IN FORCE Advance Authorisation

DGFT Minutes

Reliability

In force — no superseding record on file.

Document text

Date of Uploading /O / 05 /2024

Directorate General of Foreign Trade (PRC Section)

Minutes of the Policy Relaxation Committee Meeting held on 25.04.2024 under the Chairmanship of Shri Santosh Kumar Sarangi, Director General of Foreign Trade

Meeting No.03AM25 held on 25.04.2024

The following members were present in the meeting:

Shri S.B.S. Reddy Addl. DGFT 2. Shri AkashTaneja Addl. DGFT a Shri Anil Aggarwal Addl. DGFT 4. Dr.S.K. Bansal Addl. DGFT 5. Shri S.C.Agarwal Addl. DGFT 6. Shri Rakesh Kumar Addl. DGFT ¥, Shri Lokesh H.D. Addl. DGFT 8. Shri K.V. Tirumala Joint DGFT 9. Shri RandheepThakur Joint DGFT

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

==> picture [365 x 244] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- Case Name of the firm No. M/s. Sara Sae Private Limited, Uttarakhand M/s. SMS Lifesciences India Limited, Telangana 3. M/s. Commscope 4. | M/s. Janvi Gems, IndiaGujaratPrivate Limited,Goa | 5. _ | Mis. Opera Global Private Limited, Uttar Pradesh | 6. | Mis. Jain Amar Clothing Pvt Ltd, Ludhiana M/s. Premier Metals, Rajasthan —8.__| Mis. AMIOrganics Limited, Gujarat 10.9. _| MIs.M/s. JayanitaPrecisionExportsMetals, PrivateMumbaiLtd, Uttar Pradesh ~ M/s. Anuh Pharma Limited, Mumbai M/s. Rise and Shine Overseas, Gujarat M/s. Best Value Chem Private Limited, Gujarat M/s. G R Pet Preforms, Maharashtra . ----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [81 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

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

ieeee

----- End of picture text -----

==> picture [81 x 17] intentionally omitted <==

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

ieeee

|16.||M/s. Diehard Dies Private Limited, Andhra Pradesh|
|---|---|---|
|ls||M/s. ITCO Industries Limited, Bengaluru|
|22.<br>23.<br>|||| M/s.Mastur<br>Lal Private Limited,Bengalurut—™S<br>M/s. GlandPharma Ltd,Telangana<br>OO|
|27.||M/s. Apollo Industries, Gujarat|
|31.<br>OY|M/s. Industrial Filters& Fabrics Private Limited, Madhya<br> pageeee||
|33.||M/s. NiceSesame Agro Industries, Gujarat|
|38.||M/s. Dileep Industries Private Limited, Rajasthan|
|39.<br>|M/s. Saga Lifescience Limited, Ahmedabad<br>40.|M/s.AmrapaliIndustries Limited, Gujarat = tS|||
|44.||M/s. Mosco Prints India Private Limited, Karnataka|
|46.|||M/s. Anuh PharmaLimited,<br>Mumbai|
|49|||
|55.||M/s.BiologicalE.Limited,Telangana|

S7. M/s. Biological E. Limited, Telangana

Case No. 01 M/s. Sara Sae Private Limited, Uttrakhand.

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00009238AM24

Meeting No.03AM25 held on 25.04.2024

Subject: Request for Extension of EOP of Advance Authorization No. 0510414708 dated 24/07/2020 & AA 0510414826 dated 05/08/2020. Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they had completed 50% export against Advance Authorization No. 0510414708 due to the Corona pandemic and recession in the oil industry, they could not export the items timely as demanded by the customer, and due to delay the customer had held the order. Now the customer is ready to receive the order and had revised the value of export items. The export obligation period for 0510414708 expired on dated 06/03/2024 and for 0510414826 expired on dated 06/03/2024. Hence they are requesting to allow six months extension of EOP against the subject.

Decision: The Committee went through the statements made by the firm and noted that there is merit in the case. Accordingly, it was decided to accede to the request and allowed extension in EO Period upto 31.07.2024 and 31.08.2024 for Advance Authorization No. 0510414708 dated 24/07/2020 & AA 0510414826 dated 05/08/2020 respectively subject to payment of composition fee as per policy provisions. The firm shall approach RA concerned within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 02 M/s. SMS Lifesciences India Limited, Telangana.

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00009194AM24

Subject: Request for Export of Ranitidine API instead of Cystofer Base and 6 months time to fulfill the obligation of AA No. 0910067151 dated 08/02/2019.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they had taken an Advance Authorization for exporting 120 MT of Cystofer Base. This was exported to European customer who manufactures Ranitidine API from the intermediate they supplied. In this they could export only b42 MT, as in 2019 suddenly EU had imposed suspension of Ranitidine imports as well as manufacturing with immediate effect on September 2019. Their European Customer had sold off the company. So they could not fulfill export of this item as it is intermediate and there is no buyer for the same. Hence they are requesting for Export of Ranitidine API instead of Cystofer Base to

SD En A

fulfill balance export obligation and 6 months time to fulfill the obligation of AA No. 0910067151 dated 08/02/2019

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. 03 M/s. Commscope India Private Limited, Goa. F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00009216AM24 Meeting No.03AM25 held on 25.04.2024

Subject: Request for Revalidation of of 11 MEI Scrip. Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they are engaged in manufacturing and trading of telecom equipments. They were granted 11 MEIS Scrips, as per details annexed during the financial year 2021-22. The total value of scrips was granted Rs 19,770,896. As AGAINST THIS, THEY HAD CYUTILIZED SCRIPS NOF VALUE Rs 17,841,357. Hence scrips totaling to Rs 1,929,538 remain unutilized. They didn’t utilize these scrips due to the covid related disruptions. Hence they are requesting for relaxation of the policy as provided for under para 2.58 of the FTP 2015-20 so as to allow them to utilize the MEIS Scrips.

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

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 04 M/s. Janvi Gems, Gujarat.

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00009229AM24

Subject: Request for Condonation of delay of 16 days against License No.7147554 dated 31.01.2024

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they are an exporter of Diamond studded Gold Jewellery for more than 4 years and have procured 4000 Gms of Gold from nominated agency i.e. Diamond India Ltd. for exports Diamond Studded Gold Jewellery. The first date of procurement of Gold from nominated agency was 19/10/2023 and last date was 25/01/2023 for 1000 Gms each in 4 trances. Against this they had made exports for total quantity of 3544.275 Gms vide SB 49212436 dated 27/10/2023 and 7147554 dated 31/01/2024 and balance would exported

ee ee

shortly within 90 days. There is around 16 days delay beyond permissible 90 days for 546.236 Gms gold purchased via DIL Invoice no OX23100SUR258 DATED 19.10.23. Hence they are requesting for condonation of delay for regularization of 546.236 Gms of gold exports already made beyond permissible limit of 90 days.

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 was decided to accede to the request and allow condonation of delay of 16 day beyond 90 days permissible period for export of gold jewellery from the date of procurement of gold from Nominated Agency.

(Action: Applicant) Customs-Ahmedabad / Concerned Nominated Agency / GJEPC)

Case No. 05 M/s Opera Global Private Limited, Uttar Pradesh.

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00009199AM24

Subject: Request for Extension of EOP of Advance Authorization 0511007887 dated 13/01/2022.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that due to delay production of garment, their foreign buyer had not approved the Export no 1 & 4. The same garments lying with them and they are trying to sale out the same to other foreign buyers. Rest exports no 2 & 3 they had already sent. Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension against subject authorization. Decision: The Committee went through the justification made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length. The Committee decided to accede to the request and allow EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0511007887 dated 13/01/2022 for a further period of 6 months from the date of endorsement subject to payment of composition fee as per policy provisions. The firm shall approach RA concerned within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

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

Case No. 06 M/s. Jain Amar Clothing Private Limited, Ludhiana.

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00000384AM23

Subject: Request for representation against decision of RA, Ludhiana passed in compliance of the minutes of the EPCG Committee 5" meeting held on 27.09.23. This case was last considered in 5'""° EPCG Committee meeting held on 27.09.2023 and Committee decided that the firm will submit written submissions to substantiate

Ce ey,

their contention within a week which shall be forwarded to concerned RA for examination of the request for re-fixation of Average EO on merits. Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that challenges that the committee went through the request made by the applicant and submissions of the representatives of the firm in PH. The committee deliberated upon the case and decided that the firm will submit written submissions to substantive their contention within a week shall be forwarded to concerned RA for examination of the request for re-fixation of average EO on merits. The case stands disposed. Hence they are requesting for representation against decision of RA, Ludhiana decision. Report of RA, Ludhiana was seen.

