aoe ता of Uploading 2S / 03/2025 Directorate General of Foreign Trade (PRC Section) Minutes of the Policy Relaxation Committee Meeting Held on 25.02.2025 & 27.02.2025 under the Chairmanship of Shri Santosh Kumar Sarangi, Director General of Foreign Trade Meeting No. 26AM25 held on 25.02.2025 & 27.02.2025 The following members were present in the meeting:

1. Ms. Shubra Sr. Development Commissioner
2. Shri Hardeep Singh Addl. DGFT
3. Dr.S.K. Bansal Addl. DGFT
4. Shri Rakesh Kumar Addl. DGFT
5. Shri K.V.Tirumala Joint DGFT
6. Shri K.M. Harilal Joint DGFT
7. Shri Satya Raja SekharG = Joint DGFT Following cases were discussed. The decision taken on the individual cases are as under:- | S.No | No Name of the firm i M/s. Fortpoint Automotive (Cars) Private Limited, Thane

M/s. Nazareth Metals, Mumbai 3. M/s. Concept Pharmaceuticals Limited, Mumbai 4. M/s. Balkrishna Industries Limited, Mumbai 5. M/s. Abhishri Packaging Private Limited, Mumbai La ds | 8. | M/s. Abhishri Packaging Private Limited, Mumbai | 2 | M/s. Abhishri Packaging Private Limited, Mumbai 10. Ths 12: 13. 14. M/s. Simosis International, Mumbai 15. M/s. Nidec India Private Limited 16. M/s. Sara Sae Private Limited, Dehradun TZ. M/s. Hardik Exim, Mumbai

M/s Kalp.Impex, Maharashtra 9 —- 19. M/s. Intersnack Cashew India Private Limited, Chennai 20. M/s. Moksh International, Mumbai 21. Ms. Sri Shandar Snacks Private Limited, Uttarakhand 22. M/s. Mangaldeep Rice Mill Private Limited, Bihar 23. M/s. Vedanta Limited, Delhi 24. M/s. Kharagpur Metal Reforming Industries Pvt Ltd, West Bengal 25: M/s. Indian Oxides And Chemicals Private Limited, Mumbai 26. M/s. Futuretech Engineering Llp, Bangalore 22065 M/s. Sreema Filaments Private Limited, Tamil Nadu 28. M/s. Cleena Industries Private Limited, Delhi 29. M/s. HMC E-Valle:’ Private Limited, Ludhiana 30. M/s. BLS Ecotech Limited, Delhi 31. M/s. Global Packaging, Dadra and Nagar Haveli 32. M/s. Sudevi Chemicals, Mumbai 33. Ws. Lovy International, Uttar Pradesh 34. M/s. JSW Steel Limited, Mumbai 35. M/s. Shahi Exports Private Limited, Delhi 36. M/s. P P Bafna Ventures Private Limited, Pune 37. M/s. Whitelotus Industries Limited, Surat 38. M/s. Mepro Pharmaceuticals Private Limited, Gujarat 39. M/s. Kredence Multi Trading Limited, Mumbai | 40. | M/s. Heranba Industries Limited, Mumbai 41. M/s. Nector Exports Private Limited, Bangalore 42. M/s. Goldstab Organics Private Limited, Mumbai 43. M/s. Imperial Dyeing Limited, Surat 44. M/s. Maxmed Life Sciences Private Limited, Delhi 45. M/s. Manoj Ornaments Private Limited, Mumbai 46. Ms. K A | International Private Limited, Odisha 47. M/s. Jewel Impex Private Limited, Mumbai 48. M/s. Sadhana Nitro Chem Limited, Mumbai 49. M/s. Goldstab Organics Private Limited, Mumbai 50. M/s. B Chintamani Dyes Private Limited, Surat 51. Mis. Rigi Cut Tools Private Limited, Pune 52. M/s. Surendra Saddlery, Kanpur 53. M/s. M K U Limited, Kanpur 54, [Mis . AMI Organics Limited, Surat ae “| efile:

55: M/s. Louis Dreyfus Company India Private Limited, Gurugram 56. M/s. Ganges Internationale Private Limited, Chennai 57. M/s. Smitabh Intercon Ltd, Kolkata 58. M/s. Tholasi Prints India Private’ Limited, Bangalore 59; M/s. Subra International Private Limited, Delhi | 60. | M/s. Tathya Texfab Private Limited, Maharashtra 61. M/s. G V Ventures, Mumbai 62. M/s. Modern Threads (India) Limited, Rajasthan 63. M/s. Agronic Food Private Limited, Jodhpur 64. M/s. Banaras Beads Limited, Varanasi 65. M/s. Banaras Beads Limited, Varanasi | 66. | M/s. Fredun Pharmaceuticals Ltd, Mumbai 67. M/s. Indian Allied Exports, Moradabad | 68. | M/s. Indian Allied Exports, Moradabad | 69. | M/s. Balgopal Jewellers Private Limited, Delhi 70. M/s. Medreich Limited, Bengaluru 7. M/s. VEM Technologies Private Limited, Hyderabad ts M/s. VEM Technologies Private Limited, Hyderabad 73. M/s. R.N. Laboratories Private Limited, Mumbai 74, M/s. Technichem Organics Limited, Anmedabad 75. M/s. B. N. Jewellers India Private Limited, Mumbai 76. M/s. Balaji Speciality Chemicals Limited, Maharashtra Wh. M/s. Balaji Speciality Chemicals Limited, Maharashtra 78. M/s. Shahi Exports Private Limited, Delhi 79. M/s. Diamond Engineering (Chennai) Private Limited, Chennai | 80. | M/s. Deepak Nitrite Limited, v adodara 81. M/s. Alphamed Formulations Private Limited, Hyderabad 82. 83. 84. 85. M/s. Gupta Oxygen Private Limited, Haryana | 86. | M/s. Concord Biotech Limited, Ahmedabad 87. M/s. Jain Recycling Private Limited, Chennai 88. M/s. Ebullient Packaging Private Limited, Mumbai | 89. M/s. S K Industries, Vadodara | 90. | M/s. Rishikesh Filaments Private Limited, Mumbai 91, M/e Sneem Oversend Ine, megane Bere ae 201

| — न 6 [9 , Mumbal 93. M/s. Harimohan Agro Industries, Maharashtra 94. M/s. Jawahar Lal & Sons, Indore 95; M/s. Jawahar Exim Limited, Mumbai | 96. | M/s. Deco Mica Limited, Anmedabad 97. M/s. Kalp Impex, Jalgaon | 98. | M/s. Niaksh Jewels Lip, Bikaner | 99. | M/s. Adcock Ingram Limited, Bangalore 100. M/s. Adcock Ingram Limited, Bangalore Case No.01 M/s. Fortpoint Automotive (Cars) Private Limited, Thane F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00012139AM25 Meeting No.26AM25 heldon 25.02.2025 & 27.02.2025

Subject: Import of a Honda Civic Type R, 4-door, Front-Wheel-Drive Sports Car

for the purpose of Personal use and not for any Commercial transactions, in relevance to the Conformity of Production as applicable as per the policy notes to Chapter 87 of ITC HS CODE. Applicant Statement: The Honda Civic Type R is a high-performance, 4-door, front-wheel-drive sports car, delivering an impressive 315 brake horsepower, paired with a manual transmission for an engaging driving experience. As part of the globally renowned Civic lineup, the Type R stands out as an icon of engineering, performance, and reliability, cementing the brand's legacy in markets worldwide. While the Civic made its mark in India, its presence was relatively short- lived, leaving a gap in the market for driving enthusiasts who appreciate its blend of performance and practicality. The reason to import this car to India is because the Civic Type R is equipped with advanced Electronic Driving Aids, offers Superior Safety features such as front and side curtain airbags, knee airbags, advanced compatible body structure, vehicle stability assist, seat belt reminds for all passengers and Advanced Dynamic Controls, providing a sorted and safe drive quality with user-friendly Controls which are feasible for Indian Driving Conditions. Accordingly, we are filing this Representation to the Honorable PRC Committee at DGFT for seeking Special Sanction for import of a Honda Civic Type R, 4-door, Front-Wheel-Drive Sports Car as detailed in para 2 above. The Vehicle will be imported solely for the purpose of Personal use and not for any Commercial transactions. We will also be complying with the relevant Rule 126A of CMVR, in relevance to the Conformity of Production as applicable as per the policy notes to Chapter 87 of ITC HS CODE. A declaration to the effect is also being submitted herewith. Decision: The Committee went through the justification made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and decided to refer the matter to PC-2 for suitable , रा rae

action. Case is closed in PRC. (Action: Applicant/ PC-2) Case No.02 M/s. Nazareth Metals, Mumbai F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00012327AM25 Meeting No.26AM25 held on 25.02.2025 & 27.02.2025 Subject: Closure of Authorizations against Advance Authorization No. 0310174821 dated 27.12.2002. Applicant Statement: It will be seen that your office has already considered our application for closure of licence under amnesty scheme File no- 01/60/162/34/AM25/PRC (Case No-5) meeting no-20AM25 held on 23/10/2024 but regret that RLA is still not considering our request on the grounds that the PRC decision is not clear. Kindly intervene in the matter and issue necessary instruction to RLA for closure of licence as we have submitted all the necessary documents. Decision: The Committee examined the statement made by the applicant in its application and it decided to seek a detailed report from RA Mumbai in the matter. (Action: Applicant/ RA Mumbai) Case No. 03 M/s. Concept Pharmaceuticals Limited, Mumbai F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY000192AM24 Subject: Allow us to use same Norms For The Closure Of AA 0310717229 Dtd 14122012 also Allow to amendment The Input Qty From 2000kgs To 4000kgs Since Licence Was Wrongly Applied against Advance Authorization No. 03107172296030 0 dated 14/12/2012. This is a defer case of PRC Meeting 22AM25 held on 03.12.2024 & 06.12.2024 wherein Committee decided to refer the case to the concerned Norms Committee. Applicant Statement: (1)The norms fixed vide HQ file no. 018205000330AM14 after 2 months from the date of rejection of our file. Export and import products are same. Norms ratify for License No. 0310730523 dtd. 5.4.2013 RLA file : 039404000004AM14, so please fix same norms for the said licence no. 0310717229 (2) Allow to amend export quantity as 10000 Itrs instead of 20000 Itr, since we have made a mistake of showing 50% qty while applying the Advance Authorization. application and it decided to refer the matter to the concerned Norms Committee for examination and if possible resolution.

