IN FORCE Advance Authorisation

DGFT Minutes

Reliability

In force — no superseding record on file.

Document text

Directorate General of Foreign Trade (PRC Section) Minutes of the Policy Relaxation Committee Meeting Shri Held on 20.10.2023 under the Chairmanship of Santosh Kumar Sarangi, Director General of Foreign Trade

Meeting No. 18/AM24 held on 20.10.2023

The following members were present in the meeting:

= Shri Akash Taneja Addl. DGFT 2. Shri Anil Aggarwal Addl. DGFT 3. Shri S.C.Agarwal Add. DGFT 4. Dr. S.K. Bansal Addl. DGFT 5. Shri K.V.Tirumala Jt. DGFT 6. Shri Randheep Thakur Jt. DGFT

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

(S.No [| —sNameofthefirm —=~=SwdrtCSas No. |__6 | Ms. Ashish Life Science Pvt.Ltd, Mumbai Ss]SCiSSCSCd | 8 | M/s. Macleods Pharmaceutical Ltd., Mumbai] | 9 |M/s.M.Dhirubhai&Co.Kolkatass SC~=~sYSC“‘é‘SSO S ON’NN#”SSCS | 22 |Ms.SakunGem—ss—“‘“S™SC#C#*d’SCONCO#ié#d2~Sé«<sY

Case No. 01 M/s. Fredun Pharmaceutical Ltd., Thane..

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00021132AM22

Meeting No.18/AM24 held on 20.10.2023

Subject: Consideration of shipping bill No.4742819 dated 06.06.2019 for fulfilment of Export Obligation against Advance Authorisation No.0310814094 dated 20.06.2017. Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they had been issued subject AA with PC-9 condition by RA Mumbai, and they had other AA in the same period so were unable to fulfil the complete EO under the subject AA for which they applied and issued extension for 6 months from the RA Mumbai. Due to some changes in the export orders they tried their best of fulfil the obligation on time but unfortunately their export S/Bill got filed on 08.06.2019 which is 2 days delay from the expiry of the EOP. They had fulfilled 100% EO. Hence they are requesting to allow six month EOP extension in respect of S/Bill No.4742819 dated 06.06.2019 for regularisation purposes 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 30.06.2019 against advance authorisation No.0310814094 dated 20.06.2017 subject to payment of composition fees as per Policy provisions. The other terms and conditions towards fulfillment of EO shall remain same as per policy/HBP 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. 02

M/s. Century Pharmaceutical Ltd., Gujarat

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00180304AM22

Meeting No.18/AM24 held on 20.10.2023

Subject: Request for Granting Physical exports and Deemed export supplies in same Advance Authorization No.3410041169 dated 23.04.2015 for EODC Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they have made physical exports and deemed export supplies under this AA. RA denies EODC as physical exports and deemed exports considered together in one AA. They have been advised to delete deemed export supply for granting EODC for physical exports or vice verse. But it happened unknowingly and now they cannot undo what has been done early. Imported inputs are used under actual user condition and exported/supplied and the payments realised. As per Chapter 4 are allowed for physical exports and deemed exports. There could be a lapse in understanding the policy but not violated the actual user condition and not failed in achieving realisation of payments. They have supplied the manufactured goods which were manufactured out of the inputs allowed under the AA. Hence they are requesting to allow physical exports and deemed exports under one AA mentioned in the subject. Decision: The Committee having examined the case on the basis of justification provided and discussed the matter at length. The Committee observed that there is merit in the case and accordingly, it decided to consider the supply of goods to 100% EOU (Deemed Export) towards fulfilment of EO against Advance Authorisation No.

e Committee observed that there is merit in the case and accordingly, it decided to consider the supply of goods to 100% EOU (Deemed Export) towards fulfilment of EO against Advance Authorisation No. 3410041169 dated 23.04.2015 provided AA holder avails only such duty exemption benefits as are available for such supplies in terms of Para 4.14 of the FTP 2015-20 and subject to requisite documentation. The firm shall approach RA concerned within 30 days of the uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Vadodara)

Case No. 03 M/s. Sun International, Mumbai

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00000332AM24

Meeting No. 18/AM24 held on 20.10.2023

Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization no. 0311004619 dated 15.09.2021.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they have applied for waiver of above AA against their 9 S/Bills and against two S/Bill which was not appearing in the system as the shipments were made vide file number and hence waiver could not be proceeded. The BRCs was uploaded in bank in the month of October 2022 and due to systems error in the bank, e-BRC could not be uploaded. Due to the above two S/Bills not appearing on the Customs/DGFT portal, they referred this matter to the help desk on 17.08.2022 and had communications made till 11.01.2023 after which there has been no response from the help desk and the matter remains unresolved. This process of resolving the issues resulted in non waiver of license and also the validity period of license 24 months expired and consequently imports could not be affected in spite of EO fulfilment and realisation of payments. Hence they are requesting to allow six month revalidation against mons

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 EGTF division for its examination. Thereafter the case may be brought back again before PRC for a decision.

(Action: Applicant/ EGTF Division)

Case No. 04 M/s. Amoli Organics Pvt. Ltd., Gujarat

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00000540AM24

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization no. 0310646104 dated 03.08.2011

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they have fulfil 82.74% within initial export obligation period of 1 year from the date of import and balance export of 17.26% is made next 6 months. The license has been issued with AU condition against the undertaking given by the application under Para 4.7 HBP. Hence they are requesting to allow six month extension in export obligation period against Advance Authorization no. 0310646104 dated 03.08.2011.

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

(Action: Applicant/RA-Mumbai)

Case No. 05 M/s. Astral Limited, Anmadabad

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00002280AM24

Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization no. 0811002171 dated 30.07.2021.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that due to higher pricing in international market they have not imported any items under this authorization. Therefore, they have requested to extend their import time period against above mentioned license. 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. 06 M/s. Ashish Life Science Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY000001940AM24

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0310816092 dated 03.10.2017.