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

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 07 M/s. Premier Metals, Rajasthan.

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00000272AM25

Subject: Request for Extension of EOP of Advance Authorization 13110049573 dated 15/05/2020.

Applicant Statement: In this application they have stated that they applied AA based on customer orders. Due to COVID 19 their customers cancelled the order. Their proprietor Mr. Dinesh Sharma infected by the Cancer, operated twice and was on complete bed rest. All the business activities come to stand still. Now he has resumed the office and business is started. Hence they are requesting to extension of EOP for 6 months to complete EO.

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. 08 M/s AMI Organics Limited, Surat, Gujarat. F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00009274AM24 Meeting No. O3AM25 held on 25.04.2024 Subject: Request for Extension of EOP of Advance Authorization 5211001058 dated 27.07.2021.

Sn, Ge

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they there most of export supply is in Egypt, Turkey, Togo &Guatemala countries. Thereafter, due to Russia and Ukraine war & also due to post covid effects buyer postpone the orders in that period and such drop down of overseas orders are in overall international market. Therefore they are unable to export the goods within the particular time period. Now their buyers have confirmed the export orders and they are ready to dispatch the goods within next 6 months. Hence they are requesting to extension of EOP of above mentioned subject.

Decision: The Committee went through the justification made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length. The Committee decided to accede to the request and allow EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 5211001058 dated 27.07.2021 for six months from date of endorsement subject to payment of composition fee as per policy provisions. The firm shall approach RA concerned within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Surat)

Case No.09 M/s. Jayanita Exports Private Limited, Uttar Pradesh.

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00000263AM25

Subject: Request for Extension of EOP of Advance Authorization 0511004449 dated 02.09.2021.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that the above mentioned advance authorization has been issued on the basis of the buyer requirement and the export to be made during the prescribed period, but due to slow down of international market , export quantity had been reduced from the buyer end. Hence they are requesting to extension of EOP of above mentioned subject.

Decision: The Committee went through the justification made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length. The Committee decided to accede to the request and allow EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0511004449 dated 02.09.2021 for a further period of 6 months from the date of endorsement subject to payment of composition fee as per policy provisions. The firm shall approach RA concerned within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

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

Case No. 10 M/s Precision Metals, Mumbai F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00007886AM24 Meeting No.03AM25 held on 25.04.2024

Subject: Request for Extension of EOP of Advance Authorization 0311005665 dated 27.07.2021.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they had obtained said advance license from RA, MUMBAI for stainless steel bright bar as per their buyer requirement5. They are exporting stainless steel bright bar from past 22 years. Due to global economic slowdown and Ukraine war their some order delivery date was change. Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension against subject authorization as they could not export balance 5.13% export within validity time.

Decision: The Committee went through the justification made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length. The Committee decided to accede to the request and allow EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0311005665 dated 27.07.2021 for a further period of 6 months from the date of endorsement subject to payment of composition fee as per policy provisions. The firm shall approach RA concerned within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Mumbai)

Case No. 11 M/s Anuh Pharma Limited, Mumbai.

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00000291AM25

Subject: Request for Extension of EOP of Advance Authorization 0310836791 dated 22.06.2020.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they required extension against advance authorization 0310836791 because due to corona pandemic they had not received order from customer which were expecting hence we cannot fulfilled the condition Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension against subject authorization.

Decision: The Committee went through the justification made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length. The Committee decided to accede to the request and allow EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0310836791 dated 22.06.2020 for a further period of 3 months from the date of endorsement subject to payment of composition fee as per policy provisions. The firm shall approach RA concerned within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Mumbai)

Case No. 12 M/s Rise and Shine Overseas, Gujarat. F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00004061AM23

SO en

Meeting No.03AM25 held on 25.04.2024

Subject: Request for MEIS benefit against the shipping bills pertain to the year 2020-21 which is time barred due to delay in uploading the e-BRC from the bank against 4 SB Numbers 2400805 dt. 13.04.2020, 2458348 dt. 22.04.2020, 2705693 dt. 18.05.2020 and 2823085 dt. 25.05.2020. Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that the relevant application documents pertaining to the year 2020-21 could not be submitted for MEIS clearance because in above period they had received the payments on time from their foreign buyers however due to technical problem in the e-BRC issuing portal of their bank i.e. Yes bank could not generate and upload e-BRC against the mentioned shipping bills on DGFT website within the notified last date to apply for the period i.e. 30.04.22 as per DGFT Notification No. 15/2015 dated 01.07.22. Due to which they could not file their application of MEIS on time and their shipping bills expired. Hence they are requesting to allow for MEIS benefit against the shipping bills pertain to the year 2020-21 which is time barred due to delay in uploading the e- BRC from the bank.

Report of PC3 was seen.

Decision: The Committee examined the case on the basis of the statement made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length. The Committee observed that due to delay in uploading the BRC, the firm may have faced the problem which was beyond their control. Accordingly, the Committee decided to allow MEIS benefits only against those shipping bills whose realization has happened within time and e- BRCs have been uploaded by the bank after stipulated time. It also decided that no cut would be imposed on the entitlement. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

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

Case No. 13 M/s Best Value Chem Private Limited, Gujarat.

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00000282AM25

Subject: Request for conversion of Advance Authorization issued under Para 4.07 4.12 vi.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they had obtained some AA on same ratio of input u8nder Para 4.07 i.e. under self ratification scheme and simultaneously obtained some authorizations for same products under Para 4.07 by the norms committee on the lower side than the applied quantity. Hence RLA directed to pay duty on the excess quantity as per norms in the matter of AA issued under Para 4.07 also. Hence they are requesting for conversion of Advance Authorization issued under Para 4.07 4.12 vi.

San

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 report whether the case has been flagged .

(Action: Applicant/ EGTF Division)

Case No. 14 M/s GR Pet Preforms, Maharashtra. F.No.HQRPRCAPPLYO0009266AM24 Meeting No.03AM25 held on 25.04.2024 Subject: Request for revalidation of Advance Authorization 0311013203 dated 22/03/2022.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they are manufacture exporter of Polyester Pet Performs. Usually they are taking the raw materials against ARO/Invalidation letter from Reliance Industries Ltd (Pet Division). Due to some unavoidable circumstances they didn’t get the supply against ARO NO. 03AK04005873AM24 dated 07.07.23 and they received no supply latter on 09.02.24. Hence they had decided to start import the raw materials. Their 1st import shipment was arrived on 05.02.24 and balance import consignment ordered already because of vessel delay, the shipment had rolled over in the next upcoming vessel. Hence they are requesting for revalidation of Advance Authorization till 22.05.2024.

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. 15 M/s.Raymond Luxury Cottons Limited, Maharashtra. F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00001968AM24

Meeting No.03AM25 held on 25.04.2024 Subject: Request for Extension of total EO period, Advance Authorization 0330039015 dated 18/06/2014.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that the export was reduced due to the premature termination of the foreign joint venture which was mainly responsible for the export marketing. The severe economic crisis in Brazil from 2014-2017, leading to a recession in Brazil’s market also affected them very badly as it was the main export market for their products. Hence they are requesting for Extension of total EO period against subject authorization. Contents of their letter dated 11.03.24 were perused.

Report of PC5 was seen.

