IN FORCE Policy Relaxation Committee Advance Authorisation 2023-10-26

DGFT Committee Minutes

Document text

Date of Uploading 24 /!&[/2023]

| |

Directorate General of Foreign Trade (PRC Section) Minutes of the Policy Relaxation Committee Meeting Shri Held on _05.10.2023under the Chairmanship of Santosh Kumar Sarangi, Director General of Foreign Trade

Meeting No. 16/AM24 held on 05.10.2023

==> picture [449 x 585] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- The following members were present in the meeting: : 1. Shri S.B.S. Reddy Addl. DGFT 2. Shri Hardeep Singh Addl. DGFT 3. Shri AkashTaneja AkashTaneja Addi. DGFT 4. Shri Anil Aggarwal Addl. DGFT 5. Dr. S.K. Bansal Addl. DGFT Following cases were discussed. The decision taken on the individual cases are aS under:- —sNameofthefirm ‘S.No [| = —~—=SsS=S~S*d=C aS No. M/s. Laguna Clothing Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore M/s. Deshmukh Lead Pvt. Ltd., Maharashtra ; _ ___4 | Mls. Swiss Parenterals Limited, Ahmadabad | CS | 6 _| [Ms.] M/s. [§.] BenzoChem [Jayavelexim,] Industries [Chennai.] Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai - 87 __7| _8 ||Mis.OmegaTraeximINC,UP_M/s. National Steel and Agro Industries Limited,stMumbaiCdC(“‘éCNCOC‘*S[| ___10 | |__9 | Mis. Marklon Tex In Private limited, Surat | TCS M/s.M/s. SynergySara SeaLifestylesPvt. Ltd., Pvt.DehradunLtd., Mumbai - |1615 7”16 |Prt M/s. tideomtangMercedes-Benz Researchneand DevelopmentDeveermentindeIndia | | 1e |__19 | Ms. Medreich Limited, Kamataka CCS M/s. M/s. AnantaAbhishriMedicarePackagingLimited,Pvt. Ltd.,DelhiMumbai Page 1 of 30 sll S ----- End of picture text -----

Shri S.B.S. Reddy Addl. DGFT 2. Shri Hardeep Singh Addl. DGFT 3. Shri AkashTaneja AkashTaneja Addi. DGFT 4. Shri Anil Aggarwal Addl. DGFT 5. Dr. S.K. Bansal Addl. DGFT

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

==> picture [445 x 178] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- Nadu | 36 _| Mis.M/s.M/s. LeedGilbarcoMala s LifeFoodVeeder SciencesProductsRoot Pvt.Pvt.IndiaLtd., Ltd.Pvt. New Mumbai]Ltd., DelhiTamil Nadu | 444342 |__40 | Mis. Multitec Industries, Gurugram | M/s. Sun Pharmaceutical {ndustries Limited , Andra | 42 |Pradesh” M/s. Sun "emeoPharmac e uticauca l I ndustriessis L imitedied , AA n drc a $050 ----- End of picture text -----

Case No. 01 M/s.Mikrotex Machines Ltd., Karnataka.

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00001079AM24

Meeting No.16/AM24 held on 06.10.2023

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0710116652 dated 23.06.2020

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they had asked for an extension on 28" April, 2022 and on 2™ June, 2022 received an extension for 6 months effective from 23.12.2021 to 23.06.2022. So effectively they have received an extension for only 21 days. The export obligation period has been changed from 23.12.2021 to 23.06.2022 even after applying for one opportunity, they were getting the DL repeated and when they had replied DLs there is no response from RA till date. To complete the export obligation they had export order in hand. Hence they are requesting to allow 4 months EOP extension against subject license.

Decision: The Committee went through the statement made by the applicant and _ discussed the matter at length and observed that there is merit in the case. Accordingly, it decided to accede to the request and allowed EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0710116652 dated 23.06.2020 for a further period of 6 months from the date of endorsement subject to payment of composition fees as per ofpolicy uploadingprovisions. of theThe minutes firm shall of meeting.approach RA concerned within 30masdays from the date - (Action: Applicant/RA-Bangalore) he

Page 2 of 30

Case No. 02 Mis. Mikrotex Machines Ltd., Karnataka.

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY0OG061081AM24

Meeting No.16/AM24 heid on 06.10.2023

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0710116651 dated 23.06.2020.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that despite extension being granted by RA Bangalore and due to communication delay they could not avail the benefit of extension. Though technically 6 months extension was granted up to 23 June, 2022, the communication was received on 2" June, 2022. So, the extension effectively they could use was only for 21 days. To complete the export obligation they had export order in hand. Hence they are requesting to allow 6 months EOP extension against subject license.

Decision: The Committee went through the statement made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and observed that there is merit in the case. Accordingly, it decided to accede to the request and allowed EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0710116651 dated 23.06.2020 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-Bangalore} .

(Action: Applicant/RA-Bangalore}

Case No. 03 Mis. Mikrotex Machines Ltd., Karnataka

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLYO0080655AM24

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0710116134 dated 17.02.2020.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they had asked for an extension on 23 October, 2021 through online along with composition fee payment of Rs. 10632.25 for which there was an absolute delay in responses. On 13 March, 2023 and on 10" August, 2023 they have received DL stating that they had applied two spell EOP extension which is cover up to 30.12.2022. As per records they had applied only once on 23" October, 2021. Even after replying the said DL there is no response from RA till date. To complete the export obligation they had export order in hand. Hence they are requesting to allow 4 months EOP. extension against subject license.

Page3 of 36

29-02-2024 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-Bangalore)

Case No. 04 M/s. Laguna Clothing Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLYO0000689AM24

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0710116224 dated 09.03.2020.

Applicant Statement : The applicant stated that they had submitted application for 1° EO extension on 14" March, 2023 and that time the system was allowing them to pay the composition fee of Rs. 5,500/- only instead of Rs. 10,500/- due to technical glitch of DGFT website. On 06.04.2023 RA had issued DL informing them to pay balance composition fee of Rs.5000/-. Further on 11.04.2023 they had replied to the DL with payment receipt of the balance fee and finally the 1% EO extension was issued on 18.04.2023 and on 2™ May, 2023 they had submitted application for 2" EO extension however, the application was rejected stating that Special Advance Authorization issued as per Appendix 4J point No.11, 2™ extension is not allowed and the application was rejected. Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension against subject license to cover exports made up to September 2022. 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 30.09.2022 against advance authorisation No. 0710116224 dated 09.03.2020 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. 05 M/s. Deshmukh Lead Pvt. Ltd., Maharashtra

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00000758AM24

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorisation No.0311001998 dated 24.02.2021

Applicant Statement:The applicant stated that they are unable to complete exports even after extension up to 24.08.2023. As they have imported the raw material at higher LME Prices and subsequently the prices declined, due to which they were unable to provide competitive rates in the international market for exports, w ith resulted in delay to start the exports. The delay in start of exports resulted /in _ Page 4 of 30 KO

blocking of huge working capital amount in inventory of raw materials imported and subsequently it resulted into financial constraint for running the whole company. Hence they are requesting to allow six months EOP extension against subject license.