Applicant Statement : The applicant stated that there is delay by one month (considering 12 months original EOP and 6 months extension by RA) i.e. export obligation is completed in 19" Month from the date of Bill of Entry. Due to corona pandemics during the year 2020, huge downfall in production and demand have been witness by India and every other overseas country(s), compelled to lower/stop productions as no requirement of their finished products, resulted in closure of their manufacturing units, lack of staff and high financial constraints. As a consequences execution of export orders in general, exports towards export obligation under AA in particular, has been deferred and thus they could not comply with export condition stipulated. Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension 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 31.03.2020 against advance authorisation No. 0310816092 dated 03.10.2017 subject to payment of composition fees as per Policy provisions. The other terms and conditions towards fulfillment of EO shall remain same as per policy/HBP 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. 07 M/s. Macleods Pharmaceutical Ltd., Mumbai

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00001922AM24

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No.0310838073 dated 03.09.2020.

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 31.07.2023 against advance authorisation No.0310838073 dated 03.09.2020 subject to payment of composition fees as per Policy provisions. The other terms and conditions towards fulfillment of EO shall remain same as per policy/HBP 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. 08 M/s. Macleods Pharmaceutical Ltd., Mumbai F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00001888AM24

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No.0310839370 dated 05.11.2020.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they have fulfilled 100% EO quantity wise and value wise but partial EO is fulfilled after expiry of EOP. Due to unfavourable market conditions post covid pandemic there was decline in demand for the medicines covered in this AA and their foreign buyer has cancelled the export obligation. They could not fulfil the EO within EO period validity. There were no direct imports and all inputs covered in this AA were procured indigenously against invalidation. Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension up to 31.07.2023 for regularisation purpose 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 31.07.2023 against advance authorisation No.0310839370 dated 05.11.2020 subject to payment of composition fees as per Policy provisions. The other terms and conditions towards fulfillment of EO shall remain same as per policy/HBP 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. 09 M/s. M. Dhirubhai & Co. Kolkata

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00000030AM24

Subject: Permit application for TMA period of 3 Quarter of 2019-20.

Applicant Statement: This is review case of PRC Meeting No.32/AM 23 held on 24.02.2023 (Case No. 53) wherein Committee reject the case. Now they-have stated that the problem was that in 2 S/Bills they had applied for, but fer they

realised that in both S/Bills instead of 1 40FT container, there were 2 and 3 40 ft containers respectively and their claim would increase by Rs. 33600 to a total of 56000.00. They approached RA for solution and they asked to get the application cancelled as the claim amount is less and then file a fresh application with approval from NIC department, New Delhi and they also applied for PRC and Committee referred the case to PC-6 and ask for examination and solution. They are small scale exporter and such schemes add to their benefit. The new current portal has provision to file application for the said period only on PRC orders. As this was their first time for filing this application and the mistake they have made is genuine. Hence they are requesting to allow to re-file this application and avail their benefit against above said period.

Decision: The Committee went through the statements made by the firm and did not find any merits in the request and rejected the same reiterating the earlier decision of PRC meeting held on 24.02.2023.

Case No. 10 M/s. Radnik Export, Noida

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY000002540AM24

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0510413776 dated 03.03.2020.

Applicant Statement: This is a review case of PRC Meeting No.36/AM23 held on 28.03.2023 (Case No.15) wherein Committee allowed six months EOP extension against subject license. Now they have stated that as per above decision they had approach to concerned RA within 30 days of the uploading of the minutes of meeting and trying to upload the online application EOP extension but system shows to apply for first amendment after that apply for EOP extension. They had applied for amendment and after grant of amendment they apply for EOP extension, but CLA office advise to approach PRC for further extension due to delay in apply for EOP extension. Hence they are requesting to allow further six months EOP extension 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.0510413776 dated 03.03.2020 for a further period upto 31.03 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/CLA-New Delhi) a

M/s. Opera Global Pvt. Ltd., Noida

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00002491AM24

Subject: Request for extension of EOP of Advance Authorization No. 0510413427 dated 23.01.2020.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that due to Covid-19 issues problems they could not shipped the goods on time against the subject license. During the period of lock down and Covid-19 problems, they have done many requests to their buyer if you will not accept the ready and packed goods. They have to face lot of losses in their business because they have already made huge expenses and lot of dues pending to their job worker against the said license orders. After that their buyer has accepted lot of styles goods. Only two styles goods not accepted due to buyer foreign vendors delivery time had expired. Hence they are requesting to allow six month revalidation 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 extension of EOP of advance authorisation No. 0510413427 dated 23.01.2020 upto 31.01.2024. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/CLA-New Delhi)

Case No. 12 M/s. K-Flex India Pvt. Ltd., Pune

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00002747AM24

Subject: Closure of AA no. 3110066723 dated 04.05.2017 by USAGE of shipping bill in other AA no. 03110066140 dated 10.05.2016.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they are multinational manufacturing company specialized in the production of Thermal and Acoustic Flexible Elastomeric insulation materials. They got the AA No.3110066140 dated 10.05.2016 for import of Unvulacanised Rubber Master Batch X 100 Qty 205160.2 Kgs. against export obligation of 2,10,600 kgs . Prior to completion of their exports against this license they applied for one more AA for Import of Unvulcanised Rubber Master Batch x 100 and got the AA No.3110066723 dated 04.05.2017 for qty 216779.80 with EO qty 222529 . Upon completion of EO against first license they had applied for redemption and received IDC. As both AAs were in-operation at that time unfortunately at the time of export vide S/Bill No.7527025 dated 22.07.2017 for export quantity of 73470.18 kgs there wasa clerical mistake from their staff and AA No.3110066140 dated 04.05.2017 was mentioned. They had already completed their EO against this license. Due to the above clerical error their export statement filed at the time of redemption of AA No.3110066140 showed export of 284069.68 kgs as against obligation of 210600 kgs. EO cannot exceed 100% Per condition

ove clerical error their export statement filed at the time of redemption of AA No.3110066140 showed export of 284069.68 kgs as against obligation of 210600 kgs. EO cannot exceed 100% Per condition

sheet that import component in the export should be 97.417%. The EO achieved is 134.89%. The main reason is they had wrongfully clubbed the EO of S/B No.7527025 dated 22.07.2017 as mentioned under above. RA had scrutinized the case and upon calculation they were directed to pay the customs duty for the shortfall of qty .0.26 grams. They approached RA again with the paid custom duty along with applicable interest but it was communicated to them that once EODC is given it cannot be modified. Hence they are requesting to allow modification to enabling them to fulfil their EO 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. 13 M/s. Raj Petro Specialties Pvt. Ltd. Chennai