SD es

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 was decided to accede to the request and allow EOP extension of EPCG Authorization No. 0330039015 dated 18/06/2014 for a further period of 2 years from the date of endorsement, subject to payment of composition fee 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. 16 M/s. Diehard Dies Private Limited, Andhra Pradesh F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00000275AM25 Meeting No.03AM25 held on 25.04.2024 Subject: Request for relaxation the para 6.18(d) by relaxing the NFE waiver to migrate in to EPCG scheme on the depreciated value as on 31-3-2024 against EOU Scheme Auth/Scrip No. Letter of Permission No.PER:425/EQU/VSEZ/2008/2706 dated 29.05.2008.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they their Unit realized that they could not export the finished goods, namely, Flat Dies, Rotary Dies, Label and Embossing Dies till the financial year 2010-11, on account of the following reasons. i. The machines and technology have been ordered with the German Companies and as such the machines and the technology were expensive. ii. Installation of the said machinery and training of the personal for the manufacture of ‘Rotary Dies’ and ‘Flat Dies’ was partially completed by October, 2009 only. iii. ‘Know how’ transfer and commissioning of other important balancing matching machines did not take place. iv. Due to non-availability of skilled technicians in India, technicians were brought from countries like Egypt, Denmarkand Sweden to train the local technicians. v. Consequently, there was delay in getting orders from international market because of which there were no exports during 2009-10 and 2010-11. vi. Further there was slow down in world economy particularly in the Middle East which effected the exports of Rotary and flat Dies. vii.

se of which there were no exports during 2009-10 and 2010-11. vi. Further there was slow down in world economy particularly in the Middle East which effected the exports of Rotary and flat Dies. vii. German supplier has not provided any training in the making of these Dies which involves complicated software and on the floor training. viii. The machines imported for manufacture of Flexible Dies lay idle for almost 3 years due to lack of local technicians. ix. It took nearly four years to enter into the international market/ local market for the Flexible Dies and Embossing Dies. x. Though the Appellant Company reached the technical achievement, they ran out of time to achieve NFE. 4. The Unit on their own applied to the Development commissioner, for in principle permission to exit from the EQU Scheme and the Development Commissioner vide Letter dated 13.04.2011 accorded in principle approval to the Unit to exit from EOU scheme in terms of para 6.18 (a) and (b) of the Foreign Trade Policy 2009-14 after passing adjudication order under FTDR Act by

Cs>

ccorded in principle approval to the Unit to exit from EOU scheme in terms of para 6.18 (a) and (b) of the Foreign Trade Policy 2009-14 after passing adjudication order under FTDR Act by

Cs>

imposing a penalty of Rs.5,00,000/- 5. The unit unable to opt for EPCG Scheme for Capital Goods & Advance License scheme due to Positive NFE not achieved by the Unit. At this point of time they might have sought NFE Waiver from the Policy relaxation Committee. It is submitted that the Hon’ble PRC allowed NFE Waiver to a PRC Meeting No. 12/AM14 dated 02.07.2013 Case No.21 in the case of M/s Naturol Bio-Energy Ltd., Hyderabad decided to relax the condition of positive NFE requirement for migration from EOU to EPCG. The firm has not been able to maintain the positive NFE due to lack of export demand. RA shall grant EPCG licence taking into account the depreciation as per para 6.35.3 of Handbook of Procedures b. PRC Meeting No. 21/AM14 dated 17.09.2013 Case No.29. In the case of M/s Samyu Glass Private Limited. Kadapa,AP Commerce Secretary and Revenue Secretary on 19.6.2013 that migration from EQU to EPCG scheme with negative NFE can be considered by DGFT in its PRC. Hence they are requesting to allow relaxation of para 6.18 (qd).

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 it is not a PRC matter as an adjudication order has been passed in the case, and decided to refer to PC-6 for examination & resolution.

(Action: Applicant/PC-6)

Case No.17 M/s. Creative Garments Private Limited, Mumbai F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00000277AM25 Meeting No.03AM25 held on 25.04.2024 Subject: Request for Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0310832301 dated 17.10.2019.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they their main export products against subject AA are Silk Liners have different sizes and Specifications, Designs and Colors for each of the foreign buyer from different countries and only upon their approval / confirmation the exports are made. (ii) The main reason that due to Corona Epidemics our export products of Silk clothing were severely affected due to lack of workers in our unit and sharp decline in export of our product. (iii) In EO fulfilled against each import consignments against first BE are within 9 Months and against another 3 BE are in 14/15 months and only against another 2 BE are in 28/29 months are within which could be exported only after relief from Corona Epidemics and obtaining updated export orders from foreign buyers. They had already made exports in terms of Quantity in Meters for 70.92% up to 19.9.2022 for regularization purpose. Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension against subject authorization.

Soe, EN~

dy made exports in terms of Quantity in Meters for 70.92% up to 19.9.2022 for regularization purpose. Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension against subject authorization.

Soe, EN~

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 30.09.2022 for Advance Authorisation No. 0310832301 dated 17.10.2019 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- Mumbai)

Case No.18 M/s. Biscayne Exotics (OPC) Private Limited, Mumbai F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY0O0000266AM25 Meeting No.03AM25 held on 25.04.2024 Subject: Request for import of imported Cars — Rolls Royce car 1965 and Ford Mustang 1966.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they the current regulations governing the import of vehicles pose significant challenges for individuals seeking to acquire classic cars for personal enjoyment and preservation. The stringent restrictions and procedural complexities often deter enthusiasts from pursuing their passion for vintage automobiles. The imported classic cars will be used solely for personal collection purposes and will not be sold or commercialized in any manner. They are seeking permission for import of one right hand drive Rolls Royce car 1965 model and one left hand drive Ford Mustang 1966 model for preservation and exhibition purpose by committing to preserve automotive heritage and sharing the joy of classic cars with fellow enthusiasts through meticulous restoration thoughtful maintenance and dedicated stewardship.

on purpose by committing to preserve automotive heritage and sharing the joy of classic cars with fellow enthusiasts through meticulous restoration thoughtful maintenance and dedicated stewardship.

Decision: The Committee went through the justification given by the applicant and discussed the matter at length. The Committee decided to accede to the request and allowed for relaxation of the Policy Condition of Chapter 87 of ITC (HS) 2012 Schedule | (Import Policy) for import of aforesaid vehicles mentioned in the subject. The relaxation is subject to the condition that the cars will be used only for the intended purpose and not general purpose and shall not ply on the public roads unless otherwise permitted by MoRTH. 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. Geelon Industries Private Limited, Gujarat F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00000270AM25 Meeting No.03AM25 held on 25.04.2024

Subject: Request for clubbing of authorizations against Advance Authorization No. 5210041730 dt 15.01.2016 and Advance Authorization No. 5210042694 dt 10.07.2018.

Applicant Statement:

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they as per PN No. 40/2023 dated d.12.02.2024 clubbing of advance license can be done if license issued within 24 months from the date of issue of earliest authorization. In the current scenario of Licence No.5210041730 dated d 15.01.2016 wherein export obligation of 1000000 kgs was done and they were allowed to import 1050000 kgs against the said license. In matter of License No.5210042694 dated d 10.07.2018 no export was done by them, but import of 241935 kgs was done in this license. As per public notice clubbing can be done if license issued within 24 month from date of earliest Authorization No. 5210041730 dated 15.01.2016 in their case. Considering the dates, 24 months ends on 14.01.2018, but import has been done by them in license no 5210042692 dated 10.07.2018, which is issued 6 months later than allowed date. But considering the fact that they have done much excess export genuinely, the import benefit must not be denied from them therefore they are asking condonation of only 6 months to consider for clubbing. Furthermore, as per condition import has to be completed within 30 months from date of earliest authorization i.e.

hem therefore they are asking condonation of only 6 months to consider for clubbing. Furthermore, as per condition import has to be completed within 30 months from date of earliest authorization i.e. 14.07.2018 in their case if they calculate from date of earlier Authorization dated 15.01.2016. But imports are done on 17.07.2018 which is around 3 days delayed. Hence they are requesting to allow clubbing of above mentioned authorization.

(Action: Applicant)

Case No. 20 M/s. ITCO Industries Limited, Bengaluru F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00000264AM25 Meeting No.03AM25 held on 25.04.2024 Subject: Request for acceptance for delay in submissions of DFIA transferability application against DFIA Authorization No. 072107600039AM16.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they after completing exports, they were initially under mistaken impression that DFIA transferability can be applied only online. Hence, they waited long for the online systems and missed out on manual filing of the same. Subsequently, they have been trying to submit manually since covid time in 2020 but it was not possible to do so. Later, they were informed at JOGFT Bangalore office that manual filing shall not be accepted, and they need to follow mandatorily online filing. Unfortunately, due to some technical error in your software since the end of 2021, it was not possible to upload application and

documents. Finally, when this technical error was resolved and new software was launched by you, they could file their transferability application online at JOGFT Bangalore office on 26.10.2022. Hence they are requesting to allow DFIA transferability for utilize the same for duty free imports entitlement against export already fulfilled.

tion online at JOGFT Bangalore office on 26.10.2022. Hence they are requesting to allow DFIA transferability for utilize the same for duty free imports entitlement against export already fulfilled.