Decision: The Committee examined the case on the statement made by the firm and discussed the matter at length and observed that there is merit in the case. Accordingly, it decided to accede to the request and allowed EOP extension of Advance Authorization No.0311601998 dated 24.02.2021 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-Mumbai } _ Case No. 06 Mis. Swiss Parenterals Limited, Ahmadabad F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00000109AM24 Meeting No.16/AM24 held on 06.10.2023 Subject: Waiver of procedural requirement as per HBP against Advance Authorization no. 0811000371 dated 12.61.2021.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they have imported 2000 kg of cefuroxime sodium sterile under Policy Circular No.9 dated 30.06.2003 and No.15 dated 17.09.2003 which they have imported from registered and approved Drug Manufacturers. The exports of finished drug was to be exported within 6 months from the date of Bill of Entry dated 20.01.2021. The import item of Cefuroxime Sodium Sterile is used for manufacture of injection for treatment of infections caused by bacteria, pneumonia and lung infections etc. Unfortunately due to Corona Epidemics during the year 2021 and 2022 they had lost their export orders from various buyers and even now are unable to get any export orders for use of this imported item. The goods imported against subject licence are still in their stock. They have now found some buyers for export of imported item and want to re-export of same under the provisions of Para 4.42 of HBP which permits re-exports of goods imported against Advance Authorisation Scheme. Hence they are requesting to allow waiver of procedural requirement as per HBP for re-export of imported goods against subject license. _ Decision: The Committee went through the submission made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and it decided to refer the case to PC-4 division for its examination, whether there is scope for relief. Thereafter the case ay be brought back again before PRC for a decision. (Action: Applicant/ PC-4 Division)

==> picture [2 x 32] intentionally omitted <==

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

Page 5 of 30

Case No. 07 M/s. BenzoChem Industries Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

F.No.HQRPRCAPPL Y00000823AM24

Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No.0311005125 dated 05.07.2021

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they had obtained subject licence in the month of July, 2021 and have fulfilled the export obligation in tune of 100% but have not utilized the full import items. As the EO against the said license was fulfilled, they had submitted the same for EODC with RA Mumbai on 30" November, 2021 and 30" November, 2022 i.e. prior to the expiry of the said license. Now RA Mumbai has issued the EODC letter on 30” August, 2023 mentioning the Bond Waiver Import validity date 05.07.2023. The date of bond waiver import validity is prior to the EODC which itself expired almost before 2 months. Their import material against the license has pending for utilization. Hence they are requesting to allow revalidation up to 05.01.2024 to utilize the balance import items against subject license.

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 fram RA, Mumbai for taking the decision.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Mumbai)

Case No. 08 M/s. S. Jayavei Exim, Chennai —

F.No.HQRPRCAPPL Y00379035AM22

Meeting No.16/AM24 heid on 06.10.2023

Subject: Revalidation of ME!S scrip no. 0419020285 dated 04.10.2017

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that two S/Bills were not reflected in Customs server (ICE Gate), NIC Director RA Chennai advised as to submit the original MEIS Authorisation and cancelled the same. They dropped above two shipping bills and again applied for MEIS and received authorisation No.0419033960 darted 04.10.2017. They then approached customs for verification and there also one shipping bill was not reflected in Customs Server. There by the second original MEIS Authorisation also cancelled by RA Chennai and meantime RA Chennai instructed them to obtain license Non-Utilization Certificate from Customs and they have 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 representations were not considered in time. Now the S/Bills seems to be time barred. Hence they are requesting to allow revalidation of the above scrip.

Decision: The Committee went through the statements made by the firm and no a that the applicant has not submitted any cogent reason/ justification in support of any |

Page 6 of 30

==> picture [2 x 82] intentionally omitted <==

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

‘

genuine hardship faced by them. Accordingly, the Committee decided to reject the request.

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 09 M/s. Omega Traexim INC, UP

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00000750AM24

Subject: To allow MEIS benefit for the period 2015-16.

Applicant Statement: This is review case of PRC Meeting No.11/AM 24 held on 20.07.2023 (Case No. 27) wherein Committee reject the case. Now they have Stated that the justification/arguments submitted by them in this regard, applicant problem and concept is very much clear and based on cogent reasons on which ground applicant deserve committee favour on the matter in question. Their scrip was issued on 22.12.17 and was with Moradabad SEZ Customsfor issue of TRA from 11.12.19 to 20.08.20. Hence they are re-submitting their revised application along with necessary documents with the request that committee may kindly be reexamine their case and allow them MEIS benefit for the financial year 2015-16 as applied.Letters dated 06.06.23, 07.06.23 and 26.08.23 were perused. Decision: The Committee discussed the case at length and found no merit or hardship in the arguments made by the firm.Accordingly, it decided to maintain . rejection of the earlier decision of PRC Meeting No.11/AM 24 held on 20.07.2023 (Case No. 27). .

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 10 M/s. National Steel and Agro Industries Limited, Mumbai

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY000000731AM24

Subject: Revalidation of TPS Authorization no. 0310835155 dated 02.03.2020

Applicant Statement: This is a review case of PRC Meeting No.02AM24 held on 09.05.2023 (Case No.13) wherein Committee reject the case. Now they have stated that the present application is being made for revalidation of the scrip which was valid for two years from date of issue as in the previous submissions made by the company through the resolution professional during the period when it was undergoing insolvency proceedings, all relevant facts had not been presented before the Committee. The Scrip was issued on 02.03.2020. NCLT, vide Order dated 11.04.2022 admitted the application and imposed Moratorium. Furthermore, subsequent to decision in the PRC dated 09.05.2023, the resolution plan submitted by the successful applicant M/s. JSW Steel Coated Products Ltd. has been approy d’\ by the Hon’ble NCLT, Mumbai Bench vide order dated 19.05.2023 and now the olan

Page7 of 30

is binding on all the stakeholders as per provisions of Insolvency and Bankrupicy Code 2016 (IBC). Hence they are requesting to allow revalidation of above mentioned TPS license.

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.Accordingly, it decided to maintain rejection of the earlier decision of PRC Meeting No.02AM24 held on 09.05.2023 (Case No.13).

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 11 M/s. Markion Tex In Private limited, Surat

F.No. HQORPRCAPPLY00000783AM24

Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization no. 5211000984 dated 12.07.2021.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they have taken one revalidation up to 12.07.2023 against subject licence butdue to the situation of the global market the export order got effected and due to the Russia and Ukraine war they could not export as per the normal flow of the order as before the war. So they could not import the raw materials in the stipulated time granted by the Joint DGFT, Surat. Hence they are requesting to allow six months revalidation 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.