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00000491AM24

Subject: EOP Extension of AA. No. 0410164789 dated 16.10.2018

Applicant Statement: This is review case of PRC Meeting No.06/AM24 held on 19.06.2023 (Case No.21) wherein Committee reject the case. Now they have stated that they submit a reconsideration proposal granting them relief of the issue in the form of a period extension allowing them to fulfil the pending obligation. They are in this issue due to severe impediment to business activities during Covid-19 period, when normal business operations came to a grinding halt. The prolonged Covid-19 impact also caused not only cancellation of some export orders, but also in awarding fresh export orders. The production process also require relief time for commencing a new product to be put in process compared to the one already manufactured and taken out of the vessel. All these constraints put them off for a while and they are in pace with the export schedule for all their orders. Hence they are requesting to allow extension in EOP against subject license.

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

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 14 M/s. Raj Petro Specialties Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

==> picture [10 x 14] intentionally omitted <==

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

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY0000492AM24

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

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

Subject: EOP Extension of AA. No. 0410164705 dated 20.09.2018

Applicant Statement: This is review case of PRC Meeting No.06/AM24 held on 19.06.2023 (Case No.22) wherein Committee reject the case. Now they have stated that they submit a reconsideration proposal granting them relief of the issue in the form of a period extension allowing them to fulfil the pending obligation. They are in this issue due to severe impediment to business activities during Covid-19 period, when normal business operations came to a grinding halt. The prolonged Covid-19 impact also caused not only cancellation of some export orders, but also in awarding fresh export orders. The production process also require relief time for commencing a new product to be put in process compared to the one already manufactured and taken out of the vessel. All these constraints put them off for a while and they are in pace with the export schedule for all their orders. Hence they are requesting to allow extension in EOP against subject license.

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 15 M/s. Laxmi Organic Industries Ld., Mumbai

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00002735AM24

Subject: Request for amendment of Authorization No. 031 1008815 dated 24.11.2021 from self ratification scheme as per Para 4.07A of HBP to Self Declared authorization as per para 4.07 of HBP Applicant Statement : The applicant stated that they had obtained subject licence under self ratification scheme. License issued as per para 4.07A have to comply with pre import condition. They are not able to comply/fulfil the pre-import condition in the license. Hence they are applying to the PRC to allow to amend the license from self ratification scheme as per para 4.07A of HBP to Self Declared Authorization as per para 4.07 of HBP. They are submitting declaration as per para 4.07 of HBP and Trade Notice No.1/AM2000 dated 07.04.1999 that they undertaken to pay customs duty and interest in case norms are rejected or reduced against the license. They have already fulfilled the EO and such amendment if accepted will enable them to regularise the license as pre import condition will not be applicable to the license under self declaration scheme. Hence they are requesting to allow amendment license from self ratification scheme as per Para 4.07A of HP to Self _ Declared authorization as per para 4.07 of HBP Vaa sc.

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.

Case No. 16 M/s. Laxmi Organic Industries Ld., Mumbai

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00002731AM24

Subject: Request for amendment of Authorization No. 0311008817 dated 24.11.2021 from self ratification scheme as per Para 4.07A of HBP to Self Declared authorization as per para 4.07 of HBP. Applicant Statement : The applicant stated that they had obtained subject licence under self ratification scheme. License issued as per para 4.07A have to comply with pre import condition. They are not able to comply/fulfil the pre-import condition in the license. Hence they are applying to the PRC to allow to amend the license from self ratification scheme as per para 4.07A of HBP to Self Declared Authorization as per para 4.07 of HBP. They are submitting declaration as per para 4.07 of HBP and Trade Notice No.1/AM2000 dated 07.04.1999 that they undertaken to pay customs duty and interest in case norms are rejected or reduced against the license. They have already fulfilled the EO and such amendment if accepted will enable them to regularise the license as pre import condition will not be applicable to the license under self declaration scheme. Hence they are requesting to allow amendment license from self ratification scheme as per Para 4.07A of HBP to Self Declared authorization as per para 4.07 of HBP. 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. 17 M/s. Global Pharma Healthcare Private, Chennai

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00002865AM24

Subject: Extension of EO against AA no. 0410166147 dated 10.10.2019, 0410165747 dated 20.06.2019, 0410165950 dated 08.08.2019 and 0410165381 dated 16.07.2019. Applicant Statement : This is a review case of PRC Meeting No.13/A \held on 31.08.2023 (Case No.11) wherein Committee allowed EOP exte sion| up to 31.10.2023 against AA No.0410166147 a esa iin

against AA No.04100165950 dated 08.08.2019. Now they have stated that Committee had granted EOP for two AAs only out of Four AAs. The other two AA were not considered for the extension of EOP. AA issued for import of Erythromycin Sterate against export of Erythromycin Tablets 250 mg and 500 mg. Subsequently they have invalidated the authorizations and procured the raw material ingeniously. During the covid period, they were unable to complete EO within valid EO period and due to the lack of manpower and packing material shortage in manufacturing. After the completion of EOP they were unable to get the endorsement in the Bill of Exports from Kandla, SEZ as per PN 67 of 2020. SEZ authority directed to get the EO extension the AA in the Bill of export against advance license. They obtained 4 licences for the same product. Now they are having the valid raw material in hand and once they allowed EOP extension till 31.03.2024 they will complete the EO. Hence they are requesting to allow further EOP extension up to 31.03.2024 against subject four Advance Licenses.

hand and once they allowed EOP extension till 31.03.2024 they will complete the EO. Hence they are requesting to allow further EOP extension up to 31.03.2024 against subject four Advance Licenses.