(Action: Applicant/ Norms Committee) Case No.04 M/s. Balkrishna Industries Limited, Mumbai F.No. HARPRCAPPLY000539AM24 Subject: Re-validation of Scrip against MEIS Scrip No. 0319325056 dated 30/09/2021. This is a review case of PRC Meeting No.24AM25 held on 24.01.2025 (Case No.05) and Committee decided to maintain the earlier decision of PRC in its meeting No.34AM23 dated 09.03.2023 (Case No, 19). Applicant Statement: The MEIS scrip was issued on30/09/2021 for INR 36,20,341/- and the same was utilized against our Imports for home consumption. The last import was on 30/04/2022 and in May 2022, there was incidence of fire in the section handling the licenses and many of the records got destroyed /misplaced. It is now while reconciliation of MEIS scrips, it came to our notice that there was balance of INR 4,15,984/- available for utilization and the scrip was valid until Sept 2022. The MEIS Scrip may please be revalidated so that we can utilize the balance of INR 4,15,984/- available in the Scrip. Understanding the genuine hardship, kindly revalidate the MEIS scrip. Decision: The Committee went through the statements made by the firm and discussed the matter at length and observed that the applicant has not submitted any cogent reason/ justification in support of any genuine hardship faced by them. Accordingly, the Committee decided to maintain the rejection of the earlier decision of PRC in its Meeting No.34AM23 dated 09.03.2023 (Case No.19). (Action: Applicant) Case No. 05 F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00000647AM24

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0310825789 dated

19/12/2018. This is a review case of PRC Meeting No.05AM24 held on 13.06.2023 (Case No.08) Applicant Statement: Due to Covid-19 pandemic situation and its wave in India the Luggage activity had been adversely affected and demand for Luggage has gone down drastically. Due to lockdown the Travelling was also affected. As COVID 19 is spreading very rapidly in all over the India. And in Maharashtra there was so many restrictions imposed due to this restriction our factory production also decreased, No Man Power. Our Foreign Buyer is of USA and they have हिP S|

cancelled/Hold our all order due to Pandemic. And Now they have released the Export Order for the Luggage. So we request you to grand us the EOP till 31/08/2023 so that we can complete the Export Obligation and put for the closure (Export Order Copy attached and the mail copy where they have cancelled the Order) Accordingly, the Committee decided to maintain rejection of the earlier decision of PRC in its Meeting No.05AM24 dated 13.06.2023 (Case No.08) (Action: Applicant) Case No. 06 F.No. HQRPRCAPPLYOO000646AM24

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0310825173 dated

28/11/2018. This is a review case of PRC Meeting No.05AM24 held on 13.06.2023 (Case No.12) Applicant Statement: We would like to inform you that we are into Luggage Product, Due to Covid-19 pandemic situation and its wave in India the Luggage activity had been adversely affected and demand for Luggage has gone down drastically. Many countries took extreme measures to control the outbreak of the virus which are impacting the travel industry more than any other industry. As COVID 19 is spreading very rapidly in all over the India, in Maharashtra there were so many restrictions imposed. Due to such restriction our factory production also decreased and there was limited Man Power. Our Foreign Buyer is of USA and they have cancelled our all order due to Pandemic. Now they have released the Export Order for the Luggage. We also would like to inform you that we have completed the 90% Export against the mentioned Advance Licence and we need the EOP to complete the 10% of Export obligation as we have imported the Raw Material against the Licence. So we request you to grant us the EOP till 31/08/2023 so that we can complete the Export Obligation against aforesaid Advance Licence. Decision: The Committee went through the statements made by the firm and any cogent reasor/ justification in support of any genuine hardship faced by them. PRC in its Meeting No.05AM24 dated 13.06.2023 (Case No.12) (Action: Applicant) Case No.07 ~)—

F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00000644AM24

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0310825214 dated

26/11/2018. This is a review case of PRC Meeting No.05AM24 held on 13.06.2023 (Case No.10) We would like to inform you that we are into Luggage Product, Due to Covid-19 pandemic situation and its wave in India the Luggage activity had been adversely affected and demand for Luggage has gone down drastically. Many countries took extreme measures to control the outbreak of the virus which are impacting the travel industry more than any other industry. As COVID 19 is spreading very rapidly in all over the India, in Maharashtra there were so many restrictions imposed. Due to such restriction our factory production also decreased and there was limited Man Power. Our Foreign Buyer is of USA and they have cancelled our all order due to Pandemic. Now they have released the Export Order for the Luggage. We also would like to inform you that we have completed the 90% Export against the mentioned Advance Licence and we need the EOP to complete the 10% of Export obligation as we have imported the Raw Material against the Licence. So we request you to grand us the EOP till 31/08/2023 so that we can complete the Export Obligation against aforesaid Advance Licence. PRC in its Meeting No.05AM24 dated 13.06.2023 (Case No.10) (Action: Applicant) Case No.08 F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00000643AM24

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0310825922 dated

26/12/2018. This is a review case of PRC Meeting No.05AM24 held on 13.06.2023 (Case No.11) Applicant Statement: We would like to inform you that we are into Luggage Product, Due to Covid-19 pandemic situation and its wave in India the Luggage activity had been adversely affected and demand for Luggage has gone down drastically. Many countries took extreme measures to control the outbreak of the virus which are impacting the travel industry more than any other industry. As , हिP ad

COVID 19 is spreading very rapidly in all over the India, in Maharashtra there were so many restrictions imposed. Due to such restriction our factory production also decreased and there was limited Man Power. Our Foreign Buyer is of USA and they have cancelled our all order due to Pandemic. Now they have released the Export Order for the Luggage. We also would like to inform you that we have completed the 93% Export against the mentioned Advance Licence and we need the EOP to complete the 7% of Export obligation as we have imported the Raw Material against the Licence. So we request you to grand us the EOP till 31/08/2023 so that we can complete the Export Obligation against aforesaid Advance Licence. Decision: PRC in its Meeting No.05AM24 dated 13.06.2023 (Case No.11) (Action: Applicant) Case No.09 F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00000640AM24

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0310823820 dated

18/09/2018. This is a review case of PRC Meeting No.06AM24 held on 19.06.2023 (Case No.47) Applicant Statement: We would like to inform you that we are into Luggage Product, Due to Covid-19 pandemic situation and its wave in India the Luggage activity had been adversely affected and demand for Luggage has gone down drastically. Many countries took extreme measures to control the outbreak of the virus which are impacting the travel industry more than any other industry. As COVID 19 is spreading very rapidly in all over the India, in Maharashtra there were so many restrictions imposed. Due to such restriction our factory production also decreased and there was limited Man Power. Our Foreign Buyer is of USA/Belgium/Canada and they have cancelled our all order due to Pandemic. Now they have released the Export Order for the Luggage. We also would like to inform you that we have completed the 89% Export against the mentioned Advance Licence and we need the EOP to complete the 11% of Export obligation as we have imported the Raw Material against the Licence. Also we would like to inform you that in Year 2022 we have received the Export Order but that also our Buyer had kept on Hold due to which we were not able to take the EOP Extension in Year 2022. Now our Buyer had release the Export Order, So we request you to grand us the EOP till 31/08/2023 so that we can complete the Export Obligation against aforesaid Advance Licence. nah

Decision: PRC in its Meeting No.06AM24 dated 19.06.2023 (Case No.47) (Action: Applicant) Case No.10 F.No. HARPRCAPPLYO0000638AM24

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0310823167 dated

21/08/2018. This is a review case of PRC Meeting No.06AM24 held on 19.06.2023 (Case No.49) Applicant Statement: We would like to inform you that we are into Luggage Product, Due to Covid-19 pandemic situation and its wave in India the Luggage activity had been adversely affected and demand for Luggage has gone down drastically. Many countries took extreme measures to control the outbreak of the virus which are impacting the travel industry more than any other industry. As COVID 19 is spreading very rapidly in all over the India, in Maharashtra there were so many restrictions imposed. Due to such restriction our factory production also decreased and there was limited Man Power. Our Foreign Buyer is of USA/Belgium/Canada and they have cancelled our all order due to Pandemic. Now they have released the Export Order for the Luggage. We also would like to inform you that we have completed the 95% Export against the mentioned Advance Licence and we need the EOP to complete the 5% of Export obligation as we have imported the Raw Material against the Licence. Also we would like to inform you that in Year 2022 we have received the Export Order but that also our Buyer had kept on Hold due to which we were not able to take the EOP Extension in Year 2022. Now our Buyer had release the Export Order, So we request you to grand us the EOP till 31/09/2023 so that we can complete the Export Obligation against aforesaid Advance Licence. Decision: PRC in its Meeting No.06AM24 dated 19.06.2023 (Case No.49) (Action: Applicant) Case No.11 F.No. HARPRCAPPLY0000637AM24 aaa a —|0-—

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0310822972 dated

10/08/2018. This is a review case of PRC Meeting No.06AM24 held on 19.06.2023 (Case No.50) Applicant Statement: We would like to inform you that we are into Luggage Product, Due to Covid-19 pandemic situation and its wave in India the Luggage activity had been adversely affected and demand for Luggage has gone down drastically. Many countries took extreme measures to control the outbreak of the virus which are impacting the travel industry more than any other industry. As COVID 19 is spreading very rapidly in all over the India, in Maharashtra there were so many restrictions imposed. Due to such restriction our factory production also decreased and there was limited Man Power. Our Foreign Buyer is of USA/Belgium/Canada and they have cancelled our all order due to Pandemic. Now they have released the Export Order for the Luggage. We also would like to inform you that we have completed the 95% Export against the mentioned Advance Licence and we need the EOP to complete the 5% of Export obligation as we have imported the Raw Material against the Licence. Also we would like to inform you that in Year 2022 we have received the Export Order but that also our Buyer had kept on Hold due to which we were not able to take the EOP Extension in Year 2022. Now our Buyer had release the Export Order, So we request you to grand us the EOP till 30/09/2023 so that we can complete the Export Obligation against aforesaid Advance Licence. Decision: PRC in its Meeting No.06AM24 dated 19.06.2023 (Case No.50) (Action: Applicant) Case No.12 F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY0000647AM24