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 12 M/s. Amaravathi Textiles Pvt. Ltd., Andhra Pradesh

F.No.HORPRCAPPLY00000786AM24

Meeting No.16/AM24 held on 06.10.2623

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No.2611000102 dated 09.03.2021 and 2611000177 dated 16.06.2021.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they have obtained above license at the time when Covid — 1** Wave subsided and an upward trend was observed in terms of business and orders on hand. By the time licence was granted, an unprecedented Covid 2" wave started and was wreaking havoc on all business globally. Export Orders were cancelled, supply chain in general and logistics in. particular came to a grinding halt. They could fulfil the prescribed EO partially during the stipulated period, due to the intense competition, pre and post Covid Pan emic factors adversely affecting the sector. Hence they are requesting to allow ond year EOP extension against above mentioned licenses. :;

Page8 of 30

Decision: The Committee went through the statement made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and observed that there is merit in the case. Accordingly, it decided to accede to the request and allowed EOP extension of Advance Authorization No.2611000102 dated 09.03.2021 and 2611000177 dated 16.06.2021 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-Vishakhapatnam)

Case No. 13 M/s. Woodland import & Export, Kerala

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00001095AM24

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 5310019697 dated 16.05.2018

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they are leading manufacturer/processor export of Cashew Kernels in India and in this case they have fulfilled 99.98% in quantity and 84.31% in value endorsing AA details in S/Bills within EOP, leaving a shortfall of 15.39% in quantity. Due to economic recession in the past, recent Novel Corona Pandemic and continuous shut-down of factories and downward trend in international business they are running their business through a very critical situation. So they cannot complete export obligation within the validity period. Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension up to 31.12.2022 to cover the exports already made by them during the out of EO period against subject 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 applicant to submit copy of Shipping Bills for taking the decision.

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 14 M/s. Vinayak International Housewares Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00001094AM24

Subject: Relaxation in Appendix 4-J condition against Advance Authorization No. 0510405626 dated 13.02.2018 (Correction in MOM no. 07/AM21 dated 06.08.2020)

Applicant Statement : The applicant stated that they have filed a request to PRC for relaxation in Appendix 4J condition against AA No.0510405626 dated 13.02.2018 and their case was considered by PRC in Meeting No.07/AM21 dated 06.08.2020 and relaxed Appendix 4J condition. In the minutes of Meeting uploaded on DGFT portal, in the subject paragraph correct AA No.0510405626 dated 13.02.2018 has Page 9 of 30 me

a | |

been mentioned, however, in the Decision Paragraph wrong AA No. has been mentioned as 0310827437 dated 05.03.2019 instead of correct AA No.0510405626 dated 13.02.2018 due to typographical error. Therefore, they are requesting to issue a corrigendum/revised MOM/Approve case for correction in AA details in the decision part of MOM with correct AA No, as RA is not accepting redemption application due to wrong AA details in decision part of earlier MOM. Decision:The Committee went through the justification made by the firm and discussed the matter at length. Accordingly, the Committee decided to correct the Advance Authorisation numberas 0510405626 dated 13.02.2018 in the above mentioned PRC Minutes. Other conditions remain the same.The firm shall approach RA concerned within 30 days of the uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: CLA, New Dethi /Applicant)

Case No. 15

M/s. Synergy Lifestyles Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

F.No.HQRPRCAPPL Y00001096AM24

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0310828627 dated © 26.04.2019 .

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that their balance 81.42% export obligation against 2" export item was remained unfulfilled due to technical error in revamp digital system. While applying for second EOP extension online at DGFT site, the system is showing error i.e. “you are not allowed for EO extension as you already extended two times”. They filed query at DGFT as per DGFT resolution comments stated that i.e. “as per our investigation you have already extended your license 2 times so you are not allowed to do extension for your license”. Further they have contacted personally to RA & emailed their case but as site itself not allowed them to apply for 2°" EOP extension they are not able to resolve their issue. Hence they are requesting to allow six month EOP extension 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.

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 16 M/s. Sara Sea Pvt. Ltd., Dehradun

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00001092AM24

Meeting No.16/AM24 heid on 06.10.2023

Subject: Extension of EOP against 7 Advance Authorization No. (i) 051 0412886 dated 13.12.2019, & {ii} 0510413778 dated 03.03.2020, {iii} 0510413779 datéd

{iii} 0510413779 datéd -

Page 10 of 36

03.03.2020, (iv) 0510413553 dated 10.02.2020, (v) 0510414122 dated 08.05.2020, (vi) 0510414284 dated 29.05.2020, & (vii) 0510414577 dated 07.07.2020.

_ Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they are a manufacturer and exporter of oil field drilling equipment and components, delivering these products domestically to drilling contractors like ONGC and Oil India Ltd. Their main export destinations are nations in the middle east, Europe, north America and other parts of Asia. At present their outstanding orders for more than 100 crores and a turnover of more than Rs. 50 crores from exports alone in the most recent fiscal year. They were unable to export the goods as soon as the customer required due to the corona pandemic and the oil business recession, and as a result of the delay, the customer has put the order on hold. The customer has updated the value of the export products and is now prepared to receive the order. Hence they are requesting to allow six month EOP extension against above mentioned seven licenses. They received decision of PRC meeting 09 AM/ 24 held on 07.07.2023for extension of export obligation for all the advance authorisations as above . CLA New Delhi issued a notice of deficiency for the above mentioned authorisations and declined to extend the export obligation stating that PRC has granted a 6 month extension of EOP and no reference of the commencement date was included in the meeting minutes.provide The composition fees have already been deposited.They have requested to clarification for the completion of outstanding export obligation against the alsoadvance authorisations.The PRC committee meeting 09/am24 dated 07.07.2023 approved the extension of export obligation for AA number 051041889 dated December 13, 2019 .However due to a Technical mistake they failed to contact the RA within the authorised 30 day period from the date of uploading of the minutes. _ They approached the RA on August 28 ,2023. They have already deposited the necessary composition fee and requesting to grant extension of UP against the said advance authorisations.

Decision: The Committee went through the statement made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length.The Committee noted that the applicant has faced difficulty beyond their contro! and observed that there is merit in the case. Accordingly, it decided to accede to the request and allowed further EOP extension against Advance Authorisations No. (i) 0510414577 dated 07.07.2020 for 6 months : (ii) 0510413778 dated 03.03.2020, and (iii) 0510413779 dated 03.03.2020,upto 31.03.24; (iv) 0510413553 dated 10.02.2020, upto 29.02.24 :(v) 0510414122 dated 08.05.2020 for 6 months (vi) 0510414284 dated 29.05.2020, for 6 months. For (vii) 0510412889 dated 13.12.2019, the delay in approaching RA is condoned. Other conditions remain same such as 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. PRC desired that copy of note portion of RA in which PRC decision was dealt m be forwarded to HQ for perusal. forwarded to HQ for perusal. to HQ for perusal. HQ for perusal. for perusal. perusal. CO) (Action: Applicant/CLA-New Delhi) - an

PRC desired that copy of note portion of RA in which PRC decision was dealt m be forwarded to HQ for perusal. forwarded to HQ for perusal. to HQ for perusal. HQ for perusal. for perusal. perusal. (Action: Applicant/CLA-New Delhi) -

Page 11 of 30

Case No. 17 Mis. Salasar Techno Engineering Limited, New Delhi

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY0O0001087AM24

Subject: Acceptance of Installation certificate from chartered engineer in place of central excise authority against EPCG license no. 0530163204 dated 13.08.2014.