(Action: Applicant )

Case No.21 M/s. ITCO Industries Limited, Bengaluru F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00000274AM24 Meeting No.03AM25 held on 25.04.2024 Subject: Request for acceptance for delay in submissions of DFIA transferability application against DFIA Authorization No. 072107600008AM17.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they aftercompleting exports, they were initially under mistaken impression that DFIA transferability can be applied only online. Hence, they waited long for the online systems and missed out on manual filing of the same. Subsequently, they have been trying to submit manually since covid time in 2020 but it was not possible to do so. Later, they were informed at JDGFT Bangalore office that manual filing shall not be accepted, and they need to follow mandatorily online filing. Unfortunately, due to some technical error in your software since the end of 2021, it was not possible to upload application and documents. Finally, when this technical error was resolved and a new software was launched by you, they could file their transferability application online at JOGFT Bangalore office on 27.10.2022.

(Action: Applicant)

Case No.22 M/s. Mastur Lal Private Limited, Bengaluru. F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00000271AM25 Meeting No.03AM25 held on 25.04.2024

==> picture [83 x 11] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- Spun ON ----- End of picture text -----

Subject: Request for ALC Norms Fixation against Advance Authorization No. 0710110645 dated 22.11.2016.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they have sought ratification of Norms towards their process of manufacturing filter bags and the application submitted was rejected under above file no. for reasons that the company was asked to submit two sets of application along with copies of Advance Authorization and in view of the delay in adhering to the requirements the application was rejected. Hence they are requesting to allow ALC Norms Fixation against subject authorization.

Decision: The Committee examined the case on the basis of submission made by the firm and discussed the matter at length. After detailed discussion it was decided to refer to Norms Committee for examination & resolution.

(Action: Applicant/ Norms Committee)

Case No. 23 M/s. Gland Pharma Ltd, Hyderabad

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00000276AM25

Meeting No.03AM25 held on 25.04.2024 Subject: Request for Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0911002040 dated 13.12.2021.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they have obtained the Advance Authorization No. 0911002040 Dated 13.12.2021 under Appendix 4J (Serial No.2) with Pre-import condition (12 months validity from the date of every import). S! No. Import API BE No. / Date. Export obligation date as per Appendix 4J (1 year) from the BOE dated 21.02.2023 Extension of EOP Date as they applied as per Para 4.40 (d) of HBP 2023 Six months from initial extended. But the Addl. DGFT Hyderabad approved EOP extension upto 13.12.2023 instead of 21.08.2024 (as per Para 4.40 (d) of HBP 2023) by default online editable problem, only granted 24 months from the date of license instead of 18 months from the date of bill of entry. They have completed E.O upto 20.02.2024 - 17.41% and Balance (82.58%) - To be completed before 21.08.2024. Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension up to 21.08.2024 against subject authorization.

ave completed E.O upto 20.02.2024 - 17.41% and Balance (82.58%) - To be completed before 21.08.2024. Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension up to 21.08.2024 against subject authorization.

Decision: The Committee went through the justification made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length. The Committee decided to accede to the request and allow EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0911002040 Dated 13.12.2021 for a further period upto 21.08.2024 subject to payment of composition fee as per policy provisions. The firm shall approach RA concerned within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Hyderabad)

SD au

Case No. 24 M/s. Sunrise Industries (India) Limited, Vadodara. F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00009196AM24

Subject: Request for Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 3411000847 dated 14.07.2021.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they had obtained the license on the basis of buyers promise for execution of the order; however, they received the orders very late. Now they have the imported material in hand and now want to complete the pending export obligation in turn to save heavy duty plus interest against the license. Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension against subject authorization.

Decision: The Committee went through the justification made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length. The Committee decided to accede to the request and allowed EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 3411000847 Dated 14.07.2021 upto 31/1/2025 subject to payment of composition fee as per policy provisions. The firm shall approach RA concerned within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Vadodara)

Case No. 25 M/s. Premier Metals, Rajasthan. F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00000278AM25

Meeting No.03AM25 held on 25.04.2024 Subject: Request for Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 1311000509 dated 06.08.2021. Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that the company had suffer huge problems during the period of 2020-21 because of Covid-19 that leads the slow down and at times closure of their business. Their customers are also affected; because of non supply of material specially those where they were supposed the export the material. Furthermore, | was caught infected by “Cancer” and gone through multiple surgeries at Mumbai. Being a promoter and owner of the company, | personally suffer a process of devastation that badly affected their business and family life. Hence they are requesting to allow six month EOP extension against subject authorization. Decision: The Committee went through the justification made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length. The Committee decided to accede to the request and allowed EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 1311000509 dated 06.08.2021 for a further period of 6 months from the date of endorsement subject to payment of

composition fee as per policy provisions. The firm shall approach RA concerned within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Jaipur)

Case No. 26 M/s. Misra Automatics Private Limited, Delhi

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLYO0006863AM24 Meeting No.03AM25 held on 25.04.2024

Subject: Request for Extension of total EO Period against EPCG Authorization No.0530167560 dated 12.05.2016.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they the said machine was imported on May 16 at NHAVA SHEVA Port, Mumbai, and it was installed in mid- July at the Packhouse. This was practically the end of the Mango season hence no mango could be exported commercially until 2017. Year: 2017. This was the first year they went into Commercial production and completed a partial export of against the obligatory export. The reason for inability to do so is: 1. Machine installed but the Packhouse approval received in July 2016. So no commercial production was possible 2. The year 2017 was first year of commercial production. 3. The above was interrupted by 2 years of Covid during which, for safety of health the Japanese customers practically did not Import. Small quantities may have gone to Indian grocers in Japan. They lost important customers. 4. In 2021 the demand for Mango in Japan started to pick and by 2023 they have only exported. This year is a 4 month a year operation as Mango is available only in those months. Rest of the year no Mango is exported. Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension against subject authorization.

year is a 4 month a year operation as Mango is available only in those months. Rest of the year no Mango is exported. Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension against subject authorization.

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 was decided to accede to the request and allow EOP extension of EPCG Authorization No. 0530167560 dated 12.05.2016 for a further period of 2 years from the date of endorsement, subject to payment of composition fee 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-CLA, New Delhi)

Case No. 27 M/s. Apollo Industries, Gujarat. F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00009267AM24 Meeting No.03AM25 held on 25.04.2024 Subject: Request for waiver of procedural requirement as per HBP against Advance Authorization No. 5210042823 dated 26.07.2018.

a ee

This is review case of PRC Meeting No.30AM24 held on 23.02.2024 (Case No.24) wherein Committee rejected the case.

Applicant Statement: In the review application the applicant stated that they are manufacturer exporter of BOPP SELF ADHESIVE TAPES/JUMBO ROLLS. They had obtained an Advance Authorization for export of the above mentioned product and import of the raw materials under SION No. H-51 and had made the imports. They had made DIRECT EXPORTS for fulfilling the E.O. Please note that while exporting for fulfilling the E.O. of this Authorization (No. 5210042823 dated: 26.10.2018) they did not mention the Authorization number and date in the Shipping Bills and all the consignments were shipped under Duty Drawback scheme by an oversight. However, when they found this mistake, they paid back the duty drawback benefit to the Customs concerned with interest and now wish to include these shipments for E.O. fulfillment. They had already applied for the EODC of this Authorization to the R.A. Surat, clubbing with another Authorization of their to adjust the +/- happened in imports and exports quantity in both the Authorizations. This application is pending process with the R.A.

o the R.A. Surat, clubbing with another Authorization of their to adjust the +/- happened in imports and exports quantity in both the Authorizations. This application is pending process with the R.A. They are seeking review the decision to reject application seeking permission to include the Shipping Bills exported under DBK Scheme for fulfillment of E.O. under Advance Authorization, where the mistake of exporting under DBK was corrected by paying to the Customs DBK amount + interest. Hence they are requesting to allow waiver of procedural requirement against subject authorization.