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0310825789 dated

19/12/2018. This is a review case of PRC Meeting No.05AM24 held on 13.06.2023 (Case No.08) Applicant Statement: Due to Covid-19 pandemic situation and its wave in India the Luggage activity had been adversely affected and demand for Luggage has gone down drastically. Due to lockdown the Travelling was also affected. As COVID 19 is spreading very rapidly in all over the India. And in Maharashtra there

was so many restrictions imposed due to this restriction our factory production also decreased, No Man Power. Our Foreign Buyer is of USA and they have cancelled/Hold our all order due to Pandemic. And Now they have released the Export Order for the Luggage. So we request you to grand us the EOP till 31/08/2023 so that we can complete the Export Obligation and put for the closure (Export Order Copy attached and the mail copy where they have cancelled the Order) PRC in its Meeting No.05AM24 dated 13.06.2023 (Case No.08) (Action: Applicant) Case No.13 F.No. HARPRCAPPLYOO000636AM24

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0310823112 dated

17/08/2018. This is a review case of PRC Meeting No.06AM24 held on 19.06.2023 (Case No.51) Applicant Statement: We would like to inform you that we are into Luggage Product, Due to Covid-19 pandemic situation and its wave in India the Luggage activity had been adversely affected and demand for Luggage has gone down drastically. Many countries took extreme measures to control the outbreak of the virus which are impacting the travel industry more than any other industry. As COVID 19 is spreading very rapidly in all over the India, in Maharashtra there were so many restrictions imposed. Due to such restriction our factory production also decreased and there was limited Man Power. Our Foreign Buyer is of USA/Belgium/Canada and they have cancelled our all order due to Pandemic. Now they have released the Export Order for the Luggage. We also would like to inform you that we have completed the 97% Export against the mentioned Advance Licence and we need the EOP to complete the 3% of Export obligation as we have imported the Raw Material against the Licence. Also we would like to inform you that in Year 2022 we have received the Export Order but that also our Buyer had kept on Hold due to which we were not able to take the EOP Extension in Year 2022. Now our Buyer had release the Export Order, So we request you to grand us the EOP till 30/09/2023 so that we can complete the Export Obligation against aforesaid Advance Licence. any cogent reasor/ justification in support of any genuine hardship faced by them. i ei

PRC in its Meeting No.06AM24 dated 19.06.2023 (Case No.51) (Action: Applicant) Case No.14 M/s. Simosis International, Mumbai F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00001088AM24

Subject: Request for issuance of Transport and Marketing Assistance (TMA)

approval letter as per Trade Notice 21/2022-23 dated 25.11.2022 against Transport and Marketing Assistance (TMA) Authorization No. 032110251374AM21. Applicant Statement: RA File Number -032110251374AM21 (PRC Meeting detail- 09/AM22 held on 09.09.2021) Dear Sir, We thank you for approving our case, however our claim is not yet granted by RA by citing budget allocation issue, in connection to the same, please find below chronology of our case enclosed Note that we have already submitted online / manually TMA application with all relevant documents & ADGFT Mumbai. Our application rejected only for Non submission of reply against deficiency dated 03.05.2022. Subsequently DGFT issued a fresh Trade Notice No. 21 /2022-23 dated 25.11.2022 which read as ? it has been decided to allow all those applicants who have submitted online application (s) for exports made upto 31.03.2021 to submit physical copies along with prescribed documents with designated RAs by 31.12.2022. The concerned RA shall examine the applications which are complete in all respects in accordance with prescribed policy / procedure and dispose of the same within a further period of 30 days from the date of submission of physical copy. According all exporters were given an option and opportunity to apply/rectify for any short comings /anomaly in their application. We took the advantage of the relaxation granted by the DGFT and applied with all the document as prescribed under the said trade notice on 25.11.2022. We request you to instruct Addl. DGFT Mumbai to consider our application filed as per Trade Notice No. 21 /2022-23 dated 25.11.2022 or Give us personal hearing to explain our case in detail. About us- We are leading exporter of Agro commodities and in existences since 2002. We are government recognized Export House & has ISO 22000:2005 & an ISO 9001-2008 Certificate, Spice Board, APEDA, FIEO, SHEFEXIL, FSSAI, IOPEPC certifications. We have been awarded Export Excellence award for highest export of Safflower Seeds in India for the year 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2020-21, 2021-22 & highest export of Sunflower Seed in India for the year 2017-18, 2018-19 & 2020-21 by IOPEPC (Under Ministry of Commerce, Govt. of India) & Export Excellence Award by FIEO for the year 2019-20. Thanking you in advance, Decision: Accordingly, the Committee decided to reject the request. (Action: Applicant) “a |

Case No.15 M/s. Nidec India Private Limited, Gurgaon F.No. HARPRCAPPLYOO005S0AM24 Subject: Request for Re-fixation of Average EO and condonation for wrong endorsement Licence number on SBILL against EPCG _ Authorization No.0530164494 dated 03/03/2015. Additional DGFT, asking Installation certificate issued from Central Excise. Moreover, we had not taken certificate from Central Excise on prescribed time period. Further, we requested the GST department for the issue of Installation certificate but GST department denied to issue such Installation certificate the same is endorsed by GST Department on our request letter (the copy is enclosed for your reference). Moreover, we had taken Installation certificate from the independent Chartered Engineer. Decision: The Committee went through the submission made by the applicant and concluded that some genuine hardship is there in this case and therefore decided to accede to the request for accepting the installation certificate issued by Chartered Engineer in place of Central Excise Authority against EPCG Authorisation No. 0530164494 dated 03.03.2015 only for regularisation purpose subject to the payment of composition fee amount of Rs.25,000/-. 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.16 M/s. Sara Sae Private Limited, Dehradun F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY0007281AM24

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 6110001612 dated

09/08/2019. We were unable to export the goods as soon as the customer required due to the oil business downturn and the Corona pandemic prevented us 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. Now the customer has updated the order and advised us to export within the time. The export obligation period was expired on 17.09.2019, due to Corona disaster, DGFT relaxation to the exporter as per details are given below: 1. As per the Public Notice No.67/2015- 2020, dated 31.03.2020: Export obligation is deemed to automatically extended for six months from the date of expiry. 2. As per Notification No.28/2015-20, Dated 23.09.2021: Whereas original and extended export obligation period was expired during the period between 01.08.2020 and 31.07.2021, the export obligation period would be extended till 31.12.2021 without composition fees. The export obligation period was automatically extended up to 31.12.2021. As you are aware, the, re a

Corona Disaster severely impacted exports and caused the business to cease or slow down. The DGFT was granted a 21-month relaxation, making the entire licensing year of 41 months. The actual licensing period is limited to 20 months. We request you to kindly give approval for extension of export obligation period upto.17.06.2024 and we are prepared to pay Composition fees and penalty for regularize the Advance authorization for Export obligation Discharge certificate. (Action: Applicant) Case No.17 M/s. Hardik Exim, Mumbai F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY0007302AM24

Subject: Not Able To Apply For ROSCTL Since Our Firm Was Put Under Alert The

Alert Has Now Been Removed And We Got The Drawback From The Customs But Could Not Apply For Rosct! Due To Lapse Of Time Limit against ROSCTL Scrip No. 12345678 dated 20/01/2024. Applicant Statement: Due to some technical issues, we were not able to apply for ROSCTL since our firm was put under alert the alert has now been removed and we got the drawback from the customs but could not apply for ROSCTL due to lapse of time limit. You are requested to grant the same and issue the authorization. We have not received the authorization hence not able to mention the details of the same in the application. Decision: (Action: Applicant) Case No.18 M/s Kalp Impex, Maharashtra F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY0009079AM24

Subject: Request for removal of AU Condition of Import License 0550001577

dated 20.08.2009. This is a review case of PRC Meeting No.01AM25 held on 04.04.2024 (Case No.20) wherein Committee rejects the case. Te | ny ee

In view of minutes of inter ministerial committee meeting dt. 29.04.2003 & PN. 47 dt. 18.05.2011 as well as order of Mumbai High court dt. 21/05/2021 read with observation of Telangana High court the request of removal of AU condition of license has complete merit. PRC has considered the said issue in its meeting no 21/AM 2022 dt 10-03-2022 and found merits in the contention based on several aspects including Minutes of Inter Ministerial Meeting dt 29-04- 2003 and acceded to the request of the applicants Shah Nanji Nagsi Exports Pvt Ltd Decision: The committee went through the statement made by the firm in its application and noted that the facts of the case have not been clearly specified by the firm and hence decided to call the firm for Personal Hearing. (Action: Applicant/ PRC) Case No.19 M/s. Intersnack Cashew India Private Limited,Chennai F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY0004563AM25 Subject: Waiver of Procedural requirement as per HBP against Advance Authorization No. 3211005116 dated 26/06/2023, 3211005313 dated 02/08/2023, 3211005531 dated 11/09/2023 Applicant Statement: We request the Committee for adjustment/waiver of our export obligation as the imported goods were damaged during the incessant floods that occurred in Tuticorin, Tamilnadu in the month of December 2023. The floods has caused damage to imported goods which resulted partial non processing of it and thereby partial non fulfillment of our export obligation. Total export obligation for the given license is 1132MT, exports affected due to flood damage 238MT. Thus, we request the Committee to consider our request and grant us waiver/adjust our export obligation for238MT. Decision: (Action: Applicant) Case No.20 M/s. Moksh International, Mumbai F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00004786AM25