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 18 M/s. Bal Krishna Industries Ltd., Mumbai

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00002877AM24

Subject: To allow extension in EOP against 6 Advance Authorization Nos. (i) 0311015512 dated 15.06.2022, (ii) 0311015519 dated 15.06.2022, (iii) 0311015522 dated 15.06.2022, (iv) 0311017146 dated 12.08.2022, (v) 0311017148 dated 12.08.2022 & (vi) 0311017147 dated 12.08.2022.

Applicant Statement : The applicant stated that they are exporting more than 78% of their products to more than 160 countries and at the same time serving both original equipment manufacturers (OEM) and the replacement market in India. One of the inputs in the AA is Natural Rubber, which is covered under Appendix 4J stipulating condition of export within 6 months from the date of import. The tyres manufactured by them are specifically made as per the buyer’s requirements using natural rubber (imported) and other ingredients. They export tyres to many countries and some of them buy in bulk. During the year 2021-22 they have exported a total quantity of 240,397.25 MT of a total FOB value of US$ 834313864/-Anticipating this requirements, they plan procurement of natural rubber and other ingredients well in advance for the next year so that the supply is received well in time. Accordingly, they obtained above license during the year 2022 and imported the materials well in time so that the exports are made as per their schedule. Based on the past performance of exports and the requirements, they also started manufacturing these tyres. Unfortunately, due to overall recessionpenn all the

ports are made as per their schedule. Based on the past performance of exports and the requirements, they also started manufacturing these tyres. Unfortunately, due to overall recessionpenn all the

countries had curtailed their requirements; the importers across the globe, not only reduced their order quantity but also delayed considerably the shipment schedule. Though some of the quantity of tyres were already in stock, they could not export due to deferment of supplies. Hence they are requesting to allow six month EOP extension against six Advance Authorisation for regularization purpose.

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 against following 6 Advance Authorization as under:(1)EOP extension up to 31.08.2023 against 3 advance authorisation No. 0311015512 dated 15.06.2022, 0311015519 dated 15.06.2022 and 0311015522 dated 15.06.2022.
(2) EOP extension up to 31.07.2023 against advance authorisation No. 0311017146 dated 12.08.2022 and EOP extension up to 30.09.2023 of Advance Authorisation No.0311017147 dated 12.08.2022 and 0311017148 dated 12.08.2022.

This is subject to payment of composition fees as per policy provisions. The other terms and conditions towards fulfilment of EO shall remain same as per policy/HBP 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. 19 M/s. Sara Sae Private Limited, Uttrakhand

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY000002850AM24

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization nos. (i) 6110001393 dated 05.01.2017 (ii) 6110001549 dated 10.10.2018 & (iii) 6110001574 dated 17.01.2019

Applicant Statement: This is review case of PRC Meeting No.13/AM24 held on 31.08.2023 (Case No.17) wherein committee reject the case. Now the applicant Stated that in the past, the oil business downturn and the Corona pandemic prevented them from exporting the goods on time as requested by the customer and as a result of the delay, the customer put the order on hold. The client is now ready to receive the order after updating the value of the export goods. They are manufacturer exporter of parts and equipment for oil field drilling and they supply these items to local drilling companies like ONGC and Oil India Limited. The Middle East, Europe, North America, and various regions of Asia are their primary export markets. They performed their effort to help the country earn foreign currency with more than 100 crores and a revenue of more than Rs. 50 crores from exports alone ype)

in the most recent fiscal year. Hence they are requesting to allow six month extension in EOP 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. 20 M/s. Shibaam Polymers, Bangaluru

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00002835AM24

Meeting No. 18AM24 held on 20.10.2023

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0710115916 dated 24.12.2019

Applicant Statement : The applicant stated that their Actual EO was expired on 24.06.2021, and hence for the above said AA auto extension was considered as per Notification No.28/2015-20 dated 23.09.2021 which is up to 31.12.2021. However, erroneously instead of selecting 01.07.2022 they had selected 01.06.2022 and the extension was granted to that date. Further they had applied and obtained 2" EO extension from 01.06.2022 to 01.12.2022. The export obligation for the above mentioned AA is completed, however, 3 S/Bills was exported beyond the extended EOP. In light of the above they required extension in EOP. Hence they are requesting to allow further extension from 01.12.2022 to 01.02.2023 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 up to 28.02.2023 against advance authorisation No. 0710115916 dated 24.12.2019 subject to payment of composition fees as per Policy provisions. The other terms and conditions towards fulfillment of EO shall remain same as per policy/HBP 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. 21 M/s.Shibaam Polyemrs, Bangaluru

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00001181AM24

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0710114878 d 09.05.2019. AO

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that their Actual EO was expired on 09.11.2020 and further they had obtained 1% EO extension for 6 months i.e. 09.11.2020 to 09.05.2021. Since the extended EOP expiry date falls under Notification No.28/2015-20 dated 23.09.2021 which is up to 31.12.2021. However, considering the auto extension up to 31.12.2021 further they tried to apply for 2™4 extension from 01.01.2022 to 01.06.2022. But the selection of dates on DGFT website was limited up to 09.11.2021 only. And they could not select the dates beyond that. For the exports they have made beyond extended EOP bearing bill of export. Therefore, they requested to grant EOP from 09.05.2021 to 31.12.2021 as per Notification No.28 along with 2"? EOP from 01.01.2022 to 30.06.2022 in order to the account the exports made beyond the EOP. Hence they are requesting to allow further extension from 01.12.2022 to 30.06.2022 against subject license.

