinize documents and also lack of telephonic and internet connectivity. Hence they are requesting to allow claim MEIS on time barred Shipping Bills.

Decision: The Committee went through the submission made by the firm and discussed the matter at length and decided to defer the case for further examination.

(Action: PRC-Division)

Case No.27 M/s. S. Jayavel Exim, Tamil Nadu

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY0000379035AM22

Meeting No.01AM24 held on 25.04.2023 4 Subject: Revalidation of MEIS Scrip no. 0419020285 dated 12.08.2016.

The applicant stated that the two S/Bills were not reflected in Customs server (ICE Gate), NIC Director RA Chennai advised as to submit the original MEIS Authorisation No.0419020285 and cancelled the same. They dropped above two S/Bills and again applied for MEIS and received Authorization No.0419033960 dated 04.10.2017. They then approached customs for verification and there also one S/Bill was not reflected in Customs Server. There by the second Original MEIS authorisation also cancelled by RA Chennai office. Meantime RA Chennai instructed them to obtain license Non-Utilization Certificate from Customs and they received the same from Customs. They have been making representation repeatedly to revalidate the said S/Bills but due to pandemic corona virus situation and MEIS scheme was kept in abeyance for certain period by Central Government due lack of funds. Their representation were not considered in time. Now the S/Bills seems to be time barred. Hence they are requesting to revalidate the above mentioned MEIS Scrip.

Decision: The Committee went through the submission made by the firm and discussed the matter at length and decided to defer the case for further examination.

(Action: PRC-Division)

Case No.28 M/s. Hero Cycles Limited, Ghaziabad (UP)

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00003266AM23

Meeting No. 01 /AM24 held on 25.04.2023 Subject: Relaxation for value Cap in MEIS benefit for Period Sep. 2020 to Dec. 2020.

==> picture [9 x 12] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- A ----- End of picture text -----

Page 16 of 18

The applicant stated that they are manufacturer exporter of Bicycle, E-Bike and Automotive parts since last 4 decades having two star export house. They are availing incentives like MEIS under Chapter-3 of FTP. In the FY 2020-21 approx. Rs. 39.77 Lac MEIS incentive has left due to over and above the value cap of Rs. 2.00 Crores in the MEIS for the period of September, 2020 to December, 2020. They have taken this amount in their product cost for competing the global markets and there are a cut through competition in the market during this pandemic going on if these benefits will not allow to them then company will suffer huge losses. Hence they are requesting to allow relaxation for value Cap in MEIS benefit for the period Sept. 2020 to December, 2020.

Decision: The Committee having examined the case on the basis of justification furnished by the firm and observed that there is no merit in firm’s contention and decided to reject the request of the firm.

(Action: Applicant)

Case No.29 M/s. OEM Guru Industries, Thane

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00002731AM23

* — Meeting No. 01 /AM24 held on 25.04.2023

Subject: Request for update HSN 84729099 in MEIS module to enable to file the shipping bills for MEIS and get the benefit without any late cut against which is pending on exported goods from year 2017.

The applicant stated that they are manufacturer of office machinery and equipment and they are regularly exporting one of their item i.e. Cash/currency counting machine. Earlier in 2016 it was exported under ITC HS CODE 84729090 as per tariff heading “other” as there is no specific ITC code for Cash/currency counting machine in Customs tariff 2015-16 and 2016-17. In this year 2017-18 HSN for currency note counting machine was amended from 84729090 to 84729099 and in CIEGATE system the ITC HS code 84729090 was omitted. Unfortunately new HNS code was not included in Appendix 3B. This new code number was not update on DGFT site in link “Query ITC (HS) Based Exim Policy” and “Query ITC (HS) Based MEIS Rates”. Therefore they had approached to DGFT for updating HSN code and they updated HSN code in Query ITC (HS) Based Exim Policy. The MEIS benefits for available to currency note counting machine covering under classification 84729090 was excluded due to changes in HSN as MEIS benefit was available currency note counting machine since 2015 onwards due to technical error in HSN was removed. For this technical error and monetary loss while exporting currency note counting machines 2016-17,2017-18 and 2018-19. Hence they are requesting to take necessary action to update in link Query ITC (HS) based MEIS Rates for HSN 84729090 and in MIES module to enable them file the application against export made from 2016-17 to 2018-19 for obtain benefits without any late cut amount reduced from claim amount for delay filing of application under para 3.04 of FTP.

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.

Page 17 of 18 ree

(Action: Applicant)

Case No.30 M/s. Peters Surgical India Pvt. Ltd., Haryana

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00002592AM23

Meeting No. 01/AM24 held on 25.04.2023

Subject: To allow MEIS benefit against four shipping bills nos: 7108684 dated 23.09.2019, 7936351 dated 30.10.2019, 8342191 dated 19.11.2019 & 9400209 dated 03.01.2020.

The applicant stated that due to challenges with Bank, the e-BRC has been uploaded on the last date of submission of MEIS application for FY 2019-20 i.e. 28.02.2022, after that they are unable to apply for MEIS benefit as system is showing 100% late cut. They are facing a huge loss due to late cut of 100%. Timely in these shipments they got the payment from their customer and also submitted the documents for BRC in the bank but after many reminders, the Bank has not issued the BRC on time. Hence they are requesting to allow MEIS benefit against above mentioned S. Bills.

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.

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

)

Page 18 of 18

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

Analysis

No analysis has been generated for this document yet.