Subject: Request for benefits of

DFIA Authorization No. 0311001644 dated 24.03.2021. ae

The above DFIA was issued with a typographical error on 24.03.2021 and till date we have been given no solution so that we can utilize the DFIA licence. Now after the intervention by CPGRAM portal and on the basis of their advise we once again give a very procedural type of reply without taking any efforts form their side to approach to You (PRC) and we are back to the same position application and it decided to seek a detailed report from RA Mumbai in the matter. Case No. 21 M/s. Sri Shandar Snacks Private Limited, Uttarakhand F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00000243AM25

Subject: Extension of export obligation period beyond 8 years against EPCG

Authorization No. 6130000424 dated 22/05/2014. Applicant Statement: We are manufacturer and Exporter of Processed Food products, Tortilla Chips and Corn nuts etc. Due to tough competition in global business and impact of the Corona Pandemic, we were unable to complete the export obligation against the EPCG authorization in the prescribed time period. The EPCG committee had approved the 2nd extension in the MINUTES OF 2nd MEETING OF AM-25 dated 09.5.2024, Decision by the Committee is deliberated upon the case and decided to advise the firm to approach RA for extension of Export Obligation Period beyond 8 years in terms of Public Notice No. 53 dated 20.01.2023 where extension is permitted on account of COVID. The RA,DGFT, New Delhi has denied to give the extension as per the decision granted by the EPCG Committee 2nt Meeting held on 09.05.2024 case No.18, stating that ?Your request cannot be considered in term of para 5.17 (i) of Public Notice 53 dt.20.01.2023? the rejection was given after more than one month from the submission of request for EO Extension. We had started to fulfill the export obligation against the EPCG Authorization. The copy of deficiency is attached for your reference please. The 1st extension was granted as: Decision: The Committee deliberated upon the case and decided to advise the firm to approach RA for automatic extension of Export Obligation Period up to 31.12.2021 as per DGFT?s Public Notice No. 67 dated 31.3.2020 and Notification No. 28/2015-2020 dated 23.09.2021. We currently have a joint venture with the company and a very large order that we were awarded from Australia. We are positive that the remaining export obligation will be fulfilled in the allotted two years. We shall comply with the DGFT and pay the appropriate penalty and composition fees as demanded. We request you to further two years of export obligation period extension i.e. upto 31.12.2025, for fulfillment of export obligation against the EPCG authorization.

discussed the matter at length. The Committee decided to accede to the request and allowed EOP extension of EPCG Authorization No. 6130000424 dated 22.05.2014 for a further period of 1 year 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. Case No.22 M/s. Mangaldeep Rice Mill Private Limited, Bihar F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00005523AM25

Subject: Request for Special EO Extension for a period of 2 years against EPCG

Authorization No. 2130000196 dated 22/09/2014 & 2130000202 dated 05/12/2014. Applicant Statement: This has reference to the above-mentioned subject, we have obtained the above EPCG Authorization's from DGFT-Patna. We could able to fulfill partial EO for 1st EPCG and could not able to fulfill EO for 2nd EPCG due to various constraints as detailed hereunder :- 1) We being a Small Scale Industry had to endure harsh market conditions like un-competitive International Market Rates for our export products to do direct exports. High cost of operations due to raise in input costs Minimum Buying Price from Farmer (MSP) imposed by Govt. Increase in logistics cost due to Russian-Ukraine War and Red Sea hurdles also did not help our cause. 2) For our both cases we could not export during Block- Period and intended to take Block-wise, Covid & 19 EOP Extension to fulfill the prescribed export obligation (balance for 1st EPCG and 100% for 2nd EPCG). 3) By this time Covid Pandemic started adversely affecting the market and peripheral players like us stood no chance of fulfilling the Export Obligation. 4) This being the first instance of us availing EPCG scheme, we were not fully aware of the FTP Provisions and did not apply for Block-Extension of EO period. 5) Also, we were not aware of the EO period extension due to Covid (in terms of PN-53 dated 20-01- 2023) and hence have not availed the same, as this EPCG transaction is not a regular feature of transaction. Decision: (Action: Applicant) Case No.23 M/s. Vedanta Limited, Delhi F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00005785AM25

Subject: Request for extension of validity period of Target Plus Scrip against

«ली. ४८7]

Target Plus Scheme Authorization No. 0310839797 dated 24.03.2021. This is a review case of PRC Meeting No.08AM25 held on 14.06.2024 (Case No.24) Applicant Statement: Target Plus Scrip pertains to incremental exports made by the Company in FY 2005-06 and were issued under Para 3.7 of FTP: 2004-09. The said scrip was granted only on 24.02.2021 (expiring on 23.02.2023) after long drawn legal battle in Supreme Court. The Company is in genuine hardship to completely utilize the Target Plus Scrip against payment of BCD only which is only miniscule portion of the total Customs duty paid by the Company. Please refer to the letter annexed to this application for the detailed reasons. Decision: The committee went through the statement made by the firm in its application and noted that the facts of the case have not been clearly specified by the firm and hence decided to call the firm for Personal Hearing. (Action: Applicant) Case No.24 M/s. Kharagpur Metal Reforming Industries Pvt Ltd, West Bengal F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00000280AM25

Subject: For Relaxation of Para 5.18.5 of FTP (HBP) 2007-14 i.e. No clubbing

would be permitted after expiry of EOP Para 5.11 of FTP (HBP) 2007-14, towards EOP extension against EPCG Authorization No. 0230002383 dated 04/06/2007, 0230002416 dated 15/06/2007. Applicant Statement: For EODC purpose only. We most humbly Pray for relaxation of Para of FTP (HBP) following:- 1. For Relaxation of Para 5.11 of FTP (HBP) 2007-14, towards EOP extension of EPCG no.0230002416, dated 15/06/2007, till 29/05/2019, that is additional two years (8 Initial + 2 - already allowed + 2 - our request,total EOP will be 12 years or as you deem fit and proper) from date of expiry of already allowed EOP extension for consideration of our export already made under the EPCG till 29/05/2019 (SB Date), only for EODC/Redemption purpose. 2. For Relaxation of Para 5.18.5 of FTP (HBP) 2007- 14 i.e. No clubbing would be permitted after expiry of EOP and allow clubbing of the Authorisation issued in same policy and period and also same Month under same notification, For EPCG 0230002416, Dated 15/06/2007,(concessional 3% EPCG scheme) Issued from F.No. 022102100153AM08 & EPCG 0230002383, Dated 04/06/2007,(concessional 3% EPCG scheme) Issued from F.No. 022102100118AMO8. keeping in view of the genuine hardship and adverse impact, we most humbly pray for relaxation as requested only for EODC purpose, 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 the extension of Export Obligation Period of EPCG Authorization no.0230002416 dated 15.06.2007 up to 31.05.2019 only for regularization purpose and allowed consideration of clubbing of EPCG a Se

Authorizations 0230002383 dated 04.06.2007 and 0230002416 dated 15.06.2007 after expiry of EOP subject to payment of composition fees as per Policy provisions, all other conditions remaining the same. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting. (Action: Applicant/ RA Kolkata) Case No.25 M/s. Indian Oxides and Chemicals Private Limited, Mumbai F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00011324AM25

Subject: Condonation For Submission Of Consummation Data From Excise

Authority against Advance Authorization No. 3110066758 dated 24/05/2017. Applicant Statement: We have obtained advance Authorization from RA DGFT Pune dated. 24.05.2017 (Advance Authorization No. 3110066758 Date 24.05.2017) We have completed import and export procedure within stipulated period as per handbook procedure 2015-20 Above advance licenses NORMS Approved from Advance license committee - Enclosed NORMS approval copy. After fulfillment import and export obligation and NORMS Approval, We had submitted Application of advance Authorization redemption/ closure at RA DGFT Pune Dated 23.02.2018 But Pune DGFT issued deficiency letter dated 10.05.2018 for Submission of consumption data from Excise Authorities to confirm the eligibility of inputs as per ALC decision. On issuance of the deficiency letter, we approached GST jurisdictional range officer on 06.03.2024 for issuance of accountability / consumption data certificate (acknowledgement Copy enclosed) but the GST officer denied to issue the certificate as it doesn't fall under GST Provision. As GST officer denied to issue the accountability certificate / consumption data, we submitted a Reply letter on. 11.03.2021 to DGFT along with Chartered engineer accountability certificate (as per Policy circular no.10/2018-19 dated.13.07.2018) Once submission of reply letter at RA DGFT Pune, DGFT issued again same deficiency letter dated 12.04.2024 Due to non-issuance of accountability / consumption data certificate from Excise / GST office, we are unable to submit documents required by DGFT Decision: The Committee examined the statements made by the firm and discussed the matter at length and decided to refer the case to NC for resolution as condition regarding consumption data had been imposed by NC. Case is closed. Case No.26 M/s. Futuretech Engineering Lip, Bangalore F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY0001 1328AM25 Sp

Subject: Exempt Aircraft Part manufacturing DTA units from QCO Units who are

operating under Advance Authorization Scheme against Advance Authorization No. DGFT Notification No 71 2023 DT 11.03.2024 Para 2.03 (b) and 2.59 Applicant Statement: We kindly request your good office to intervene and take up MSMEs cause by supporting Governments promote MSME initiative. and help aerospace parts machining Industry with following exemptions and approvals: (i) Exemption from mandatory Quality Control Orders for DTA units who are operating under Advance Authorization. (ii) Permit SEZ / EOU units to clear their Inputs/ Raw materials/ Finished Goods to MSME Aircraft parts manufacturers against Advance Authorizations. (iii) Permit Advance Authorization holder of DTA units to sell / clear their finished goods to EOUs or SEZs under Deemed Export Scheme. (iv) Permit Advance Authorization holders as well as Duty Paid inputs for MSME DTA from SEZ units who are exempted from QCOs and non BIS registered International vendors and there by cover the Inputs (Raw material) shortages arise due to high process wastage and online rejections. Also permit scrapping of rejected parts after following set down norms without again penalizing the MSME DTA units with penalty, etc which would only increase the losses of the MSME units. Kindly consider the above request and exempt Aerospace and defense parts manufacturing Industry from mandatory Quality Control Orders. (QCO) and allow MSME-DTA, Advance Authorization holders Deemed Exports under above referred notifications. 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. Case is closed in PRC and was referred to PC-4 for examination. (Action: Applicant/ PC-4) Case No.27 M/s. Sreema Filaments Private Limited, Tamil Nadu F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00011325AM25