Decision:The Committee reviewed and went through the justification furnished by the firm and discussed the case at length and found no merit in the request of the firm. Accordingly, it decided to maintain rejection of the earlier decision of PRC in its Meeting No.30AM24 held on 23.02.2024 (Case No.24).

Case No.28

M/s. Cummins Technologies India Private Limited, Pune.

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00007671AM24

Meeting No.03AM25 heldon 25.04.2024

Subject: Request for issue of corrigendum.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they File no. 01/60/162/207AM21/PRC. Request to issue corrigendum for Case no. 61 of Minutes of the Meeting of Policy Relaxation Committee (PRC) dated 22 April 2022 & 05 May 2022. The Company had made a manual application with PRC for two branch codes with respect to condonation of time limit to file MEIS application 169 Shipping Bills amt to INR 1,60,80,133 pertaining to the exports made during the FY 2015-16 & 2016-17 &2017-18 as the Company could not file MEIS application due to the online system related technical issues. In this regard, a decision was given in the meeting

Srey OH~

held on 22 April 22. However, the name and the file no. appearing in the minutes are wrong. Hence, vide the application, they are requesting to issue corrigendum to minutes to correct the name & file no.

Decision: Deferred. The committee discussed the matter at length and noted that there appear to be discrepancies in the application. Applicant may check the details for typographical errors and submit a reply.

(Action: Applicant/PRC)

Case No.29 M/s. Anuh Pharma Limited, Mumbai F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00000295AM25 Meeting No.03AM25 held on 25.04.2024 Subject: Request for Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0311002999 dated 01.04.2021.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they have not received order from customer which was expecting hence they cannot fulfill the condition of subject authorization. Now they have received export order for export. Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension against subject authorization.

Decision: The Committee went through the justification made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length. The Committee decided to accede to the request and allow EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0311002999 dated 01.04.2021 for a further period of 6 months from the date of endorsement subject to payment of composition fee as per policy provisions. The firm shall approach RA concerned within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Mumbai)

Case No.30 M/s. Anuh Pharma Limited, Mumbai F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00000303AM25 Meeting No.03AM25 held on 25.04.2024 Subject: Request for Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0311001314 dated 01.02.2021.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that this is with reference to the request mentioned above and for relaxation of policy provision to extend the export obligation period of Advance Authorization No. 0311001314 dated 01.02.2021. It is to inform that at the time of application of Advance license, the ratio was 1:0.876 and accordingly they have imported and exported the material. 2. The License issued was on 01/02/2021. Whereas the norms was approved on 07/09/2022 at the ratio of

SD ey OO

1:0.78 instead of ratio 1:0.876. Due to low wastage Export obligation has been increase and there is excess import quantity. 3. They are ready to export against excess import done and they have export order in hand. Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension against subject authorization.

Decision: The Committee went through the justification made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length. The Committee decided to accede to the request and allow EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0311002999 dated 01.02.2021 for a further period of 6 months from the date of endorsement subject to payment of composition fee as per policy provisions. The firm shall approach RA concerned within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Mumbai)

Case No.31 M/s. Industrial Filters & Fabrics Private Limited, Madhya

Pradesh

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00009211AM24 Meeting No.03AM25 held on 25.04.2024 Subject: Request for Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 5611000466 dated 27.08.2021.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they the purpose of this letter is to bring to your attention the challenges that their company had faced due to the unprecedented impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on global trade specially in initial few months after taking the advance license and after Russia and Ukraine war upset to their already develop Export Market. In this particular case also their customer was from Russia only. Due to the unprecedented and concurrent crises of the COVID-19 pandemic and the Russia Ukraine war. These unforeseen events have severely disrupted global supply chains, caused market uncertainties, and posed significant logistical challenges. Their license is already expired about a year back. This extension is very much crucial for company to navigate the challenges posed by the pandemic and fulfill commitment to achieving the export targets outlined in the Advance authorization. Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension against subject authorization.

s posed by the pandemic and fulfill commitment to achieving the export targets outlined in the Advance authorization. Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension against subject authorization.

Decision: The Committee went through the justification made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length. The Committee decided to accede to the request and allow EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 5611000466 dated 27.08.2021 for a further period of 6 months from the date of endorsement subject to payment of composition fee as per policy provisions. The firm shall approach RA concerned within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Indore)

==> picture [84 x 14] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- <> -y —— ----- End of picture text -----

M/s. Walia Auto Ancillaries Private Limited, Maharashtra

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00000115AM25

Meeting No.03AM25 held on 25.04.2024 Subject: Request for (a) EOP in FIRST and SECOND BLOCK (b) EOP upto 7th YEAR against EPCG Authorization No. 3130004263 dated 27.10.2009 for 6 years EOP.(c) Acceptance of CE Installation Certificate in the absence of Installation Certificate issued by CEX Authority.

This is a review case of 3° EPCG Committee meeting held on 25.05.2022 (Case No.20) wherein Committee reject their request for acceptance of CE Installation Certificate in the absence of Installation Certificate issued by Central Excise Authority.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that the first two requests were approved vide meeting dated 25" May, 2022 and the issue of acceptance of installation certificate from the CE had been rejected on the ground that no cogent reason. Further on 13" March, 2024 they had filed a review application for acceptance of installation certificate provided by CE. The Central Excise Department has been abolished this condition from 2017 and at present it is not possible to obtain installation certificate from Central Excise Department. Hence they are requesting to allow acceptance of installation certificate provided by CE. Decision: The Committee went through the statement made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and it was decided to accede to the request of the firm to accept the installation certificate from chartered engineer in place of central excise authority, subject to the payment of composition fee amount of Rs.25,000/against EPCG Authorization No.

firm to accept the installation certificate from chartered engineer in place of central excise authority, subject to the payment of composition fee amount of Rs.25,000/against EPCG Authorization No. 3130004263 dated 27.10.2009 and that no investigations/proceedings are pending against the firm. The firm shall approach RA concerned within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Mumbai)

Case No.33 M/s. Nice Sesame F.No.HQRPRCAPPLYO0000268AM25

M/s. Nice Sesame Agro Industries, Gujarat

Subject: Request for clubbing of authorizations against Advance Authorization No. 3410035667 dated 14.12.2012, Advance Authorization No. 3410035802 dated 03.01.2013.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they got two authorizations from Vadodara RA and excess EO was fulfilled against authorization no. 3410035667 dated 14.12.2012 for exports of 184.875 MTS against import of 87.493 MTS and in authorization no. 3410035802 dated 03.01.2013 they had done nil exports against

S>on

import of 78 MTS. After that they had filed EODC application by mistake with excess exports against advance authorization no. 3410035667 dated 14.12.2012 which was granted EODC by RA on 28.11.2019. After that they came to know that they have to file the clubbing application of above mentioned both authorization, but due to EODC granted with excess exports on Advance authorization No. 3410035667 dated 14.12.2012 they are not be able to file clubbing application and there is nil exports against the authorization no. 3410035802 dated 03.01.2013 they could not file single EODC application. Hence they are requesting to allow clubbing of above mentioned authorizations.

Case No.34 M/s. T.C. Terrytex Limited, Punjab

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00003944AM23

Meeting No.03AM25 held on 25.04.2024 Subject: Request for non availability of Shipping Bills at DGFT portal for making application for RoSCTL claims against the shipping bills filed on or before 31.12.2020.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they would like to draw reference in respect of Advisory Number 06/2021 dated March 21, 2022, issued by Directorate General of Systems and Data Management, Central Board of Indirect Taxes &Customs, which states as follows in Para 4.3, Further, RoSCTL claims as per above notified scheme would be applicable to shipping bills filed on or after 01.01.2021. If a shipping bill has been filed prior to 01.01.2021 but processed after 01.01.2021, it will not be eligible for RoSCTL benefit (as per the aforesaid new scheme). Hence, date of filing of Shipping Bill and not date of LEO is relevant. For the residual RoSCTL/RoSL claims of the period prior to 01.01.2021, these would continue be transmitted to DGFT by Customs System for issuance of scrips, as was being done till now, since the same would not eligible for aforesaid notified ROSCTL scheme. In continuation to above, RoSCTL scrips against shipping bills filed on or before 31 December 2020 and let export order made on or after 01 January 2021 would be continued to be processed by the DGFT. Accordingly, shipping bills involving ROSCTL of Rs. 20.57 Lakhs issued before 01.01.2021 and where LEO are made on or after 1 January 2021 were not getting reflected over the DGFT portal despite of repeated requests.

ping bills involving ROSCTL of Rs. 20.57 Lakhs issued before 01.01.2021 and where LEO are made on or after 1 January 2021 were not getting reflected over the DGFT portal despite of repeated requests. As a result of same, they were unable to submit ROSCTL application online at DGFT portal. As per FTP the benefit of benefit is admissible to exporters from the date of availability of Shipping Bill at DGFT portal. In present case the S/Bills as per list attached have never been updated at DGFT

CoD yy Ae

portal before the sunset period and hence we were not able to file claim application. Hence they are requesting to allow claim of ROSCTL.