OP from 01.01.2022 to 30.06.2022 in order to the account the exports made beyond the EOP. Hence they are requesting to allow further extension from 01.12.2022 to 30.06.2022 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 up to 30.06.2022 against advance authorisation No. 0710114878 dated 09.05.2019 subject to payment of composition fees as per Policy provisions. The other terms and conditions towards fulfilment of EO shall remain same as per policy/HBP 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. 22 M/s. Sakun Gem, Mumbai

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY000002853AM24

Subject: To allow relaxation of export of gold jewellery.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they are an exporter of studded/plain gold jewellery since last 18 years. They have procured 1000 gms of Gold from Nominated agency (DIL) wherein last date of export was 14.11.2021. The average time schedule between various stages in preparation of draft design of gold jewellery and approval by foreign buyer and then manufacture and export is between 60 to 100 days. However, due to nationwide covid lockdown and absence of karigars for making jewellery the timeline was extended beyond the average period inspite of their best efforts. 43.38% gold jewellery has been exported within the due dated 14.11.2021 vide various S/Bills (SB) and remaining 56.62% gold jewellery has been exported which delay of only 1 month 10 days and 2 months 5 days for the reasons stated above which was beyond their control. Hence they are requesting to allow relaxation of 1 month 10 days and 2 months 5 days delay beyond 90 days permissible period for export of gold jewellery from the date of procurement of gold from DIL.

e 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 andype

10 days and 2 months 5 days delay beyond 90 days permissible period for export of gold jewellery from the date of procurement of gold from DIL subject to payment of composition fees as per Policy provisions. The other terms and conditions towards fulfilment of EO shall remain same as per policy/HBP 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. 23 M/s. Titan Laboratories Pvt. Ltd.

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY000002856AM24

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0311004823 dated 22.06.2021.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they have acquired many Advance License under No Norms category as well as SION category till date out of which maximum licences have been already redeemed from AddIl.DGFT Mumbai. In the Said license they have majorly affected export against the import done in the license. Their consignments may not be within the stipulated period of one year from the date of imports as per the guidelines framed in Policy Circular No. 9. They have effected two imports in the license. The exports effected against the first license are not done within the mandatory 1 year period as per PC 9 condition. Hence they are requesting to allow six month EOP extension against subject license for regularization purpose.

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. 0311004823 dated 22.06.2021 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-Mumbai)

M/s. Avt Mccormick Ingredients Pvt. Ltd

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY000002840AM24

Meeting No. 18/AM24 held on 20.10.2023 |

Subject: Relaxation of time limit for filing of TMA application for the quarter ended 30.06.2019 and 30.09.2019.

Applicant Statement: This is review case of PRC Meeting No.01/AM2 held on 25.05.2021 (Case No.26) wherein Committee decided to accede the request for

condonation of delay in submission of TMA application for the quarter ended 30.06.2019 and 30.09.2019. The firm advised to approach RA concerned within 60 days of the uploading of the minutes. The applicant stated that despite the positive decision by the PRC and upload of minutes to website on 04.06.2021 there has occurred an unintentional and unforeseen delay of 12 days in complying to the PRC directive. Further delay due to Covid 19 induced operational dislocation of the company in the capacity of a high risk industry with restrictions imposed beyond the date of upload of PRC decision. Delay due to receipt of direct official communication regarding PRC decision. Delay due to initial wrong submission of PRC decision implementation request to RA Cochin instead of RA Bangalore consequential to reference of RA Cochin in PRC Minutes. Delay due to forced re-entry of the entire application data afresh in new e-com module: pursuant to loss of initially uploaded e- com files upon technical up gradation/migration of DGFT online filing system during the period. Hence they are requesting to allow relaxation of time limit for filing of TMA application for the quarter ended 30.06.2019 to 30.09.2019.

n/migration of DGFT online filing system during the period. Hence they are requesting to allow relaxation of time limit for filing of TMA application for the quarter ended 30.06.2019 to 30.09.2019.

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. 25 M/s. TV 18 Broadcast Ltd., Noida.

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00000225AM24

Subject: Condonation of Procedural Lapse for not making endorsement of Group Company in the EPCG Authorization Nos. (i) 0530139286 dated 10.08.2005, (ii) 0530139517 dated 12.09.2005 (iii) 0530139858 dated 09.11.2005 and (iv) 0530141650 dated 02.08.2006.

Applicant’s statement: This is review case of 6 Meeting EPCG Committee held on 03.08.2022 (Case No.09 ) wherein Committee reject the case. The applicant stated that they had obtained above 4 EPCG licenses for import of Capital Goods. During FT 2008-09, the company acquired 33.70% of equity capital of M/s. Viacom18 Media Pvt. Ltd. The company’s shareholding in Viacom18 Media Pvt. Ltd. was further increased to 50% in FY 2009-10 and remained at that level in subsequent financial years thereafter. Accordingly, Viacom 18 Media Pvt. Ltd became a Group Company of TV18 Broadcast Ltd in terms of para 9.28 of the FTP with effect from FY 2008-09. Unfortunately, due to oversight, the company missed to get the Group Company's name endorsed on the above mentioned EPCG Authorizations. TV18 has fulfilled specific as well as average E.O. as on 31°" March, 2012 towards the aforesaid EPCG Authorizations by considering its Group Company’s exports for FY’s 2008-09 to FY 2011-12...and had duly filed its application for issuance of EODC together with a request for condonation of delay in endorsing Group Company’s name vide O/o DGFT receipts dated 19" may, 2013 for each of the authorizations. In the flurry of corporate actions aforesaid and overweight, the company may have missed to get meme je ond

Company’s name vide O/o DGFT receipts dated 19" may, 2013 for each of the authorizations. In the flurry of corporate actions aforesaid and overweight, the company may have missed to get meme je ond

Company name in its EPCG licenses. As the management of the company changed hands in July, 2014 and almost all of the previous top and middle management team is changed since long, they genuinely feel an inadvertent oversight as the reason for delay in endorsing Group Company’s name in the EPCG licenses. Hence they are requesting to allow condone the delay for endorsement of Group Company name for fulfilment of EO against subject licenses.