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 3510045605 dated

17/10/2019, 3210079549 dated 05/06/2020, 3210079391 dated 05/02/2020, 3210079399 dated 12/02/2020. Applicant Statement: 1. Due to the outbreak of Covid 19 during the validity of EOP of subject Advance Authorizations, we could not fulfill the exports within the extended EO Period. 2. All our manufacturing activities and exports were severely disrupted and crippled on account of COVID-19 and the 2 major lockdowns. 3. Due to cancellation of domestic and export orders and disruption of manufacturing activities due to major lockdowns and lack of manpower our plant was operating at very low capacity. 4. It took us nearly 3 years to emerge from the negative and disruptive impact of COVID-19 and to resume normal operations. 5. Despite the severe impact we have commenced exports and have managed to make some exports, but they were not sufficient to fulfill 100% export obligation. 6. Now we have sufficient export orders in hand, and we are confident of fulfilling 100% export a cael

obligation within 6 months. Copies of export orders are enclosed for your ready reference. 7. We belong to the MSME category and have borne the brunt of the crippling impact of COVID-19 & if EOP extension is not granted to us we will face genuine hardship. The 2 major lockdowns and the consequent disruptions and lack of manpower were beyond our control. 8. As we are barely emerging out of the impact of COVID-19 if extension in EOP is not granted to us, we will face a severe financial crunch and will not be able to sustain our manufacturing and export activities. This will also result in loss of jobs for our workers. 9. We are making a valuable contribution to the foreign exchange earnings of the country. 10. Hon'ble PRC should take a lenient view and should consider granting EOP extension beyond 48 months on account of COVID-19. Hon’ble PRC should make an exception to the 48 months? time period rule in view of the extraordinary situation beyond our control. 11. The Hon'ble PRC should take into account that if EOP extension is denied to us, being a MSME enterprise our very existence and survival will be under threat and on the contrary granting us 6 months extension in EOP will not only enable us to fulfill 100% export obligation, but it will also enable a MSME enterprise to survive and continue its operations thereby not only contributing to the foreign exchange earnings of the country but also generating employment and keeping our existing employees gainfully employed. 12. We also draw the kind attention of the Hon'ble PRC to case no.26 Meeting no.31/AM 24 held on 01.03.2024. 13. We are enclosing herewith a copy of our MSME Certificate for your ready reference. Decision: (Action: Applicant) Case No.28 M/s. Cleena Industries Private Limited, Delhi F.No. HARPRCAPPLY0000310AM25 Subject: Request for allowed the shipping bills under EPCG Authorization Number 0530169946 dated 23/03/2017. Applicant Statement: We are manufacturer of PVC Flex Banner since 1998. We are doing our business in all over India. In the year of 2015, we decide to expand our business in the international market. With our best efforts, we got some order from the overseas market to ensure the goods supplied with in their parameter. In that scenario, we found that we are not compare with the international market in both quality wise and value wise. Thereafter, we decide to import the new capital goods for enhance the quality as well as the qty of finish product with in the parameter of international markets. We had import the machineries under EPCG authorizations issued in the year of 2016-2017. After the completion of import & installation of CG, we were in the completion of our export order & also fulfill our export liabilities under the said EPCG authorizations. The subject authorization ie JF | 1

having duty saved amount of Rs 2808722.00. Import made 100% under the same. The export obligation arrived in USD 248376.30. At the time of export, we had mentioned the EPCG authorization number 0530168091 dated 13.07.2016 in the shipping bills number 4724028 dated 08.05.2018, 5778557 dated 25.06.2018, 6081405 dated 06.08.2019 & 6306990 dated 17.08.2019. That was the clerical mistake made by our staff. The Total FOB value of these shipping bills USD 124140.57 Whereas the FOB value of above mentioned shipping bills were excess export obligation amount for EPCG Authorization Number 0530168091 dated 13.07.2016 We had submit our closure application of EPCG Authorization Number 0530169946 dated 23.03.2017 in the Additional DGFT, CLA New Delhi. RA issued deficiency letter to approach EPCG committee for further consideration of our case. Copy of Deficiency letter attached Further, we also want to intimate you that the EPCG authorization Number 0530168091 dated 13.07.2016 has been closed. Copy of EODC of the same is attached for your reference. Due to the lack of knowledge or mistake by our staff, we cannot suffer on account of shortfall worth USD 124140.57 under the EPCG authorization number 0530169946 dated 23.03.2017. Further, we undertake & indemnify the Govt of india in case of any type of financial loss on account the EPCG authorization Number 0530169946 dated 23.03.2017. In the light of above fact, you are requested to please allowed the particular shipping bills on the account of EPCG authorization number 0530169946 dated 23.03.2017 so that we can pay the custom duty with interest on the excess import for finally closure of our said authorization. Anticipating you kind co-operation application and it decided to seek a detailed report from CLA New Delhi in the matter. Case No.29 M/s. HMC E-Valley Private Limited, Ludhiana F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY000012150AM25

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0511010884 dated

10/03/2022. | am writing to formally request an extension for our Advance Authorization under the provisions set by the Policy Relaxation Committee for our start-up, HMC E valley Pvt Ltd. Cycle, Valley Dhanansu, Ludhiana. We are currently engaged in Manufacturing of Push Bicycles, E- Bicycles & E Mobility vehicles to carter demands of Domestic and International Markets, and as a start-up unit we have encountered unforeseen challenges that have impacted our timeline for utilizing the authorization. These challenges include New Product Development which incurred high lead-time against new tooling development which consumes lot of time for making, correction & final trial run before mass production start, Testing & Certifications as per international requirements which is again a big lead-time activity of minimum 6 to 12 months &

• 23- ae

sometimes in case of part failure this same cycle re initiates from scratch again, to meeting the requirements for USA & EU there are many hidden things which are beyond our control. In addition to above, we have received orders for export of HNF Bikes against which we have made purchases of imported components but later on due to global market crisis in E Bike market our orders got cancelled which negatively impacted our export obligation. We appreciate the support provided by the Start-up authority and the Policy Relaxation Committee, which have been instrumental in facilitating our growth and operations. An extension of the Advance Authorization would enable us to complete necessary Exports as we are receiving the good orders from Overseas customers which is result of our strong & continuous efforts so far. By getting this extension we can liquidate our high cost inventory as well since these components were imported keeping the international market demand in view. Which ultimately contributing against our commitment of producing products of global standards. We are dedicated for future innovation in exports which ultimately leads towards a better future & more job creation. We kindly request an extension for Export obligation of Advance Authorization as per enclosed list. It will provide us the sufficient amount of time to utilize the dues against requirements. We assure you that we will remain committed to complying with all regulatory requirements and utilize the authorisation effectively. and allowed EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0511010884 dated 10.03.2022 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. Case No.30 M/s. BLS Ecotech Limited, Delhi F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY0000370AM25

Subject: Extension

of Total EO Period against EPCG Authorization No. 0530165387 dated 14/07/2015. Applicant Statement: Due to various international and economic reasons there is some shortfall in exports and we could not achieve the target. We have achieved around 54% exports obligation as on date and currently having good orders in hand and hope to achieve the balance exports obligations within next 2 years. We earnestly request you to grant us 2 (two) years extension in the export obligation period 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 EPCG Authorization No. 0530165387 dated 14.07.2015 for a further period of 1 Years 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. Sip ea

Case No.31 M/s. Global Packaging, Dadra and Nagar Haveli F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00012206AM25

Subject: Extension

of Total EO Period against EPCG Authorization No. 0330040944 dated 11/02/2015. Request 1: We are enclosing herewith the above original licence and request you to extend 1st block of 4 years for which we have paid 2% composition fees on duty saved amount equal to unfulfilled portion of EO of the 1st block of 4 years for the above EPCG licence. Calculation of 1st block extension:- Duty Saved value (DEBIT AMOUNT) = Rs. 47, 59, 993.00 50% of Duty Saved value = Rs. 23,79,996.50 2% of Rs. 23,79,996.50 = Rs. 47,599.93 We are enclosing E-Challan of Rs. 47,599.93 as 2% composition fees for 1st block extension. We are also enclosing E-Challan of Rs. 5000/- (E-CHALLAN ENCLSOED) for Onetime condonation of time period in respect of obtaining block- wise extension in Export Obligation period under EPCG Scheme as per P.N 35/2015-20. Request 2: With reference to above file no.03/96/021/01423/AM15 we would like to inform you that we hereby apply for export obligation period Extension to EPCG committee. We hereby inform you that we have already get EOP extension up 10.02.2023 on 29-Aug-2024 after the expiry of extended validity of licence. In between COVID period we have not done any export in our company. After that due to bad scenario of international market of our industries and our export value is down in market so that we have not received any order from market and we have not fulfilled our export obligation of aforesaid EPCG licence, meanwhile our extended export Obligation period is expired. We hereby humble request you to kindly look in this matter and observe all condition & grant us Export Obligation period for 2 years from the date of endorsement. Hence we request you to grant us 1st Block extension as well EOP extension for 2 years from the date of endorsement. and allowed EOP extension of EPCG Authorization No. 0330040944 dated 11.02.2015 for a further period of 1 Years 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. Case No. 32 M/s. Sudevi Chemicals, Mumbai F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00012214AM25 Subject: Extension of Total EO Period against EPCG Authorization No. = jib HP |