Comments of PC5 were seen.

Decision: The Committee went through the submission made by the firm and discussed the matter at length and noted that there is merit in the request and decided to refer the issue to PC-3 Division for its appropriate resolution.

(Action: Applicant/PC-3 division)

Case No.35 M/s. Indena India Private Limited, Tamil Nadu

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00008695AM24

Subject: Request for sanction of MEIS against Hon’ble Karnataka High Court Order. Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that with reference to Writ Petition No. 51917 of 2019 (GM-RES) and Karnataka High Court Order Dated 30th Jan 23. Their letter dated: 13.02.2023 and 17.10.2023 DGFT RA. They are the manufacturers and exporters of botanical derivatives and extracts used in medicinal / pharmaceutical products. They were eligible for MEIS benefit against our exports. Inadvertently in their Shipping Bills during the period of F.Y. 2016-17, 2017-18 and 2018-19, the Scheme Reward was selected as No instead of Yes, resulting in ineligibility for the claim of MEIS benefit. They filed Writ Petition in the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka seeking relief against the above clerical error. The Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka after considering the statements of facts and arguments has disposed the petition in their favour. In accordance with the direction of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka, the Customs Authority of Bangalore ICD and Air Cargo have issued the No Objection Certificate for 1 Shipping bill pertaining to Bangalore ICD and 184 Shipping Bill pertaining to Bangalore Air Cargo for the F.Y. 2016-17, 2017-18 and 2018-19. They have observed that out of 185 shipping bills 166 Shipping Bills are already transmitted to the DGFT portal.

ping Bill pertaining to Bangalore Air Cargo for the F.Y. 2016-17, 2017-18 and 2018-19. They have observed that out of 185 shipping bills 166 Shipping Bills are already transmitted to the DGFT portal. There are 19 numbers of shipping bills are not transmitted to the DGFT portal maybe due to certain technical glitches. The statement of shipping bills with transmission status is attached. Hence they are requesting to allow MEIS benefits.

Decision: Withdrawn as PC-3 has complied with the Hon’ble High Court order.

(Action: Applicant)

Case No.36 M/s. Mallak Specialties Private Limited, Mumbai F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00007247AM24 Meeting No.03AM25 held on 25.04.2024

SS — ya

Subject: Request for relaxation to grant MEIS license which was not filed within due date against 13 MEIS Scrip Numbers.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that one of their colleague who handled refund related work skipped to claim refund on some shipping bills and it was bought to their notice only after his sudden resignation from the company. During audit their auditor pointed out missing of some shipping bills where claim was not filed. Hence they are requesting to allow relaxation to grant MEIS claim against 13 MEIS scrips.

Case No.37

M/s. Chandra Polyplast Private Limited, Maharashtra

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00000250AM25 Meeting No.03AM25 held on 25.04.2024 Subject: Request for conversion of EO based on duty saved amount instead of CIF value against EPCG Authorization No.01100918 dated 11.08.1999.

This is review case of PRC Meeting No.32/AM24 held on 13.03.2024 (Case No.02) wherein Committee decided to reject the case.

Applicant Statement: In this review application the applicant stated that they there are several instances when the Committee has considered the request for such a relaxation in the past. Some examples are cites for the sake of convenience of the Committee like M/s. Sanghi Industries Ltd., New Delhi and M/s. Shirpur Gold Refinery Ltd., in its meeting held on 04.05.2001 on 11.00 AM at SI.No.15 and 24.08.2011 on 11 AM at S.No.19 respectively. It is apparent from the above submission that their case has complete merit for consideration of the relaxation regarding permission to convert EO based on duty saved amount instead of CIF value, in terms of the Notification No.28 dated 28.01.2004.

Decision: The Committee reviewed and went through the justification furnished by the firm and discussed the case at length and found no merit in the request of the firm. Accordingly, it decided to maintain rejection of the earlier decision of PRCin its MeetingNo.32/AM24 held on 13.03.2024 (Case No.02).

(Action: Applicant )

=u oO

Case No.38 M/s. Dileep Industries Private Limited, Rajasthan

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00006045AM24

Subject: Request for delayed uploading of Shipping Bills on DGFT site by Customs. Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they are the manufacturers and exporters of Handicrafts items since last four decades under the efficient guidance of our Managing Director Sh.Dileep Baid. They have exported goods against 11 shipping bills and payments were received by bank well within the time. But shipping bills were not uploaded by Customs. It happens only during the month of November 2022 as mentioned in the statement and also attached excel sheet. i.e uploaded very late after the expiry of prescribed time limit. In spite of repeated reminders, customs have delayed in uploading shipping bills on online, may be due to some or other technical issues at their level, which was beyond their control. Hence due to non availability of shipping bills online, they could not submit MEIS application in time i.e. before the prescribed time limit of 28.02.2022. The last date for submission of online applications were 28.02.2022 as per Notification No.53 dated 01.02.2022, whereas all the said eleven shipping bills were uploaded by Customs only after 28.02.2022.Hence they are requesting to allow MEIS benefits against S/Bills.

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

(Action: Applicant/PC-3 division)

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

(Action: Applicant/PC-3 division)

Case No.39 M/s. Saga Lifescience Limited, Anmedabad

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00007949AM24 Meeting No.03AM25 held on 25.04.2024 Subject: To allow Relaxation for submitting destruction certificate Advance Authorization No. 0811000286 dated 05.01.2021.

This is review case of PRC Meeting No.29AM24 held on 15.02.2024 (Case No.27) wherein Committee rejected the case.

Applicant Statement: Tin this review application the applicant stated that they have perused the minutes of the PRC meeting no. 29/AM24 held on 15.02.2024 and observe a communication gap is the reason for rejection of request. They elaborate the matter very precisely as below-: They requested for the exemption from submitting destruction certificate for the raw material/finished goods, as prescribed in the PC-9. Please refer to the uploaded copy of shipping bill no. is 8772799 date 08/03/2022, from which you may observe that there were three modes of consignment. On serial-wise, Sr. no.1 was correctly classified under the subjected advance authorization- AA no. 0811000286 dated 05/01/2021. Sr. no. 2 was wrongly

NO

e were three modes of consignment. On serial-wise, Sr. no.1 was correctly classified under the subjected advance authorization- AA no. 0811000286 dated 05/01/2021. Sr. no. 2 was wrongly

NO

declared under duty drawback which was not allowed under PC-9. They seek relaxation in this matter. They express willingness to pay duty and interest on the proportionate quantity of imports if not considered under advance authorization. If considered there is no shortfall. Hence they are requesting to allow relaxation against subject authorization.

Decision: The Committee went through the statement made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length. After detailed discussion, it was decided to waive-off the requirement of destruction certificate with the condition that the applicant would submit an affidavit/declaration in order to indemnify to the Government for any loss/misuse due to diversion of unregistered import materials to the domestic market that may be detected in future to Regional Authority. This waiver is allowed subject to payment of Rs. 25,000/- as composition fee. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Ahmedabad)

Case No.40 M/s. Amrapali Industries Limited, Gujarat

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00007948AM24 Meeting No.03AM25 held on 25.04.2024 Subject: Request for revalidation of Scrip against MEIS Scrip No. 4019003157 dated 04.08.2022.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they have made constant and continuous efforts and communications to the extent that officers have visited the Gift SEZ Authorities personally, requesting them to register the said scrip on the ICEGATE platform. That they have made efforts, to the extent of personally providing the document by sending their Officer to Falta SEZ from Ahmedabad twice at the company’s expense. That due to genuine technical errors, not on their part, the said scrip was not registered during its period of validity and for that same reason, they would have to bear with the financial loss as well as loss to goodwill of the company. If revalidation is not granted then they have the face a loss of Rs. 14,73,162/- and it will further hamper financial strength. Hence they are requesting to allow revalidation of above mentioned scrip.