Decision: The Committee went through the statement made by the applicant and reviewed the decision of EPCG Committee. After detailed discussion the Committee observed that there is merit in the case. Accordingly, it decided to accede to the request and allowed condonation of procedural lapse for not obtaining timely Endorsement of Group Company in the EPCG Authorization in respect of EPCG Authorization No. 0530139286 dated 10.08.2005, 0530139517 dated 12.09.2005, 0530139858 dated 09.11.2005, and 0530141650 dated 02.08.2006 for fulfillment of EO. The other terms and conditions towards fulfilment of EO shall remain same as per policy/HBP provisions. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

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

Case No. 26 M/s. Mehta Pharmaceutical Industries, Mumbai F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00004665AM24

Subject: To allow MEIS benefits against shipping bill No. 5519077 dated 29.09.2020. Applicant’s statement: The applicant stated that they have exported goods to M/s. Selenia Ltd but the payment was received from their sister concern M/s. Mayachem Ltd, due to the difference in name mentioned in the S/Bill and payment remitter bank did not issued the Bank Realization Certificate in time. Hence they were not able to apply the MEIS on time. After submitting all required documents to Bank they have released the BRC which received on 31.10.2022. The MEIS has been delayed. Hence they are requesting to allow BRC issued by the Bank for MEIS benefits against their export.

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 against shipping bill no. dated 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 imposedv6n 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)

M/s.Top Light Process, Tamilnadu.

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00000601AM24

Subject: To allow Third Party exports against EPCG License No.3230022210 dated 06.05.2015.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they had obtained subject license under FTP 2015-20 policy and they were EO fulfilled through third party and necessary documents submitted to RA Coimbatore for redemption. But RA not consider the same as per para 5.04 (a) of FTP 2015-20 . They are one of the supporting manufacturer for Readymade Garments (Intermediate stage) and their unit is TINY (MSME) status only. Hence they are requesting to allow CSP scheme against subject license to close the case.

Decision: The Committee went through the submission made by the firm and discussed the matter at length and it decided to refer the issue to PC-5 Division for consolidated communication on all similar cases.

(Action: Applicant/PC-5 division)

Case No. 28 M/s. Sum Marketers LLP, Delhi

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00000505AM24

Subject: To allow MEIS benefit against 18 shipping bills

Applicant’s statement: The applicant stated that their company has not been Claiming MEIS for the year 2020-21 because of payment received from the party on time but at the time of application they cannot file because shipping bills are not online at DGFT portal. There is also S/Bill hold by the concerned GST Department. So these S/Bills are not online at DGFT portal. When it is online at DGFT portal MEIS Module is closed at portal and at that time they have not filed the application S/Bills. Hence they are requesting to allow MEIS benefit against 18 Shipping Bills.

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. 29 M/s. The Indian Hotel Co. Ltd. New Delhi.

==> picture [4 x 14] intentionally omitted <==

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

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00002849AM24

Subject: Revalidation of 79 SFIS Scrip Nos.(1) 0510408528 dated 26.11.2018, (2) 0510408527 dated 26.11.2018, (3) 0510408542 dated 26.11.2018, (4) 0510408617 dated 26.11.2018, (5) 0510408616 dated 26.11.2018, (6) 0510408532 dated 26.11.2018, (7) 0510408533 dated 26.11.2018, (8) 0510408543 dated 26.11.2018, (9) 0510408579 dated 26.11.2018, (10) 0510408588 dated 26.11.2018, (11) 0510408612 dated 26.11.2018, (12) 0510408620 dated 26.11.2018, (13) 0510408621 dated 26.11.2018, (14) 0510408503 dated 26.11.2018, (15) 0510408611 dated 26.11.2018, (16) 0510408524 dated 261 1.2018, (17) 0510408574 dated 26.11.2018, (1 8) 0510408581 dated 26.11.2018, (19) 0510408628 dated 26.11.2018, (1 0) 0510408576 dated 26.11.2018, (21 ) 0510408596 dated 26.11.2018, (22) 0510408597 dated 26.11.2018, (23) 0510408598 dated 26.11.2018, (24) 0510408619 dated 26.11.2018, (25) 0510408557 dated 26.11.2018, (26) 0510408595 dated 26.11.2018, (27) 0510408502 dated 26.11.2018, (28) 0510408594 dated 26.11 .2018, (29) 0510408552 dated 26.11.2018, (30) 0510408510 dated 26.11.201 8, (31) 0510408512 dated 26.11.2018, (32) 0510408538 dated 26.11.201 8, (33) 0510408539 dated 26.11.2018, (34) 0510408540 dated 26.11.201 8, (35) 0510408544 dated 26.11.2018, (36) 0510408545 dated 26.11.201 8, (37) 0510408546 dated 26.11.2018, (38) 0510408558 dated 26.11.201 8, (39) 0510408573 dated 26.11.2018, (40) 0510408585 dated 26.11.2018, (41) 0510408586 dated 26.11.2018, (42) 0510408592 dated 26.11 .2018, (43) 0510408593 dated 26.11.2018, (44) 0510408599 dated 26.11.2018, (45) 0510408608 dated 26

018, (40) 0510408585 dated 26.11.2018, (41) 0510408586 dated 26.11.2018, (42) 0510408592 dated 26.11 .2018, (43) 0510408593 dated 26.11.2018, (44) 0510408599 dated 26.11.2018, (45) 0510408608 dated 26.11.2018, (66) 0510408566 dated 26.11.201 8, (47) 0510408517 dated 26.11.2018, (48) 0510408521 dated 26.11.201 8, (49) 0510408591 dated 26.11.2018, (50) 0510408607 dated 26.11.2014 8, (51) 0510408601 dated 26.11.2018, (52) 0510408609 dated 26.11.201 8, (53) 0510408629 dated 26.11.2018, (54) 0510408572 dated 26.11.201 8, (55) 0510408626 dated 26.11.2018, (56) 0510408511 dated 26.11.201 8, (57) 0510408520 dated 26.11.2018, (58) 0510408580 dated 26.11.201 8, (59) 0510408571 dated 26.11.2018, (60) 0510408518 dated 26.11.201 8, (61) 0510408522 dated 26.11.2018, (62) 0510408559 dated 26.11.201 8, (63) 0510408602 dated 26.11.2018, (64) 0510408613 dated 26.11.201 8, (65) 0510408622 dated 26.11.2018, (66) 0510408624 dated 26.11.201 8, (67) 0510408625 dated 26.11.2018, (68) 0510408499 dated 26.11.2018, (69) 0510408501 dated 26.11.2018, (70) 0510408537 dated 26.11 .2018, (71) 0510408500 dated 26.11.2018, (72) 0510408578 dated 26.11.2041 8, (73) 0510408618 dated 26.11.2018, (74) 0510408504 dated 26.11.201 8, (75) 0510408523 dated 26.11.2018, (76) 0510408610 dated 26.11.2014 8, (77) 0510408535 dated 26.11.2018, (78) 0510408569 dated 26.11.201 8, (79) 0510408570 dated 26.11.2018.