Applicant Statement : This is a review case of PRC Meeting No.4/AM24 held on 26.05.2023 (Case No.22) wherein Committee accept the installation certificate issued by Chartered Engineer in place of Central Excise Authority against EPCG License No.0530162311 dated 13.02.2014. Now the applicant stated that PRC not considered their another EPCG License No.0530163204 dated 13.08.2014 applied for the installation certificate issued by Chartered Engineer in place of Central Excise Authority. They had applied to PRC for relaxation for 2 EPCG Authorisation and the request for both the EPCG was on same grounds and same relaxation required. Therefore, on grounds of genuine hardship they request to accept the installation certificate from chartered engineer in place of central excise authority on the same ground applied vide earlier application considered in PRC Meeting No.4/AM24 dated 26.05.2023.

Decision: The Committee went through the statement made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and observed that there is merit in the case. Accordingly, it decided to accede to the request of the firm to accept the installation certificate from chartered engineer in place of central excise authority with Rs.25,000/- composition fee. The firm shall approach RA concerned within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/CLA-New Delhi)

Case No. 18 M/s. Mercedes-Benz Research and Development India Pvt. Ltd., Karnataka

F,No.HQRPRCAPPLY0000162AM24

Meeting No.16/AM24 held on 06.10.2023

Subject: To import of one RHD used Mercedes Vehicle for purpose of conducting research on the Vehicles imported for R & D testing purposes only be permitted

For import at Bangalore / Chennai / Mumbai Air Ports or Nnavasheva sea port and 2. To ply on public road for on road condition testing for research & development after registration in terms of DGFT Notification no. 14/2015-2020 dated28.08.2019. Applicant Statement: The applicant stated at the moment, only Roll-off (Ro-Ro) ships dock in Mumbai Seaport and Ro-Ro Vessel companies do not accept used electric vehicle transportation from Germany to Mumbai Seaport. So it has become difficult for them to import the used electric vehicle quickly and to complete the, project that their customers expect from them. it also leads to revenue losses at the company and country levels. They are looking for an alternative way to import via . Page 12 of 30 .

==> picture [2 x 33] intentionally omitted <==

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

other seaports through closed containers or airports for the reasons stated above and to achieve faster shipment timelines. This will help them in importing the vehicles as quickly as the business expects. Hence they are requesting to relaxation in the policy to import of used One RHD Mercedes-Benz Vehicle to be permitted for import at “Bengaluru Airport/Chennai Airport/Mumbai Airport or Bengaluru ICD/Chennai Seaport/Nhavasheva Seaport for the purpose of conducting research/testing on the Vehicles imported for R&D testing and to allow the imported vehicle for registration with RTO to ply on public road for on-road condition testing for R&D and not for any other use after registration in terms of DGFT Notification No.14/2015-2020 dated 28.08.2019.

Decision: The Committee went through the statement made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and observed that there is merit in the case. Accordingly, it decided to accede to the request and allowed to import via air at . Bangalore Airport/ Chennai Airport) Mumbai Airport or import via sea at Bengaluru ICD/ Chennai Seaport/ Nhavasheva Seaport.The vehicle shall not be permitted to ply on public road without permission of MoRTH. The firm shall approach RA concerned within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Bangalore)

Case No. 19 M/s. Plastibiends India Limited, Maharashtra

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY000001103AM24

Meeting No. 16/AM24 held on 06.10.2023 ,

Subject: Revalidation of 13 Advance 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) 03108310358 dated 04.09.2019 (7) 0310831554 dated 16.09.2019 (8) 0310831590 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. Applicant Statement : The applicant stated that due to pandemic and lockdown . restrictions of Govt. their office was closed for most of the time from 21.03.2020 to 31.07.2021 and Govt.Dept. were also working with skeleton staff at below 50% capacity, as a result they were unable to file EODC application and revalidation or any amendment with DGFT. The above Advance Licenses have been issued on the basis of fixed norms on net content basis. At the 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 exports, they import the raw materials also due to slow down payment against exports was rolling in slower than before and in return bank also released E-BRC at a slower pace. 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 ; \ allowrevalidation of above mentioned 13 Advance Licenses. pe Page[13][of][ 30] J

==> picture [2 x 31] intentionally omitted <==

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

Decision: The Committee examined the statements made by the firm and noted that the applicant has not submitted any cogent reason/ justification in support of any genuine hardship faced by them. Accordingly, the Committee decided toreject the request.

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 20 M/s. Kerala State textile Corporation limited, Kerala

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00001114AM24

Meeting No.16AM24 held on 06.10.2023 .

Subject: Extension of EOP against EPCG Authorization no. 5330001310 dated 22.12.2010.

Applicant Statement: This is a review case of 11" Meeting of AM23 of the EPCG Committee held on 10.02.2023 (Case No.32) wherein Committee reject the case. Now the applicant stated that the particular EPCG Authorization was taken by the Corporation during 2010 for the modernization Malabar Spinning and Weaving Mills, one unit of KSTC, with Government budget allocation during 2010. Corporation availed this benefit with a good intention to reduce Government expenditure in the project and also earn foreign currency by export of finished products. However, the corporation could not fulfil the EO as per EPCG terms because of the adverse market condition due to the recession during 2011. The situation continued till 2018, hence the industry gripped down thus the export markets were crushed. Meantime the export obligation period was over. During the year 2018 and 2019 the entire state of Kerala was affected by flood which had a heavy impact on operations of the mill. Further in 2020 and 2021 no export was possible due to the worldwide outbreak of Covid 19 pandemic. Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension up to 2026 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 . ‘Mmaintainrejection of the earlier decision of the 11 Meeting of AM23 of the EPCG Committee held on 10.02.2023 (Case No.32). (Action: Applicant) Case No. 21 Mis. Kerala State textile Corporation limited, Kerala F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00001113AM23 Meeting No.16/AM24 held on 06.10.2023 a Subject: Extension of EOP against EPCG Authorization no. 5330001171 dated _ 23.07.2008 and 5330001319 dated 04.01.2011. yo -