0330042044 dated 06/07/2015. Applicant Statement: With reference to query letter dt:.02.07.2024, issued by Addn! DGFT Mumbai (Query letter enclosed) we submit as follows:- As per public notice no.53 dt:-20.01.2023 para 5.17( | ) reproduced below:- The benefits under (h) shall not be applicable in cases where extension of export obligation period has been obtained in terms of public notice no.67 dated 31.03.2020 and notification no.28 DT:-23.03.2021. We have not taken the benefit under public notice 67 and notification no:-28 dated:-23.09.2021 together, but have taken benefit of only notification no.28 dt:-23.09.2021, hence we are entitled for benefit under public notice.53 dt:-20.01.2023, by ignoring / deleting the benefit granted to us vide notification no:-28 dated:-23.09.2021 If the intention of DGFT was to deny benefit of public notice no.53 dt:-20.01.2023, if benefit of any of the two notifications i.e public notice 67 and notification no:-28 dated:-23.09.2021, then it should have been mentioned as ?The benefits under (h) shall not be applicable in cases where extension of export obligation period has been obtained in terms of public notice no.67 dated 31.03.2020 OR notification no.28 dt:-23.03.2021.? Hence if we have taken benefit of only 1 of the two , then we are entitled for benefit of public notice 10.53 dt:-20.01.2023 by deleting benefit under notification no:-28 dated: 23.09.2021. We have been struggling to get our EOP extended as per public notice 10.53 dt:-20.01.2023, with Add DGFT Mumbai but they are nor accepting our explanation and have rejected our request for EOP extension. We request you to help us in this matter and grant us EOP extension for 1 year from the date of endorsement so that we can fulfill our export obligation. and allowed EOP extension of EPCG Authorization No. 0330042044 dated 06.07.2015 for a further period of 1 Years 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. Case No. 33 M/s. Lovy International, Uttar Pradesh F.No, HARPRCAPPLY00012217AM25

Subject: Issue of ROSCTL license after post Leo Amendment of scheme code in

S/bill. Applicant Statement: Shipping bill no.3900932 dt.18.7.20 and Shipping bill no.6716621 dt.23.11.2020 of LOVY INTERNATIONAL, F 50, Sector 8, Noida, were amended from Drawback (Scheme code 19) to Drawback and RoScTL (Scheme code 60) by Commissioner of Customs Tuglakabad in accordance with CESTAT ORDER NO.FO/C/A/54467/2024-CU[DB]dt.30.4.24 As SB were post leo amended no data was transferred to DGFT to issue license Since SB amendment letter was issued manually by customs so we have to approach DGFT for issue of fresh license to generate online scrips. However, when | am trying to apply online, an

error message is flashing stating that “This IEC is not allow to apply for ROSCTL for this year of rendering services. " | have also approached DGFT, CLA Delhi to help me in this regard. Kindly facilitate the application process and allow me to avail the ROSCTL benefits discussed the matter at length and decided to refer the case to Policy-3 for suitable action in terms of the Customs Amendment. (Action: Applicant/ PC-3) Case No.34 M/s. JSW Steel Limited, Mumbai F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00012259AM25

Subject: Supplementary MEIS claim.

Applicant Statement: We wish to state that exports have been made on the basis of APSA which had been executed in terms of Masters Circular issued by RBI in respect of exports of goods and services. However we are facing problem as from total supply of US$ 716.6 MN amount of US$ 50.65 MN which had been adjusted towards interest is not reflected in inward remittance. Kindly also note that on the entire interest amount our company has deducted TDS and charged the interest to profit & Loss account in accordance with account standard and provisions under Income Tax Act. In view of above , we are unable to submit proof of realization for the amount which had been adjusted against interest payment in accordance with APSA in spite of the fact that such amount has been received as it has been netted against interest liability . Period Application No. Application Amount 2019-20 1 84,73,428 2020-21 2 30,37,717 Total 1,15,11,145 Please intervenes in this matter and request you to kindly instruct the concerned team to issue us the aforesaid benefit scrips (MEIS) at the earliest. Decision: Case is withdrawn, as already referred to PC3. (Action: Applicant) Case No.35 M/s. Shahi Exports Private Limited, Delhi F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00012254AM25 Subject: Closure of Authorizations against Advance Authorization No. 0510410402 dated 26/04/2019. Applicant Statement: We introduce ourselves as a Five-Star Export House and tier 3-AEO with annual exports of around $1 billion. Most of our buyers are international clothing brands like GAP, H&M, M&S, Target, Kohl, and Walmart. We are facing problems in closing our authorization, as mentioned above, as we could _aq- |

not realize the export proceeds of $ 29,120.00 due to our buyer's bankruptcy. Background: We obtained the above-mentioned ?Special Advance Authorization? (Copy attached) from RA, CLA, New Delhi, for import of Fabric to export Girls Jumpsuit against specific export orders of buyer Orchestra Premaman SA, FRANCE? as per the details below: Description Quantity Value As per the Authorization: Imports 7185.00 Sq. M $ 11560.78 Exports 3151 Pcs. $ 28674.10 Value Addition 60.46% As per actual Utilization: Imports 7177.00 Sq. M. $ 9858.92 Exports 3200 Pcs 00 Value addition 00 The export was made under two shipping bills as per the details below: Sr. No. Shipping Bill No./Date Export qty. (Pcs.) Buyer Invoice Value (FOB) $ FE Realized 1. 6166752 09-08-19 1860 Orchestra Premaman SA, FRANCE 16926.00 00 2. 6166917 09-08-19 1340 Orchestra Premaman SA, FRANCE 12194.00 00 TOTAL 3200 29120.00 00 We filed the prescribed documents with the RA, Delhi, but the RA is not admitting the export made via the above shipping bills because the export proceeds against the shipping bills have not been realized. The RA asked us to pay duty on the fabric utilized in the product exported under the above shipping bills. A copy of the RA letter dated 16/08/24 is attached. Hardship: In this regard, it is submitted that Orchestra Premaman SA, FRANCE, was our established customer for many years. We had good, regular business with it. The said order was against LC, but due to the delays in shipment, the banker did not honour the LC and delivered export documents to the buyer. The said amount has been written off in our books of accounts. Request: Since all the imported fabric has been accounted for, and realization against both shipments, as mentioned above, is not possible due to the buyer?s bankruptcy, we request the PRC to help us close the case by admitting the export made under both shipping bills. It is reiterated that the end product has been exported, and imported material has been utilized. Therefore, there is no reason to ask for the customs duty as no material has been left unutilized with us. Since it is a bonafide default, we will pay the requisite amount as per regularization procedure. A copy of our correspondence dated 13th August, 2020 with the Judicial representative of the case is attached. 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. RA concerned may deal the case as per the provisions of Chapter-2 of FTP & HBP. Case No.36 M/s. P P Bafna Ventures Private Limited, Pune F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00012258AM25

Subject: Amendment in Import quantity and re-validation of DFIA Authorization

against DFIA Authorization No. 0311032978 dated 12.04.2024. Applicant Statement: Thanks for issuing DFIA licence no. 0311032978 DT: 12.04.2024, under Transferability file no. O3AS07601173AM24 (attached herewith Licence copy) in this regard we would like to inform that there was a typing error in Import quantity in Serial 10.1, Actual quantity is 207690.28 kgs whereas by : 28 Ler

oversight quantity taken by us is 20790.28 kgs. As there is huge difference in actual quantity and licence quantity which will take us in loss instead of profiting the consignment, hence we are approaching PRC for amendment of import quantity and revalidation of licence as it will expire in April 2025. application and it decided to refer the case to EGTF Division for examination. Thereafter it may be brought back to PRC. (Action: Applicant/ EGTF/PRC) Case No.37 M/s. Whitelotus Industries Limited, Surat F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00012262AM25

Subject: Re-validation of Authorization/Certificate against Advance Authorization

No. 5210043580 dated 28/10/2020. Applicant Statement: We could not import the allowed quantity of Raw Material within the validity of 1 year ie. 27.10.2021. Therefore, we had applied for extension and the same was granted by DGFT Surat and import validity period extended by 1 year i.e. till 28.10.2022. Therefore, we requested for further 6 month extension to PRC and accordingly 6 months from date of endorsement was granted as per approval of PRC Meeting No.29/AM23 held on 16.01.2023 and import validity period has been extended from 14.03.2023 to 13.09.2023, but we could not import balance qty of Granule as the said amended license was not reflected on custom site. Further as per para 2.2 (0) (I) of HBP- “(d) Revalidation of Authorization/Duty Credit Script shall also be allowed without charging any fees for the period of delay (the period for which authorization/scrip holder was unable to utilize the same) or six months, whichever is less, due to the reasons. Further some reports were being asked from RA Surat which we came to know when we visited the local RA Surat DGFT office. RA Report regarding the technical issue faced was seen. Decision: The Committee went through the justification made by the applicant and the RA Report 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 Advance Authorization No. 5210043580 dated 28.10.2020 and referred the matter to EGTF Division for resolution of the technical difficulty. (Action: Applicant/ EGTF Division) Case No.38 M/s. Mepro Pharmaceuticals Private Limited, Gujarat F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00012266AM25