08504 dated 26.11.201 8, (75) 0510408523 dated 26.11.2018, (76) 0510408610 dated 26.11.2014 8, (77) 0510408535 dated 26.11.2018, (78) 0510408569 dated 26.11.201 8, (79) 0510408570 dated 26.11.2018.

Applicant’s statement: The applicant stated that PRC Meeting No.26/AM23 held on 03.01.2023 (Case No.38) were allowed them to revalidate above 79 SFIS scrips worth about Rs. 11 crores, which was expired on 5" August, 2023. As they previously mentioned the IHCL has been using the scrips issued under SFIS judiciously since many years for import of capital goods and food and beverage items which are international quality. The hotels were able to use around Rs. 6.01 crores out of the Rs. 11 Crores. The IHCL is currently on an 5 pee

has been using the scrips issued under the SFIS. They have already placed the orders well in advance but due to the unstable global situation created by ongoing War and post pandemic affect, the manufacturing and transport system are severely hindered, making it difficult for them to receive their imports on time and their current scrips was valid till 5" August, 2023. There are many ongoing projects that would require imported equipment and the consequent requirement for duty relief. Hence they are requesting to allow revalidation of above mentioned 79 SFIS up to March, 2024.

ongoing projects that would require imported equipment and the consequent requirement for duty relief. Hence they are requesting to allow revalidation of above mentioned 79 SFIS up to March, 2024.

Case No. 30 M/s. Jubilant Ingrevia Ltd., Noida

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00001494AM24

Subject: Revalidation of Advance License no. 0511004409 dated 31 .08.2021

Applicant’s statement: The applicant stated that as per their nature of business, they do export first and import subsequently they fulfil export obligation first, later on company import the equivalent quantity of inputs as replenishment of raw material. They have received supply documents from customer on expiry of initial and extended validity period of the said AA due to flood, landslides and continues rain all the Government and Private Offices h been affected. They were unable to import of raw material against export of Finish goods. Hence they are requesting to allow revalidation of above mentioned Advance License.

Case No. 31 M/s.Rusan Pharma Ltd., Mumbai.

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00001132AM24 Meeting No. 18/AM24 held on 20.10.2023 Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorisation No. 0341004202 soe) 01.06.2021. Yo

Applicant’s statement: The applicant stated that they have been able to complete 34500 nos of the export obligation till now under subject license. They had planned to complete the balance EO also in the stipulated time. They had applied for PRC forNo.extension of EOP and PRCin its meeting No;04/AM24 held on 26.05.2023 (Case 37) has been approved. While filing online EO error occurred as the license is issued under 4J and the error rectified by DGFT on 04.08.2023 and on 05.08.2023, they submitted online application but it was rejected by RA stating that 30 days from PRC approval is lapsed. Hence they are requesting to allow further EOP extension against subject license.

Decision: The Committee discussed the case in detail and in view of justification provided by the firm it decided to allow EOP extension against advance authorisation No. 0311004202 dated 01.06.2021 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 of the uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Mumbai)

Case No. 32 M/s. Rusan Pharma Ltd., Mumbai

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00001131AM24

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorisation No. 0311003742 dated 12.05.2021.

Applicant’s statement: The applicant stated that they had planned to complete the balance EO also in the stipulated time. They had applied for PRC for extension of EOP and PRC in its meeting No;04/AM24 held on 26.05.2023 (Case No. 38) has been approved. While filing online EO error occurred as the license is issued under 4J and the error rectified by DGFT on 04.08.2023 and on 05.08.2023, they submitted online application but it was rejected by RA stating that 30 days from PRC approval is lapsed. Hence they are requesting to allow further EOP extension against subject license.

Decision: The Committee discussed the case in detail and in view of justification provided by the firm it decided to allow EOP extension against advance authorisation No. 0311003742 dated 12.05.2021 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 of the uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Mumbai)

M/s. O. C. Sweaters LLP, Gurugram.

Case No. 33

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00004425AM24

Meeting No. 18/AM24 held on 20.10.2023

Subject: Permission of EODC application manually against AA No.0511005106 dated 01.10.2021.

Applicant’s statement: This is a review case of PRC Meeting No.26/AM23 held on 03.01.2023 (Case No.55), wherein Committee reject the case. The applicant stated that the above said license was issued with invalidation by RA on 01.10.2021. They completed sourcing and after production attempted to file S/Bill on 03.12.2021, but failed to do so as authorization was not transmitted to the ICEGATE. Delivery date of shipment to USA was expiring on 08.12.2021, and were not having even single day to spare to wait for transmission hence they were forced to file S/Bill under Zero Scheme. The authorization details were also mentioned in S/Bill in description column. Hence they are requesting to allow permission to file EODC application manually because their two S/Bill were filed under Zero Scheme due to above situation.

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

M/s. KSE Electricals Pvt. Ltd. Kolkata.

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY0000007AM24

Subject: Revalidation of MEIS scrip no. 0219029872 dated 01.12.2016

Applicant’s statement: The applicant stated that the Committee noted the as per Para 3.13 of the HBP the DCS issued on or after 01.01.2016, shall be valid for a period of 24 months from the date of issue. Further para 2.20 (d)(i) of HBOP 201520 provides for revalidation of scripts by RA on the grounds of transmission errors. It is equally unfortunate that they could not find any solution other than referring this case to DGFT. It is also surprising that license was issued by DGFT which could not get registered due to technical issues or may be for some other reason which they do not know. In spite of that beneficiary is held responsible for not getting this done. Hence they are requesting to allow revalidation against subject MEIS.