==> picture [1 x 27] intentionally omitted <==

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

Page 14 of 30

Applicant Statement: This is a review case of 11" Meeting of AM23 of the EPCG Committee held on 10.02.2023 (Case No.34) wherein Committee reject the case. Now the applicant stated that the particular licenses are taken for Trivandrum Spinning Mills, a PSU under Government of Kerala at Balaramapuram, Truvandrum, Kerala. Due to the ineffective working condition, the unit closed during 2007 and reopened with urgent R&M work in 2007 under BIFR package, as first phase of project, as per Government direction. In 2010 the unit undergone for second phase. The revival of said PSU was done through KSTCL. However, the corporation could not fulfil the EO as per EPCG terms because of the adverse market condition due to the recession during 2011. The situation continued till 2018, hence the industry gripped down thus the export markets were crushed. Meantime the export obligation period was over. During the year 2018 and 2019 the entire state of Kerala was affected by flood which had a heavy impact on operations of the mill. Further in 2020 and 2021 no export was possible due to fhe worldwide outbreak of Covid 19 pandemic. Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension up to 2026 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 maintainrejection of the earlier decision of the 11" Meeting of AM23 of the EPCG Committee held on 10.02.2023 (Case No.34) (Action: Applicant) Case No. 22 Mis. Kerala State textile Corporation limited, Kerala F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY000004115AM24 Meeting No.16/AM24 heid on 06.10.2023 Subject: Extension of EOP against EPCG Authorization no. 5330001303 dated 25.11.2010, 5330001325 dated 19.01.2011, 5330001330 dated 01.02.2011 and . 5330001355 dated 29.03.2011 ApplicantCommittee Statement:This is a review case of 171° Meeting of AM23 of the EPCG Now held on 10.02.2023 (Case No.36) wherein Committee reject the case. the applicant stated that the particular EPCG Authorization were availed for the establishment of Komalapuram Spinning & Weaving Mills at Alappuzha, Kerala. The mill was started as part of green field projects initiated by Govt. of Kerala during 2010, with a capacity of 18240 ring spindles with 6000 kg yarn per day and 30 looms with 10,000 mtr fabric per day. The unit is capable to cater the export market with good quality products. M/s. Komalapuram Spinning & Weaving Mill was a private mill closed down the operations and referred BIFR and was declared sick during 2006. Later the unit was acquired by Govt. of Kerala and the assets were vested with Kerala State Textile Corporation Lid., as per the Kerala Sick Textile Undertakings Act, 2020. In spite of commissioning the machines during 2011, mills could not start commercial production due to various court cases filed before Hon’ble 2018-19.High CourtThe of Kerala,unit startedpertainingfull commercial to recruitment.productionThus,fromthe2018unit remainedonwards andclosedby theytill a\ | time the stipulated EOP was over. DuringPage 15 the of year30 2018 and 2019wo the entire state of |

Kerala was affected by flood which had a heavy impact on operations of the mill. Further in 2020 and 2021 no export was possible due to the worldwide outbreak of Covid 19 pandemic. Hence they are requesting fo allow EOP extension up to 22.12.2026 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, ihe Committee decided to maintainrejection of the earlier decision of the 11 Meeting of AM23 of the EPCG Committee held on 10.02.2023 (Case No.36).

(Action: Applicant)

| Case No. 23 Mis. Kerala State textile Corporation limited, Kerala

F.No.HQRPRCAPPL Y000001 1 12AM24

Subject: Extension of EOP against EPCG Authorization no. 5330001315 dated 30.12.2010, 5330001320 dated 10.01.2011, 5330001329 dated 24.01 2011, 5330001331 dated 01.02.2011 and 5330001356 dated 29.03.2014. Applicant Statement: This is a review case of 17" Meeting of AM23 of the EPCG Committee held on 10.02.2023 {Case No.33) wherein Committee reject the case. Now the applicant stated that the particular licenses were availed for the establishment of Hi-tech Weaving Mills (HWM) at Kannur Kerala. Hi tech Weaving mills at Kannur was started as part of green field projects initiated by Govt. of Kerala during 2010, with a capacity of 18240 ring spindles, 1920 doubling spindles and 30 air jet looms. The unit is capable to cater the export market with good quality products. In spite of commissioning the machines during 2011, the mill could not Start commercial production due to various court cases filed before Hon'ble High Court of Kerala, pertaining to recruitment. During the year 2018 and 2019 the entire state of Kerala was affected by flood which had a heavy impact on operations of the mill. Further in 2020 and 2021 no export was possible due to the worldwide outbreak of Covid 19 pandemic. Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension up to 2026 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 maintainrejection of the earlier decision of the 11 Meeting of AM23 of the EPCG Committee held on 10.02.2023 {Case No.33). (Action: Applicant) (\ Case No. 24 M/s. Kerala State textile Corporation limited, Kerala _\4 F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY0O00001110AM24 Yo} Page 16 of 30

. .

==> picture [2 x 35] intentionally omitted <==

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

Meeting No. 16/AM24 held on 06.10.2023

Subject: Extension of EOP against EPCG Authorization no. 5330001304 dated 25.11.2010 and 5330001321 dated 10.01.2017.

Applicant Statement: This is a review case of 11" Meeting of AM23 of the EPCG Committee held on 10.02.2023 (Case No.35) wherein Committee reject the case. Now the applicant stated that the particular licenses were taken for the establishment of Uduma Textile Mills at Kasargode, Kerala. The mill was started as part of green filed projects initiated by Govt. of Kerala during 2010 with a capacity of 11088 ring spindles, with 30,000 kgs yearn production per day. In spite of commissioning the machines during 2011, the mill could not start commercial production due to various court cases filed before Hon'ble High Court of Kerala, pertaining to recruitment. During the year 2018 and 2019 the entire state of Kerala was affected by flood which had a heavy impact on operations of the mill. Further in 2020 and 2021 no export was possible due to the worldwide outbreak of Covid 19 pandemic. Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension up to 2026 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 maintainrejection of the earlier decision of the 11" Meeting of AM23 of the EPCG Committee held on 10.02.2023 {Case No.35). (Action: Applicant) .

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 25 M/s. Medreich Limited, Karnataka

F.No.HQORPRCAPPL Y00001 109AM24

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0710116931 dated 26.08.2020.

Applicant’s statement: The applicant stated that they have obtained subject license under self declaration/No norms with Appendix 4J/Pre-import conditions and imported the raw material from unregistered Source. The license has been obtained during the Covid period. They have started the production due to the raw material and other expedient supply disruptions. The exports have been re-scheduled and the 1* export has been made on 20.05.2021 after 6 months from the date of import. 55.93% of exports have been compieted withini2 months from the date of import as per pre-import conditions. Rest of the exports have been made after that and they have completed their stipulated exports on 09.06.2022. Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension up to 09.06.2022 for redemption purpose only against subject license.

Page 17 of 30

) ?

fees as per Policy provisions. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

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

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

(Action: Applicant/RA-Bangalore)

Case No. 26 M/s. Raajratna Metal Industries Limited, Anmadabad

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00001034AM24

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0811000001 dated 11.12.2020.