Decision: The Committee reviewed and went through the justification furnished by the firm and discussed the case at length and found no merit in the request of the firm. Accordingly, it decided to maintain rejection of the earlier decision of PRCin its MeetingNo.28/AM24 held on 17.02.2024 (Case No.04).

(Action: Applicant)

==> picture [51 x 15] intentionally omitted <==

----- Start of picture text ----- ot Een ----- End of picture text -----

Case No.41 M/s. Prince Corp F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00007841AM24

M/s. Prince Corp Private Limited, Mumbai

Subject: Request to apply DFIA transferable with multiple SION products against DFIA Authorization No. 039207600036AM20 dated 06.07.2019.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they are the regular exporters of plastic household/kitchenware products under DFIA scheme from Mumbai, India. During the period 06-07-2019 to 18-10-2020, they have applied total 7 DFIA application file with multiple SION and accordingly export is also done under single shipping bill with multiple SION. All these 7 DFIA File no. application was made before system migration phase, but now while applying DFIA transferable application the new DGFT software does not allow to apply multiple SION. They are in agreement with 15-20 FTP Para 4.29 (vi) that separate DFIA shall be issued for each SION, but DGFT system software accepted each DFIA File no. application with multiple SIONs before the migration phase. Hence earlier DGFT system software had a glitch of allowing application with multiple SION which was against 15-20 FTP Para 4.29 (vi) that separate DFIA shall be issued for each SION. Now New DGFT System Software is not allowing to apply multiple SION DFIA File no application. Hence they are requesting to allow DFIA transferable with multiple SION products.

Report of EGTF was seen.

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.42 M/s. Mytec Process Private Limited, Karnataka

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLYOOO009090AM24 Meeting No.03AM25 held on 25.04.2024 Subject: Request to accept manual BRC instead of E-BRC against EPCG Authorization No. 0730005485 dated 05.04.2007.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated thatinspite of repeated efforts banker unable to generate EBRC for supply of goods to SEZ. Since the last date is approaching for availing amnesty scheme they have taken manual BRC request for consideration to closure of EPCG under amnesty scheme. They paid 50%duty with interest on unfulfilled EO while availing extension, then paid duty with interest under Amnesty. They hereby undertake to submit the e-BRCs soon after issued by their banker. Uploaded request letters submitted to bank since Oct 2023 to till date. Hence they are requesting to allow / accept manual BRC instead of E-BRC.

SD eu

Decision: The Committee heard and examined the case and discussed the matter at length. After detailed discussion on justification furnished by the firm Committee observed that there is merit in the case. Accordingly, it was decided to accede to the request and consider manual BRC instead of E-BRC for the purpose of closure of EPCG Authorization No. 0730005485 dated 05.04.2007. No other relaxation was provided. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-/Bangalore)

Case No.43 M/s. V A Global Business, Maharashtra

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00007328AM24 Meeting No.03AM25 held on 25.04.2024 Subject: Request to allow application for transferable DFIA with respect to file no. 03AS07600301AM24 and 03/90/076/00016/AM20

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they during the year 2020 to 2021 exports/imports were shut due to the pandemic situation of Covid 19. Hence, the automatic extension of 6 months was granted by DGFT by issuing Policy circular No. 35/2015-20 dated 23 April, 2020. As per the policy circular No. 35/2015-20 dated 23 April, 2020, automatic extension of Import Validity Period and Export obligation period by 6 months from the date of expiry for existing advance Authorization (AAs)/DFIA expiring from February to July 2020 has been granted. With respect to file no. 03/90/076/00016/AM20, they hereby submit that, they have uploaded approx. 75 documents/shipping bills in the said file. But due to some error in the server the entire documents got corrupted/deleted. They have complaint the same to DGFT grievance portal. After several correspondences with DGFT grievance portal, it agreed to release the documents and instructed them to generate new file and reupload the documents/shipping bills. They have acted as per the instructions of DGFT. The application under the mentioned file is still pending and needs to be allowed at the earliest. Hence they are requesting to allow application for transferable DFIA with respect to file no. O3AS07600301AM24 and 03/90/076/00016/AM20.

file is still pending and needs to be allowed at the earliest. Hence they are requesting to allow application for transferable DFIA with respect to file no. O3AS07600301AM24 and 03/90/076/00016/AM20. Comments of EGTF were also seen.

Decision: The Committee went through the representation received from the applicant and decided to withdraw the case as RA Mumbai has already given opportunity for PH to the firm.

(Action: Applicant/RA, Mumbai)

Case No.44 M/s. Mosco Prints India Private Limited, Karnataka. F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00009299AM24

Sn H~

Meeting No.03AM25 held on 25.04.2024

Subject: Request for acceptance of manual e-BRC for supply of goods to EOU against EPCG Authorization No. 0730011908 dt. 07.12.2012.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they inspite of repeated efforts banker unable to generate EBC to volumes transactions (total 572 transactions towards supply of goods to EOU. Manual BRC is issued by banker and duty and interest on unfulfilled portion of EO has been paid under amnesty scheme. Since the supply is to EOU there is no involvement of foreign currency remittance and also transactions relates to old period. Hence they are requesting to allow / accept manual BRC instead of E-BRC. Decision: The Committee heard and examined the case and discussed the matter at length. After detailed discussion on justification furnished by the firm Committee observed that there is merit in the case. Accordingly, it was decided to accede to the request and consider manual BRC instead of E-BRC for the purpose of closure of EPCG Authorization No. 0730011908 dt. 07.12.2012 subject to payment of composition fees as per policy provisions. No other relaxation was provided. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-/Bangalore)

Case No.45 M/s Styrax Life Sciences Private Limited, Telangana F.No.HQRPRCAPPLYO0000305AM25

Meeting No.03AM25 held on 25.04.2024 Subject: Request for Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0911001350 dated 10.08.2021.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they are manufactured 100000 Kgs of 5-(4-AMINO-2-OXO-PYRIMIDINYL)-OXATHIOLANE-2-CARBOXYLICACIDISOPROPYL-METHYL (CYCLOHEXYL ESTER) by using Imported raw materials procured against above said TWO Advance Authorizations issued by RAHyderabad as per the Ad-hoc NORMS fixed by NORMS Committee in DGFT, New Delhi and executed a small export shipment successfully. However, after receipt of partial shipment, Foreign Buyer insisted them to enhance the product purities as per US FDA specifications. They discussed the same internally with their technical team & production department and re-processed the entire quantity as instructed by our Foreign Buyer and sent couple of samples to verify their results. After receipt of the successful confirmations from Foreign Buyer, they are ready for executing exports without any further delay. They had already imported major Raw Materials at higher price and cleared the same against above said TWO Advance Authorizations and not applied its EOP extensions within time allowed by RA - Hyderabad due to

a

ted major Raw Materials at higher price and cleared the same against above said TWO Advance Authorizations and not applied its EOP extensions within time allowed by RA - Hyderabad due to

a

above said ambiguity raised by foreign buyer. Meantime, they got the Deemed Export Order from M/s. Tianish Laboratories Private Limited, Hyderabad for the entire quantity of their finished goods with similar standards & specifications as insisted by Foreign Buyer. Hence, we have decided to ship the entire consignment either direct export (or) deemed export as per the convenient of their Price, Payment and terms & conditions. This is an alternative option in their hand as of now. They are ready pay the Composition fee as specified in the PARA 4.40 (k) of Hand Book of Procedures for grant of EOP extensions. Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension against subject authorization.

Decision: The Committee went through the justification made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length. The Committee decided to accede to the request and allowd EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0911001350 dated 10.08.2021 for a further period of 6 months from the date of endorsement subject to payment of composition fee as per policy provisions. The firm shall approach RA concerned within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/RA-Hyderabad)

Case No.46 M/s. Anuh Pharma Limited, Mumbai

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00000291AM25

Meeting No.03AM25 held on 25.04.2024 Subject: Request for Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0310836791 dated 22.06.2020.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they required EOP extension against subject authorization because due to corona pandemic they have not received order from customer which were expecting hence they cannot fulfilled the condition. Hence they are requesting to allow EOP extension against subject authorization.