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0310816041 dated

29/09/2017. This is a review case of PRC Meeting No.18AM25 held on 09.10.2024 (Case No.29) Applicant Statement: 1. Product was intiated in Oct?2017 based on the confirmed purchase order from the client. 2. The project / manufacturing was based on the technology provided by the marketing authorisation holder in United Kingdom. Before starting for commercial order manufacturing we had to take smaller trials to ensure that the product process as prescribed / described in the technical documents from the client is feasible at our end and the end result product is meeting all the requirements as mentioned in the technical documents. 3. The trails were conducted on receipt of the imported raw material under advance authorization no 0310816041 Dtd.29.09.2017 4. Prior to technology transfer to us in INDIA , this product was manufactured in EUROPE. 5. During the trials of the product we had some technical difficulty in the product, the hardness of the tablets were not as per specified limits 6. As the product was registered with the specification as per the technology transfer documents , the changes in the specification was not permitted. 7. We referred this matter to marketing authorisation holder from whom we had received the technology transfer documents for their assistance to resolve the same (PI find copy of email dtd. 14th Nov?2018 for the same for your reference) 8. The matter was investigated and found that we need to check the specification of the raw material used for the product (mail dtd 18th Mar?2019) 9. We were continuously following up with the raw material supplier for the change of specification (if any) for the material supplied to us (pl refer to mail dtd. 10th Apr?2019) 10. We received reply from the raw material manufacturer on 18th April?2019 stating that the material was complying as per JULY2007 DMF and they had submitted updated DMF to UK authorities and informed marketing authorisation holder for the list of changes incorporated ( mail dtd. 18th Apr?2019) 11. Based on the documents the raw materials got technically cleared on 7th June?2019 (PI refer to the mail of 7th June?2019) 12. Again on 9th July 2019 , based on the revised specifications of the raw material there were some limit variation of Sulphated ash in the raw material which required attention prior to manufacturing 13. On resolving the issue of the raw material our focus shifted to packing material development , which was reminded to all concerned time to time. 14. One of the key primary packing material was the printed foil , which was required to be of certain specification of coating. For almost 2 ? 3 months we contacted many INDIAN vendors for supply of foil with our specification and we could not succeed as no manufacturer we contacted had that facility available with them 15. Finally we contacted the manufacturer CONSTANTIA in UK for the development and supply of the foil and they agreed to supply the same (please refer mail dtd, 17th Dec?2019) 16. On 19th FEB?2020 , all the development at MEPRO was completed and documents were submitted to Marketing authorization holder for their review and approval from the concerned authority so that we can start commercial manufacturing 17. Due to COVID situation from MAR?2020 onwards our approval from UK ? MHRA was delayed and it was received in FEB?2021 and based on the same we started our manufacturing activity and we exported finished product imported under _30- aati

advance authorisation no ?0310816041 Dtd.29.09.2017 in Vide Shipping bill No.9658815 on 25th Mar?2021. Decision: PRC Meeting No.18AM25 held on 09.10.2024 (Case No.29) (Action: Applicant) Case No.39 M/s. Kredence Multi Trading Limited, Mumbai F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00012265AM25

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0311007524 dated

06/10/2021. Applicant Statement: We are a Star exporter of steel and related products. Although we operate as merchant exporters, all our export goods are processed at M/s. Uttam Galva Steels Limited (UGSL), Khopoli, which is also a Star exporter. Regarding the referred license we procured in 2021, we imported around 5,000 Metric tones of HR steel in November 2022, which could not be processed due to the following reasons: UGSL was admitted in Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP), and a resolution professional was appointed who claimed the materials imported meant for export. Despite our best efforts to claim the materials back, we were unsuccessful. Subsequently, the resolution plan under CIRP was approved and the Company was acquired by M/s. Arcelor Mittal Khopoli Limited, with whom we raised the aforesaid issue. After a lot of efforts and persuasions, they have agreed to process the materials for export. Meanwhile, we wish to inform you that the ongoing war between Russia and Ukraine has significantly weakened the steel market, causing prices to drop on the lower side. However, the situation is gradually improving and we are actively negotiating with our clients. We are hopeful that the export can be concluded after the Christmas festival. In light of this, we kindly request the following: 1. An extension or revalidation of the license for exports for an additional six months. 2. Closure of the license after completing these obligations. Decision: The Commitiee went through the justification made by the applicant and and allowed EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0311007524 dated 06.10.2021 for afurther period up to 31.10.2025 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. 5) न]

Case No.40 M/s. Heranba Industries Limited, Mumbai F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00012269AM25

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0311016295 dated

12/07/2022, 0311016566 dated 25/07/2022. Applicant Statement: With regard to subject application we would like to clarify as follow: We have already made 100% import under the subject mentioned advance licence. Further we have fulfilled part Exports & need to fulfil 100% Exports before 2nd Extended EOP. But now it seems we are unable to fulfill the same within the extended EOP the reason being the export order was cancelled by the importer due to sudden decrease in prices in the market for the export product. Party cancelled the order being the prices fixed earlier were high as compared to the existing market rates. Hence due to sluggish demand for our Export Product in foreign market & very steep reduction in prices for the product we were unable to fulfill the Export Obligation. Now we are forced to reduce our prices to no profit no loss just to fulfill the Export obligation and for the same we request you to please grant us further EOP extension of 6 months allowing us to fulfill our pending EO. and allowed EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0311016295 dated 12.07.2022 and 0311016566 dated 25.07.2022 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. Case No.41 M/s. Nector Exports Private Limited, Bangalore F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00012271AM25

Subject: Reconsider against Advance Authorization No. 0711002386 dated

17/11/2021. Applicant Statement: We are not aware of deficiency issued by your end as the case was handed over to third party hence we could not able to justify our case if you reopen the file and we have completed import and export hope you will do the needful and reconsider our request. discussed the matter at length. The Committee noted that the matter is not explained clearly and therefore asked the applicant to submit a detailed explanation in the matter. S| —3a—

(Action: Applicant) Case No.42 M/s. Goldstab Organics Private Limited, Mumbai F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00012270AM25 Subject: Clubbing of Authorizations against Advance Authorization No. 0310820485 dated 16/04/2018, 0310831694 dated 23/09/2019. We have submitted the same for closing under clubbing but as per P.N: 40/2023 dated 12.02.2024 the import is done beyond 30 month where as export is done within stipulated period so we request you to kindly consider our request and allow us for closing under clubbing as there is no other deficiency in the said license. Decision: (Action: Applicant) Case No.43 M/s. Imperial Dyeing Limited, Surat F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00012293AM25

Subject: Request For The Grant Of Ted against Refund of TED Authorization No.

5230023411 Dated 07/02/2017. Applicant Statement: Our application for refund of TED submitted to RA, Surat long back is still pending with them just for the reason that we have not submitted e-BRC in time, instead we submitted manual BRC issued by our Bank. A detailed letter explaining the entire history of the issue is attached herewith for your kind perusal and request you to kindly grant us some relaxation so that we can get the issue cleared at the earliest. Decision: Accordingly, the Committee decided to reject the request for relaxation and applicant may approach the RA. (Action: Applicant) Case No.44 M/s. Maxmed Life Sciences Private Limited, Delhi 33-

F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00012324AM25 Subject: Waiver of Procedural requirement as per HBP against Advance Authorization No. 0511003185 dated 17/06/2021. Applicant Statement: We have been issued an Adv Auth. no.05511003185 on 17/06/2021 further extended till 17/12/2023. We have exported through third party named Chandrabhagat Pharma Limited, Matunga, Mumbai vide shipping bill no.4974516 & 6495456. The name of our company is mentioed as the manufacturer but unfortunately missed to mention the Adv. Auth. No 0511003185. We request your goodself to allow us for the endorsement of Adv auth. no in the above mentioned shipping bill to consider for export obligation and redemption of license. (Action: Applicant) Case No.45 M/s. Manoj Ornaments Private Limited, Mumbai F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00012326AM25

Subject: Replenishment Of Gold In Respect Of Export Of Jewellery Product

against Grant Of Gold Under Gold Replenishment Scheme Chapter 4. Applicant Statement: The review petition file by us addresses the rejection of a request by the Policy Review Committee (PRC) during its Meeting No. 12/AM24 on August 3, 2023 (Case No. 32). The petitioner challenges the committee's four-line decision, which stated that the applicant did not provide valid reasons or evidence of genuine hardship, resulting in the rejection of their claim. The petition primarily revolves around the entitlement to gold replenishment under the Foreign Trade Policy (FTP) and Handbook of Procedures (HBP). The petitioner contends that their entitlement to 16.003 kilograms of gold for exporting jewelry (sourced from local traders with applicable taxes paid) was denied by the nominated bank, SBI Mumbai. This denial, we respectfully submit , contradicts clear provisions of the FTP/HBP during the export period (April 1, 2011, to March 31, 2016). Supporting documentation for this claim is included as Annexure-B. The petition emphasizes the unfairness of the PRC?s rejection, particularly when previous decisions had highlighted systemic issues with nominated agencies like SBI not implementing the replenishment scheme. Minutes from a meeting chaired by the then-Commerce Secretary on April 19, 2016 (Annexure-A), are presented as evidence. During that meeting, it was explicitly stated that no nominated agency should impose , _3u- ail

institutional practices beyond government policy. Furthermore, it was noted that agencies like MMTC and Nova Scotia Bank implemented the scheme appropriately, unlike SBI. The petitioner details efforts to resolve the issue, including multiple representations to various authorities, such as the Prime Minister's Office, the Ministry of Commerce and Industry, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), the Directorate General of Foreign Trade (DGFT), and others. Despite submitting extensive documentation exceeding 120 pages to the PRC, their claim remains unresolved. Specific reference is made to their communications with SBI (e.g., a letter dated May 21, 2014) and repeated follow-ups, none of which resulted in their gold entitlement being granted. The review petition also outlines a chronological account of events, including five RBI circulars that influenced the denial of gold by some nominated agencies. The petitioner underscores how this refusal contravenes policy and procedure, elaborating on these issues in detailed sections (paras 2 to 7) of the attached petition. Ultimately, we request the PRC to Review their decision and consider the petitioner?s hardships in light of the evidence provided. We seekthe release of our due entitlement under the gold replenishment scheme as per Annexure-B. Additionally, we also request a personal hearing to clarify our case and emphasize the challenges they have faced due to wrongful denial of our entitlement by nominated agency namely SBI Mumbai. Since there are restrictions to not submit the online request beyond 500 words, our major submissions / averments in the Review petition may kindly be gone by PRC at time of deliberating and examining the genuine hardships faced by us for which we will be highly obliged. the firm and discussed the matter at length. The Committee noted that it is not a PRC matter. The case was closed. (Action: Applicant) Case No.46 M/s. K A | International Private Limited, Odisha F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00012325AM25