Applicant’s statement: The applicant stated that they had applied for 2" EOP on 14.12.2022 for six months from 11.12.2022 to 10.06.2023 but RA Ahmedabad approved the 2° EOP on 25.07.2023 and that too only up to 10.01.2023. Meanwhile they have exported during February 2023 for which they request to allow and approve the 2 EOP up to the last export date of 27.02.2023. Since they have received only 01 month EO extension approval from RA Ahmedabad and required balance EO extension up to last export date 27.02.2023. Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension up to 27.02.2023 against subject license. Decision: The Committee examined the case on the basis of statement made by the firm and discussed the matter at length and decided to allow EOP extension up to 27.02.2023 against advance authorisation No. 0811000001 dated 11.12.2020subject 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-Ahmedabad)

Case No. 27 M/s. Ashish Life Science Pvt. Ltd., Maharashtra

F.No.HQRPRCAPPL Y00001090AM24

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0310837179 dated 14.07.2020.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they have obtain the subject license for export of Drug item. The license is issued in terms of Policy Circular No.9 (RE2003)/2002-2007 dated 30.06.2003. As per the PC 9 condition the license EOP is 12 months from the date of each import. They have already fulfilled 100% EO quantity and value wise but partial EO is fulfilled after expiry of EOP. Due to unfavourable market conditions during Covid pandemic their buyer had cancelled the _- export orders. Moreover, most of the business worldwide suffered production and / \ demand it seems due to closer of factories, lacks of staff and huge financial constraints therefore, they could not fulfil the export obligation within EOP validity. Page 18 of 30 \

==> picture [2 x 69] intentionally omitted <==

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

Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension up to 30.03.2023 for regularization purpose only against subject license.

Decision: The Committee went through the submission made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and observed that there is merit in the case. Accordingly, it decided to accede to the request and allowed EOP extension up to 30.03.2023 against Advance Authorization No. 0310837179 dated 14.07.2020subject 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-Mumbai)

Case No.28 = Mls.Ashish Life Science Pvt. Ltd., Maharashtra

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00001089AM24

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0310838216 dated 11.09.2020.

Applicant’s statement: The applicant stated that they have obtain the subject license for export of Drug item. The license is issued in terms of Policy Circular No.9 (RE-2003)/2002-2007 dated 30.06.2003. As per the PC 9 condition the license EOP is 12 months from the date of each import. They have already fulfilled 100% EO quantity and value wise but partial EO is fulfilled after expiry of EOP. Due to unfavourable market conditions during Covid pandemic their buyer had cancelled the export orders. Moreover, most of the business worldwide suffered production and demand it seems due to closer of factories, lacks of staff and huge financial constraints therefore, they could not fulfil the export obligation within EOP validity. Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension up to 10.09.2023 for regularization purpose only against subject license.

Decision: The Committee went through the statement made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and observed that there is merit in the case. Accordingly, it decided to accede to the request and allowed EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0310838216 dated 11.09.2020upto 30.09.2023 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-Mumbai)

Case No. 29 M/s. Ananta Medicare Limited, Delhi F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00001 108AM24

_ Meeting No.16/AM24 held on on 06.10.2023

Meeting No.16/AM24 held on on 06.10.2023 i \ Subject: To allow usage of shipping bill under Advance Authorization. no. ) 0510414801 dated 31.07.2020.

Page 19 of 30

Applicant's statement: The applicant stated that company imported Empty Plastic Tubes under subject license on 6" August, 2020 from China against BE No.8393667 at ICD Tughlakabad, New Delhi valued at INR 603165.03. They used those tubes as packing material for one of their cosmetic product {intinova Cosmetic Gel) and exported the finished goods on 1“ October, 2020 against S/Bill No.5583356 (Item No.9). However, due to some mistake by their staff they did not put the AA Number on the S/Bill and hence it did not refiect in the Customs. This tube was imported only once and exported in only one shipment to their client. Later theirclient, changed the packaging specifications and they did not have any use of such a packaging tube. Hence they are requesting io allow usage of S/Bill under subject AA for closure purpose only.

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 CLA-New Delhi for taking the decision.

(Action: Applicant/CLA-New Delhi}

Case No. 30 M/s. Abhishri Packaging Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00001 148AM24

Meeting No.16/AM24 heid on 06.10.2023

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization no. 0310823932 dated 24.09.2018.

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

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

Applicant’s statement: The applicant stated that the rapid spread of covid throughout India, particularly in Maharashtra, led to the imposition of numerous restrictions. These constraints resulted in a reduction in their factory’s production capacity and a shortage of available manpower. The foreign buyers from the USA, Belgium and Canada have cancelled all outstanding orders due to the pandemic. They have fulfilled 97% of EO in accordance with the terms of AA. The outstanding 3% remains pending, primarily due to the significant impact of Covid19.Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension up to 30.11.2023 against subject license.

Decision: The Committee examined the case on the basis of statement made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and it decided to defer the case further examination,

(Action:Applicant/PRC}

==> picture [487 x 126] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- Case No. 31 M/s. Abhishri Packaging Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai . F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00001 44 7AM24 Meeting No. 16/AM24 held on 06.10.2023 Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization no. 0810825712 dated 18.12.2018. } ; Page 20 of 30 VU ----- End of picture text -----

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization no. 0810825712 dated 18.12.2018.

Applicant's statement: The applicant stated that the rapid spread of covid throughout India, particularly in Maharashtra, led to the imposition of numerous restrictions. These constraints resulted in a reduction in their factory’s production capacity and a shortage of available manpower. The foreign buyers from the USA, Belgium and Canada have cancelled all outstanding orders due to the pandemic. They have fulfilled 98% of EO in accordance with the terms of AA. The outstanding 2% remains pending, primarily due to the significant impact of Covid19. Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension up to 30.11.2023 against subject license.

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

(Action:Applicanv/PRC)}

Case No. 32 Mis. Abhishri Packaging Pvt. Lid., Mumbai

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00000238AM24

Meeting No. 16/AM24 held on 06.10.2023

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization no. 0310823819 dated 18.09.2018.

_ Applicant's statement: The applicant stated that the rapid spread of covid throughout India, particularly in Maharashtra, led to the imposition of numerous restrictions. These constraints resulted in a reduction in their factory's production capacity and a shortage of available manpower. The foreign buyers from the USA, Belgium and Canada have cancelled all outstanding orders due to the pandemic. They have fulfilled 91% of EO in accordance with the terms of AA. The outstanding 9% remains pending, primarily due to the significant impact of Covid19. Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension up to 31.08.2023 against subject license

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

(Action:Applicant/PRC}

Case No. 33

M/s. AGLO Polymers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY06001 120AM24

Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization no. 0211000912 dated 09.07.2021. Applicant’s oN imported statement: The applicant stated that all import products are to be \ and they have already fulfilled export obligation against subject license. ~/ Page 21 of 30 [oeAv:

Their balance import producis/import consignment reaching at concern ports so they need revalidation against above mentioned license for six months from the date of approval or up to 09.01.2024 Hence they are requesting to allow six months 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.