Decision: Withdrawn. Already decided in case No. 11.

Case No.47 M/s. Kanpur Texel Private Limited, Uttar Pradesh

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00007244AM24

Subject: Request to allow MEIS Claim for 3 unclaimed shipping bills.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated thattheir following SBs were not showing in DGFT portal for which various complaints lodged with Customs, finally SBs were start showing at DGFT portal in Jan,2023 but since then MEIS portal for fresh applications is not opened therefore their MEIS claim for following SBs is pending. They have lodged complaint no. PMOPG/E/2023/0134607 dated 7.7.2023 in PMG portal and in response of which they were advised to request PRC at DGFT

—— — —s

HQ as per para 2.58FTP due to which this application has been made. Since, they could not claim this benefit of these 3 SB because of ICEGATE issue. Hence they are requesting to allow MES claim for 3 unclaimed S/Bills.

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

(Action: Applicant/PC-3 division)

Case No.48 M/s. Markap Resources Private Limited, Delhi F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00000293AM25

Subject: Request for revalidation against licenses for restricted items Auth/Scrip No. 0111003763 dated 02.05.2022.

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that they are manufacture of Reclaim and Crumb rubber powder from raw material used rubber tyre scarp / Rubber Crumb /Granules having size 10 to 15 Mesh and devoid of iron/ steel & most of the fibers. They were granted Import Authorization No. 0111003763 on 02.05.2022, by the DGFT HQ and have since endeavored to import the necessary raw materials. The unforeseen global challenges, notably the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, have significantly disrupted the global supply chain. This situation has led to increased international sea freight costs, making planned imports economically unviable at this time. Additionally, ongoing geopolitical tensions in Europe and the Middle East have further complicated the logistics and commercial aspects of importing the required materials. Hence they are requesting to allow revalidation against subject authorization.

Decision: The Committee went through the justification made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and observed that there is merit in the case. Accordingly, it decided to allow revalidation for a further period of 6 months from the date of endorsement against Import Authorisation No. 0111003763 dated 02.05.2022 for restricted item. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

(Action: Applicant/ILS,DGFT(HQ)

Case No.49 M/s. Minda Kosei Aluminum Wheel Private Limited, Haryana F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY0007863AM24 Meeting No.03AM25 held on 25.04.2024

Subject: Request for Third Party Exports against various EPCG Authorization Numbers

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that Adverse Impact on Trade\Post the commencement of manufacturing by the Applicant, the domestic market witnessed an increased demand for alloy wheels. This increase in domestic demand was caused due to preponement of MSIL’s (Maruti) expansion plan and increased demand of OEM's customers for cars fitted with alloy wheels. This demand (which would have otherwise been met by import because of few low-scale domestic manufacturers) was met by the Applicant. During the period 2016-17 until 2021-22, the total no of Alloy wheels manufactured by the Applicant and supplied to MSIL which were ultimately exported by MSIL outside India is approximately INR 134 crores in value. Had the Applicant not fulfilled this sudden domestic demand, MSIL alone would have had to import alloy wheels valuing INR 2,046.66 crores. Therefore, if the Applicant had exported directly outside (which though was impossibility), there would have been an adverse impact on trade because the OEM's would have been forced to import the alloy wheels. Genuine Hardship 2016 onwards (when the Applicant commenced manufacturing) the international automobile sector witnessed a decline due to macro-economic factors which by 2018 saw a negative growth reaching almost -17% with the onset of COVID-19.

ant commenced manufacturing) the international automobile sector witnessed a decline due to macro-economic factors which by 2018 saw a negative growth reaching almost -17% with the onset of COVID-19. At the same time there were dumping trends from China in the international market which was impossible for the Applicant to compete. This decreasing demand of cars outside India persisted until the international market completely recovered from COVID pandemic. The nature of alloy wheels is also such that its usage is limited to its application in cars alone. Further, the procurement of contract for supply of wheels is highly technical involving months of testing for safety concerns before any contract for export can be finalized. Therefore, the Applicant submits that it was impossibility for it to meet its EO in the face of act of god in the nature of COVID

Decision: The Committee examined the case on the basis of submission made by the firm and discussed the matter at length. After detailed discussion it was decided that previous submissions made by the firm before PRC and the decision thereon may be collated and placed before the PRC for taking a holistic view. Thereafter the case may be brought back again before PRC for a decision.

M/s. Biological E. Limited, Telangana.

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00007921AM24 Meeting No.03AM25 held on 25.04.2024 Subject: Request for waiver of PC-18 condition/other condition of Authorization against Advance Authorization No. 0910064910 dated 13.04.2017.

a) —n ; oa

Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that as per the advance authorization the proposed imported material i.e. Noscapine crude 95% is an intermediate not a drug (for which Appendix 4J condition does not apply) while applying for advance authorization they have opted Appendix 4J condition assuming the import item as a drug by overlook. Due to this they need to fulfill the export obligation within 12 months instead of 18 months. Hence they are requesting to allow waiver of appendix 4J condition to enable them to get the redemption certificate.

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 it is not a PRC matter and decided to refer to PC-4 for resolution.

Case No.51 M/s. Biological E. Limited, Telangana F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00007918AM24

Subject: Request for waiver of PC-18 condition/other condition of Authorization against Advance Authorization No. 0911000602 dated 26.03.2021.

(Action: Applicant/PC-4)

Case No.52 M/s. Biological E. Limited, Telangana

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00007919AM24

Subject: Request for waiver of PC-18 condition/other condition of Authorization against Advance Authorization No. 0910066702 dated 28.09.2018.

SO Ey

drug (for which Appendix 4J condition does not apply) while applying for advance authorization they have opted Appendix 4J condition assuming the import item as a drug by overlook. Due to this they need to fulfill the export obligation within 12 months instead of 18 months. Hence they are requesting to allow waiver of appendix 4J condition to enable them to get the redemption certificate.

Case No.53 M/s. Biological E. Limited, Telangana

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00007954AM24

Subject: Request for waiver of PC-18 condition/other condition of Authorization against Advance Authorization No. 0911002902 dated 26.04.2022. Applicant Statement: The applicant stated that as per the advance authorization the proposed imported material i.e. Noscapine crude 95% is an intermediate not a drug (for which Appendix 4J condition does not apply) while applying for advance authorization they have opted Appendix 4J condition assuming the import item as a drug by overlook. Due to this they need to fulfill the export obligation within 12 months instead of 18 months. Hence they are requesting to allow waiver of appendix 4J condition to enable them to get the redemption certificate.

M/s. Biological E. Limited, Telangana

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00007953AM24

Subject: Request for waiver of PC-18 condition/other condition of Authorization against Advance Authorization No. 0910064707 dated 21.02.2017.

CSD eon EE

months instead of 18 months. Hence they are requesting to allow waiver of appendix 4J condition to enable them to get the redemption certificate. 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 it is not a PRC matter and decided to refer to PC-4 for resolution.

(Action: Applicant/PC-4)

Case No.55 M/s. Biological E. Limited, Telangana F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00007922AM24 Meeting No.03AM25 held on 25.04.2024 Subject: Request for waiver of PC-18 condition/other condition of Authorization against Advance Authorization No. 0910063353 dated 03.03.2016.

M/s. Biological E. Limited, Telangana

F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00007925AM24

Meeting No.03AM25 held on 25.04.2024 Subject: Request for waiver of PC-18 condition/other condition of Authorization against Advance Authorization No. 0910067894 dated 19.08.2019.

a>.yy, ~~

Case No.57 M/s. Biological E. F.No.HQRPRCAPPLY00007923AM24 Meeting No.03AM25 held on 25.04.2024

M/s. Biological E. Limited, Telangana

Subject: Request for waiver of PC-18 condition/other condition of Authorization against Advance Authorization No. 0910068792 dated 26.05.2020.

Additional issue discussed

After consideration among members, the Committee decided to discontinue the practice of informing applicants through e-mails about the decisions of the PRC, as the decisions are being updated on online module. (Action: PRC)

SP em ~~

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 10712 --apply.