M/s. PMR Mud Riggers India Pvt. Ltd., Pune

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00001137AM24

Subject: Revalidation of MEIS Scrip no. 3119062914 dated 14.03.2022, 3119062755 dated 11.03.2022, 3119061989 dated 07.02.2022, 3119061076 dated 30.12.202, 3119060677 dated 28.12.2021, 3119060111 dated 20.12.2021 and 3119059758 dated 09.12.2021 Applicant’s statement: The applicant stated that they are regular importer/exporter and had an export manager handling all documents of exportvimport and DGFT incentive scheme. But unfortunately their manager dies last year and they were unaware of script. They were totally unaware of their expiry of script and when it come to their notice they were already expired. Hence they are requesting to allow two month revalidation against above mentioned script. 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.

Case No. 36 M/s. India Yamaha Motor Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00000474AM24

Subject: To allow MEIS benefit against 12 shipping bills.

Applicant’s statement: The applicant stated that they filed their application for MEIS benefits against 12 S/Bills at RA and they issued D/L stating that description of export is not tally with the MEIS appendix. Therefore, they realized that they had exported Motorcycles in CKD/SKD condition and the same description is also mentioned in all 12 S/Bill against which the application filed. However, the ITCH of these export items were mentioned as 87112011 and 8714090 instead of correct ITCH which is 87112029. The mentioning of wrong ITCH was done at the time of filing of S/Bills due to oversight. They approach Customs for amendment and again file application. Now RA informed that S/Bills are not appearing at MEIS portal and ~~ they should approach PRC. Hence they are requesting to allow MEIS benefit against above mentioned 12 S/Bills after amendment in the portal.

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

(Action: Applicant/PC-3 division)

Case No. 37 M/s. Blue Stripes Apparels, Tamilnadu F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00002816AM24

Subject: Condonation for the free shipping bills filed due to the Advance License Technical Issue against AA No.3210078912 dated 09.04.2019.

Applicant’s statement: The applicant stated that they had availed an AA from RA Coimbatore and imported the raw materials. At the time of export while filing the AA S/Bill they were getting the negative acknowledgment as wrong SI.No. in Regd. No. fort the few line items. But the error was not rectified and due to the urgency and fear of order cancellation by the buyer they had filed under free S/Bill with scheme code 00 for against the negative acknowledgement serial numbers received and by quoting the AA No. There are multiple S/Bills filed and the materials were fully consumed for the exported products. Due to the above issue they could file the S/Bills under this license. Hence they are requesting to condone the case and allow them free shipping Bills for redemption against subject license.

Case No. 38 M/s. Dharma Exports, Daman and Diu

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00001119AM24

Subject:

To allow MEIS benefit against 40 shipping bills

Applicant's statement: The applicant stated that they have 40 Shipping Bills of the FY 2018-2019 where their reward scheme has “N” mentioned instead of “Y”. On 10.04.2019 they approached respective customs and got a manual amendment as well as a NOC that MEIS can be issued to them against these 40 shipping bills. All these years they could not do anything but a Public Notice No.30/2023 dated 11.04.2023 was issued where they have allowed transmission on case to case basis/ Hence they are requesting to allow MEIS benefit against 40 shipping bills.

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.

Case No. 39 M/s. BPE Biotree India Pvt. Ltd. , Bangalore.

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00004116AM23

Subject: Clubbing of two Advance Authorization no. 0710117086 dated 01.10.2020 and 0710117046 dated 22.09.2020.

Applicant’s statement: This is defer case of PRC Meeting No.33/AM23 held on 01.03.2023 (Case No.07) wherein Committee to defer the case and ask RA to submit a report after evaluating the PRC application within 21 days. The matter was taken up. The entire submission made by the applicant was gone through. The applicant stated that they had one export order against which they had to import various raw materials from different vendors with different mode of transport like sea and air cargo. Therefore, they have applied for two licenses for transport of goods via Air-and transport of goods via Sea by providing the same export order details in both the license and procured the goods for manufacturing of final product. While exporting the final product they could not give the consumption details of both licenses together in the S/Bills as they have only one export product consuming raw materials imported through both licenses. Since the consumption details could not be provided in the S/Bills they are unable to apply for the closure of the AA No.0710117086 Hence they are requesting to allow clubbing the above mentioned licenses for closures.

Decision: The Committee went through the submission made by the firm and discussed the matter at length and it decided to refer the issue to PC-4 Division for its examination. After obtaining inputs of PC-4 division, case would be brought back to PRC for a decision.

(Action: Applicant/PC-4 division)

M/s. Cosmique Pvt. Ltd., Gurugram

F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00000513AM24

Meeting No. 18/AM24 held on 20.10.2023 Subject: Enabling like to file the claim under MEIS scheme, IEC Code no. 058863711 Applicant’sgoing to file thestatement:claim underTheMEIS applicant statedscheme, the thasi t e inhad thenot yearaccepted 2021 whentheir theyclaim,woro

enquiry they came to know that their IEC code is under the DEL list. From 2020 onwards, due to covid last date for filling the claim has extended by Govt. but due to DEL status they were not able to file their claim. They could not avail of the extension which were being generously given by the Govt. At the same time they could not have access to DGFT to be able to know the actual cause of DEL. Finally DGFT DEL got lifted on 29" April 2023. The application for MEIS are not being accepted for presumed reason of expiry of the scheme. Hence they are requesting to allow MEIS claim.

Decision: The Committee examined the statement made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and it decided to refer the issue to PC-3 & EGTFDivision for its examination and resolution. (Action: Applicant/PC-3 & EGTF- division).. p*

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

Analysis

No analysis generated for this document yet (analysis runs over brief docs + on-demand). Run build_analysis.py --ids 10694 --apply.