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

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

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 34 Mis. Ashutosh Fibre Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY0G001 135AM24

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0810135484 dated 17.06.2015.

Applicant’s statement: The applicant stated that they have obtain above AA and were suppose to export Text Yam 24801.58 USD but due to some unavoidable situation in the global market their export orders stucked and could not export the said quantity in stipulated time and they exported less quantity 2264.89 USD. RA, Ahmedabad has already been rejected their application due io non-fuifilment of 50% export during 1° extension period. However, they have made full exports in the period of the 2 extension against the said license. Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension up to 17.12.2017 for regularisation purpose against subject license.

Decision: The Committee went through the statement made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and observed that there is merit in the case. Accordingly, it decided to accede to the request and allowed EOP extension to 31.12.2017 against advance authorisation No. 0810135484 dated 17.06.2015 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-Mumbai}

Case No. 35M/s. Axora Resources Limited , Kolkata

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00001 597AM24

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0210210029 dated 10.08.2020. Applicant’s statement: The applicant stated that they have not fulfilled the EO both in terms of quantity and value as stipulated in the authorization and co pleted

==> picture [11 x 31] intentionally omitted <==

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

Page 22 af 30

imports as per the authorisation but due to Covid-19 situation, they could not complete the corresponding quantity of export against the import quantity made. Hence they are requesting to allow extension in EOP for six months against subject license.

Decision: The Committee examined the submission made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and observed. that there is merit in the case. Accordingly , it decided to accede to the request and allowed EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0210210029 dated 10.08.2020for 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 concemed within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Kolkatta)

Case No. 36M/s. ChampaPurie-Chem Industries, Vadodara

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00000972AM24

Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization no. 3410046469 dated 09.10.2020, 3411000982 dated 16.08.2021, 3411001548 dated 17.12.2021, 3411001743 dated 31.01.2022, 3411002130 dated 19.04.2022, 3411002559 dated 21.07.2022 & 3411003048 dated 29.11.2022.

Applicant’s statement: The applicant stated that their raw material namely mercury is allowed import against their license and validity amended up to 18.07.2023 is pending due to the hardships and delay in getting prior informed consent (PIC) from MoEF& CC. Because to import mercury, importers have to get Prior Informed Consent (PIC) from MoEF& CC, as the import of mercury has been revised from Free to Restricted vide Notification No.24 dated 09.09.2021. It is under process/follow-up to get their PIC from the Ministry and import the item. They have already completed and fulfilled export obligation against subject license within the original validity period. Hence they are requesting to allow one year revalidation against subject licenses to complete the import.

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 37M/s. PMEA Soloar Systems Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00001796AM24 Meeting No. 16/AM24 held on 06.10.2023

==> picture [151 x 88] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- f \X AI ----- End of picture text -----

Page 23 of 30

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0311004348 dated 05.06.2021. .

Applicant’s statement: The applicant stated that they have obtained above AA and export obligation is also in process but due to cancelled export order for Torque Tube 4.0mm they have short of export obligation. As specification of their product is custom made they need specific type of order. Hence they need extension for completion of export obligation. Hence they are requesting to allow six month EOP extension 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 for a further period of 6 months from the date of endorsement against advance authorisation No. 0311004348 dated 05.06.2021subject to payment of composition fees as per Policy provisions. The firm shail approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Mumbai}

Case No. 38M/s. Rieter india Pvt. Ltd., Maharashtra.

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00001084AM24

Subject: Revalidation of MEIS scrip no. (1) 3119055621 dated 29.09.2021 (2) 3119055497dated dated 29.09.2021,{3} 3119055503 dated 29.09.2021, (4) 3119055515 29.09.2021 (5} 3119055736 dated 29.09.2021 , {6} 3119056254 dated 04.10.2021 (7) 3119056645 dated 05.10.2021 (8) 3119056011 dated 30.09.2021 and (9) 3119056863 dated 07.10.2021. Applicant’s statement: The applicant stated that they have obtained MEIS license they were using self utilization but due to technical error license not debited at customs, they follow up at customs and rectified the error but their license is expired. Hence they are requesting to allow three months revalidation of above nine MEISscrips for utilization.

{Action: Applicant)

Case No. 39M/s. AstronPlymers Pvt. Ltd., Faridabad.

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00000631AM24

==> picture [9 x 21] intentionally omitted <==

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

Meeting No. 16/AM24 heid on 06.10.2023

Subject: Revalidation of MEIS scrip no. 0519252993 dated 08.02.2021.

: \ ri‘

Page[24][ of][ 30]

Applicant’s statement: The applicant stated that they were importing material and capital goods in earlier years but to promote “Make in india” initiative of Hon’ble PM they tried different alternatives to decrease imports and increase exports. But now due to some development in their technical area, they have te import material as well as machines. This will certainly help them the industry to promote export in untouched dimensions. Hence they are requesting to allow revalidation of 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 reasory justification in support of any genuine hardship faced by them. Accordingly, the Committee decided to reject the request.

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 40M/s. Dewan& Sons, UP.

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00001022AM24

Meeting No. 16/AM24 held on 06.10.2023 ,

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization no.0511000105 dated 10.12.2020.

Applicant’s statement: The applicant stated that due to Covid-19 reason they are not exports to give time period and they have already extension in 12 month but those time they have not exporis for order but present time they export to ready. Hence they are requesting to allow six month EOP extension 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. 41M/s. Diamond Engineering (Chennai) Pvt. Ltd., Tamil Nadu

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY0G001 59ZAM24

Meeting No. 16/AM24 held on 06.10.2023

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0411000538 dated 23.03.2021.

Applicant’s statement: The applicant stated that they have imported raw materials like beam, channel, angle & plate for a quantum of 1629.963 MT out of licensed qty of 1900 MT under the above AA. Out of imported oty of raw material for 1629.963 MT they have to compiete the EO for a net gty of 1598.003 MT after considering the allowance of wastage caiculated @2%. The pending balance qty of finished goods . to be exported for 552.20 MT before 31.03.2024 as per the amendment purchase i \ Page 5 ; order.After taking in to the consideration of effects anden[PY][;] 25 of 3 0

which caused delay in release of modified final fabrication drawings from the customer during the period of Covid 19. Hence they are requesting allow six months EOP extension against subject license.

Decision: The Committee went through the statement made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and observed that there is merit in the case. Accordingly, it decided to accede to the request and allowed EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0441000538 dated 23.03.2024for 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-Chennai)

Case No. 42M/s. Gilbarco Veeder Root India Pvt. Ltd., Tamil Nadu.

F.No. HORPRCAPPLY00001373AM24

Subject: Revalidation of MEIS scrip no. (1) 3819018740 dated 04.01.2022, (2) 3819018779 dated 05.01.2022, (3) 3819018780 dated 05.01.2022, (4) 3819018748 dated 04.01.2022 (5) 3819018845 dated 08.02.2022 and (6) 3819018861 dated 10.02.2022.

Applicant’s Statement: The applicant stated that they have received above scrip and sent to register in the respective port and the same has been received by them. At the time of receipt of scrip, they are in the process of shifting their offices from old building to new building. While shifting the below scrip are misplaced and found right now. Hence they are requesting to allow revalidation of above mentioned MEIS scrip to utilize further in their import shipment.

(Action: Applicant}

Case No. 43M/s. Leeds Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi.

_ F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00001 793AM24

Subject: Revalidation of MEIS scrip no. 0519260175 dated 05.07.2021

Applicant's statement: The applicant stated that they have above MEIS scrip of i value Rs. 452,150.00 and due to some internal changes, they missed utilizing this Ny MEIS scrip within its validity period. To utilize scrip, its validity needs to extend. y

==> picture [25 x 20] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- XN ----- End of picture text -----

Page 26 of 30

Hence they are requesting to allow revalidation of above mentioned MEIS scrip to utilized further in their import shipment.

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

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

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 44M/s. Malas Food Products Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY60001487AM24

_ Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0311001513 dated 09.02.2021.

Applicant's statement: The applicant stated that in the initial period because of the effect of Covid 19 they failed to import their material and result of the same they failedhave to export finished goods, later to complete import and export obligation they applied and received two extension from RA office. They have some ready finished goods available in their factory premises which they have produced using imported material but unable to export under said AA as export validity expired on 09.02.2023. Hence they are requesting to allow six month EOP extension against subject license to fulfil the balance E.O.

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 for a further period of 6 months from the date of endorsement against advance authorisation No. 0311001513 dated 09.02.2021subject 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-Mumbai)

Case No. 45M/s. MultitecIndustries ,Gurugram

F.No.HQRPRCAPPL Y00001 295AM24

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No.0510415699 dated 29.10.2020.

Applicant’s statement: The applicant stated that the import was made during covid lockdown period but factory was closed and the export order were cancelled. Now they got the order and required minimum 12 months to fulfil the expo obligation f Page[27][of][ 30] .

| |

against subject license. The goods are available with them. Hence they are requesting to allow one year EOP extension against subject license to fulfil the E.O.

Decision: The Committee went through the statement made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and observed that there is merit in the case. Accordingly, it decided to accede to the request and allowed EOP extension of Advance Authorization No.0510415699 dated 29.10.202Cfor 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/CLA-New Delhi}

Case No.46M/s. Neuland Laboratories Ltd., Hyderabad

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00001372AM24

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No.0911002250 dated 07.01.2022,

Applicant’s statement: The applicant stated that initially the export product “lbrexafungerp citrate” batch was manufacturing on 20 kg scale. Keeping the increasing export demand in the product, they have initiated the increase in batch size from 20 kg to 60 kg. During this process of scale-up they observed that, dry material was not meeting the specifications as one of the known impurities. It is taking time for them to develop the re-process procedure to reduce the impurity to the required level and experiments are going in the Lab. They have shared the Lab data with their customer for their support as this product has only one Customer. Hence it will take further time to confirm the re-process procedure, Analytical validation and stability of processed batch and approval of the same by the new Customs. Hence they are requesting to allow six monih EOP extension 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.0911002250 dated 07.01.2022for 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-Hyderabad)

Case No. 47M/s. Neuland Laboratories Ltd., Hyderabad F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00001371AM24 Meeting No. 16/AM24 held on 06.10.2023

==> picture [174 x 85] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- (% ; XY x a 7) ----- End of picture text -----

Page 23 of 30

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No.0911002840 dated 07.04.2022.

Applicant's statement: The applicant stated that initially the export product ‘Ibrexafungerp citrate” batch was manufacturing on 20 kg scale. Keeping the increasing export demand in the product, they have initiated the increase in batch size from 20 kg to 60 kg. During this process of scale-up they observed that, dry material was not meeting the specifications as one of the known impurities. It is taking time for them to develop the re-process procedure to reduce the impurity to the required level and experiments are going in the Lab. They have shared the Lab data with their customer for their support as this product has only one Customer. Hence it will take further time to confirm the re-process procedure, Analytical validation and stability of processed batch and approval of the same by the new Customs. Hence they are requesting to allow six month EOP extension 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.0911002840 dated 07.04.2022for 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-Hyderabad)

Case No. 48M/s. Multitec Industries, Gurugram | F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00001294AM24 | | Meeting No. 16/AM24 held on 06.10.2023 Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No.0510413771 dated 03.03.2020. Applicant's statement: The applicant-stated that the import was made during covid lockdown period but factory was closed and the export order were cancelled. Now they got the order and required minimum 12 months fo fulfil EO. The goods are _ available with them. Hence they are requesting to allow one year EOP extension 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 for a further period upto 31.03.24 from the date of endorsement against advance authorisation No.0510413771 dated 03.03.2020subject to payment of composition fees as per Policy provisions. The fir shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes o . meeting. °

(Action: Applicant/RA-CLA-New Delhi)

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

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

Page 29 of 30

Case No. 49M/s. Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Limited, Andra Pradesh.

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00001143AM24

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No.0510401297 dated 16.01.2017.

Applicant’s statement: The applicant stated that they have completed the export obligation in terms of value and for quantity, they have exported more than 17% within the initial validity period i.e. 18 months and remaining quantity exported within the next 2 months after the expiry date of authorization. Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension against subject license for regularization purpose only.

Decision: The Committee went through the statement made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and observed that there is merit in the case. Accordingly, it decided to accede to the request and allowed EOP extension up to 30.09.2018 against Advance Authorization No.0510401297 dated 16.01 .2017subject 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/CLA-New Delhi) Case No. 50M/s. Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Limited,Andra Pradesh F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00001035AM24 Meeting No. 16/AM24 held on 06.10.2023 .

(Action: Applicant/CLA-New Delhi)

Case No. 50M/s. Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Limited,Andra Pradesh

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00001035AM24

Subject:.Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No.0510415981 dated 25.11.2020. .

Applicant's statement: The applicant stated that they applied under para 4.40 ({k} of HBP 2023 read with PN No.59/2015-2020 dated 28.02.2023 regarding composition fee applicable for regularisation of exports already made. They have fulfilled 70.98% EO during original EOP of their AA and remaining 29.46% exports are made beyond original EOP. RA has already been rejected their request for EOP extension. Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension against subject license for regularisation purpose only.

Decision: The Committee went through the statement made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and observed that there is merit in the case. Accordingly, it decided to accede to the request and allowed EOP extension up to 18.06.2022 against Advance Authorization No.0510415981 dated 25.11.2020subject to payment of composition fees as per policy provisions. The firm shall approach concerned within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/CLA-New Delhi)

==> picture [84 x 41] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- ; oma ----- End of picture text -----

Page 30 of 30

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.