Subject: Request to allow to make application for MEIS of Shipping Bill for the

Year 2018. Applicant Statement: We are a regular Exporter of Iron Ore against this Item there is No Incentive of MEIS. In the year 2018, for the first time, we exported M.S. Billets (Non Alloy Steel Billets) and MEIS Benefit was available against this Export Product. The details of the Three Shipping Bills, for which we seek your kind permission to make an application for MEIS are as follows:- SL NO. SHIPPING BILL NO. SHIPPING BILL DATE PORT CODE 1. 761125 11.04.2018 INSNLB ( Sonauli LCS ) 2. 761442 12.04.2018 INSNLB ( Sonauli LCS ) 3. 761941 19.04.2018 INSNLB ( Sonauli LCS ) 2. Since this was our first Export qualifying for MEIS Benefit, it took some time to understand the scheme and apply for MEIS License. Sir, all the Three Shipping Bills are Manual Shipping Bills and the Port of Export was also NON ? EDI (Sonauli LCS). 3. We were allowed to make application for MEIS License up to the year 2021 with late cut. 4. Sir your goodself —Se= शत]

is aware that this was peak Covid ? 19 Period and there was a unexpected shut down of our office. 5. Thereafter, our Export Executive looking after this Department was unfortunately hit by Covid and unfortunately, he passed away. All the documents were handled by him and we could not trace the Shipping Bills which were in his possession. 6. Sir, when we shifted our office, several old files and original records had been shifted from our registered office to our new office. While making an inventory of the files and records, so shifted, our clerk came across certain important original documents along with the said Three Shipping Bills for which we could not apply for MEIS. 7. Now, when the matter has come to the knowledge of management, the time of making the application with late cut has expired. 8. Sir, there was natural hardship due to the Covid ? 19 Pandemic and loss of life of One of our Executive looking after this Department. This situation was beyond our control and we could not do anything. 9. Copy of 3 Shipping Bills and e-BRC is attached. Sir, under the above circumstances, we request your goodself to kindly grant us Relaxation under the Policy and allow us to make the MEIS Application with your approval. Sir, In Case your office need any further Information / Clarification please let us know and give us an opportunity of Personal Hearing (PH) so that we may explain our case in a better way for your satisfaction. (Action: Applicant) Case No.47 M/s. Jewel Impex Private Limited, Mumbai F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00012329AM25

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0310822443 dated

19/07/2018. Applicant Statement: The AA is issued in the Month of July 2018, we had completed Export Obligation upto 9% till the Original EOP of 18 Months which expired on 19.01.2020, after that the COVID-19 pandemic period started, our overseas Client held their procurement and cancelled the order and also hold some payments. The combination of COVID-related supply chain disruptions, higher energy prices, and shortages of raw materials has made exports more expensive. This, in turn, has affected the profitability and competitiveness of many exporting countries. The pandemic caused disruptions to global supply chains, leading to delays, shortages, and reduced production capacity in many sectors. The war in Ukraine, which began in February 2022, has also had major consequences for global trade and exports, the Ukraine war have significantly impacted global trade, altering export volumes, shifting trade routes, and creating new challenges for businesses around the world. Many countries faced production * -3६-- Le"

slowdowns or shutdowns, leading to shortages of goods and raw materials, Lockdowns and illness reduced labour availability, affecting both manufacturing and logistics. This resulted in slower production and transportation of goods. Global shipping routes were disrupted by COVID-19, with delays at ports, increased shipping costs, and a shortage of containers, further impacting exports. Now our Overseas Client had confirmed the order and we are ready to manufacturing and Export Goods (Order Copy Enclosed) Due to Export obligation period expired we are not able to export goods under this Advance authorization. So we request you to give the extension in Export obligation period for 6 months so that we can fulfill export obligation against the same. Decision: (Action: Applicant) Case No. 48 M/s. Sadhana Nitro Chem Limited, Mumbai F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00012328AM25

Subject: Request to allow MEIS benefit against the shipping bills pertain to the

year 2018-19, 2019-20 & 2020-21 which is time barred due to delay in uploading of the e-BRC from the Bank. Applicant Statement: Request to allow MEIS benefit against the 13 shipping bills pertaining to the years 2018-19, 2019-20 & April-2020to August-2020 which is time barred due to delay in uploading of the e-BRC from the CITI Bank, Fort, Mumbai. The relevant application documents pertaining to the said years could not be submitted to you for MEIS clearance for the following reason. In above period we have received our payments on time from our foreign buyers however due to some technical problem in the e-BRC issuing portal our bank i.e. CITI Bank, could not generate and upload e-BRCs against the mentioned shipping bills on DGFT website within the notified last date to apply for said period i.e. 28.02.2022 & 30.04.2022 as per DGFT Notification No.53 dt.01.02.2022 and Notification No.15/2025-2020 dt.01.07.2022. Due to which we could not file our application for MEIS on time and therefore our shipping bills expired. Decision: (Action: Applicant) Se

Case No.49 M/s. Goldstab Organics Private Limited, Mumbai F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00012330AM25 Subject: Clubbing of Authorizations against Advance Authorization No. 0310834477 dated 24/01/2020, 0311015224 dated 03/06/2022. We have submitted the same for closing under clubbing but as per PN: 40/2023 dated 12.02.2024 we have to make export within 48 months from the first issue of advance license whereas our last export under second advance license is made on 24.01.2024 i.e. one day excess to condition laid down in P. N. 40/2023 there for we request you to kindly allow us this time for one day excess and to complete the closing procedure as there is no other deficiency in the same. We enclose herewith following documents 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 condonation of delay of one day for the clubbing of Advance Authorization 0310834477 dated 24.01.2020 and 0311015224 dated 03.06.2022 for regularization purpose subject to payment of composition fees as per Policy provisions. All other conditions shall remain the same.The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting. Case No.50 M/s. B Chintamani Dyes Private Limited, Surat 5,190. HARPRCAPPLY00012281AM25 Meeting No. 26AM25 held on 25.02.2025 & 27.02.2025

Subject: Request for Revalidation of DFIA Authorization No. 0311025262 dated

27.07.2023. This is a review case of PRC Meeting No.17AM25 held on 03.10.2024 (Case No.25) wherein Committee rejects the case. We wish to bring to your attention a matter concerning the above-referenced DFIA. We are a manufacturer and regular importer of Kraft Paper. For one of our imports, we procured the aforementioned DFIA from M/s. Narendra Plastic through M/s. Sun L Export, Mumbai. However, during the transfer of this DFIA to our IEC, the system disallowed the transfer, citing a mismatch in the sequence of the Director's name on the PAN Card and Aadhaar Card. Upon review, it is evident that while the names on both documents are identical, the sequence differs. Due to this technicality, the system did not permit the transfer of the DFIA, rendering it unusable for both M/s. Sun L Export and ourselves. Consequently, we were compelled to clear the consignment by paying the ot a शत

applicable duties. We have since corrected the Aadhaar Card to align with the PAN Card, and the DFIA has been successfully transferred to our name. Unfortunately, by the time this was rectified, the DFIA had already expired. In light of the above, we kindly request that you revalidate the DFIA for an additional three months from the date of endorsement. This extension would enable us to utilize the DFIA for our upcoming import consignment, which is expected to arrive in October-November 2024. We are attaching relevant screenshots from your online system as evidence of the situation. We hope you will consider the loss we have incurred due to a technical discrepancy and kindly approve the revalidation of the DFIA. discussed the matter at length and decided to refer the case to PC-4 to ascertain if the mismatch of details as stated could have led to some technical difficulty in registration of the DFIA by the system. Thereafter case may be brought back before PRC. (Action: Applicant/ PC-4) Case No.51 M/s. Rigi Cut Tools Private Limited, Pune F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00004873AM25

Subject: Consideration of SEZ exports for fulfillment of export obligation against

EPCG Authorization no. 3130007475 DT. 22.07.2013 Applicant Statement: With reference to the subject, we would like to inform you that we have fulfilled 100% export obligation against the subject EPCG authorization. We are enclosing herewith copy of ANF-5B along with Annexure A. In the Annexure A, serial no.38 to 117 is our direct exports where supplies has been made to M/s. S E Blades Ltd. (Suzlon Energy, Rotar Blade Unit), SEZ, UDUPI- 574111. This unit of Suzlon Company is now not in existence . You may find that there are 80 Invoices shown in the Annexure A of ANF-5B. In all the 80 invoices, M/s. S E Blades Ltd. (SEZ) have not issued Bill of Exports. When we had submitted the application of redemption we came to know that Bill of Export is a mandatary document after 01.04.2015. We had approached the concerned office of M/s. S E Blades Ltd. (SEZ) and after continuous requests, they have issued us certificateSEZ based on our sales records from customs officer who is sitting in the SEZ. Please note that the said SEZ exports of 80 invoices comes to 26% of the total export obligation fulfilled. We are having all the 80 ARE-1 and 80 Customs attested certificates against all the 80 invoices. Similarly, we have also made supplies to M/s. Zenstar Jewellery LLP, against LUT( letter of undertaking , the unit situated in SEEPZ Mumbai, vide Sr. no. 23 to 37 counting to 15 invoices which comes to 0.5% . As a small manufacturer, the consequences of such a repayment of 26.5% of duty saved would be particularly severe for us. We humbly request your understanding of our situation and seek your kind consideration to allow the acceptance of ARE-1 in the absence of Bill of Exports for fulfilling our export obligation under the EPCG scheme. a=

discussed the matter at length and decided to defer the case. (Action: Applicant/PRC) Case No.52 M/s. Surendra Saddlery, Kanpur F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00012036AM25

Subject: Special Advance Authorization No. 0611001737 dated 07.12.2022.

Applicant Statement: Against Special Advance Authorization no. 0611001737 dated 07.12.2022 we request you for one time relaxation to kindly amend/ modify Export item description of SION J-252 From: Mens/Ladies riding breeches of woven/knitted fabric with a full seat of artificial leather cloth To Mens/Ladies riding breeches of woven/knitted fabric with a full seat of artificial leather cloth OR Seat Coated with Silicon and / or PU. In our Export item Description SION J- 252 we only request you to include the term Seat Coated with Silicon and / or PU to facilitate smoother customs clearance. The input Artificial Leather OR Seat Coated with Silicon and / or PU are similar and give the same characteristics. The details we have explained in our uploaded letter. In authorization issued to us with Relevant type of Fabric only and we have imported only the relevant types of fabric and all other materials used in the manufacturing process being indigenous. And in our shipping bill we have shown the consumption of our imported fabric in export product. We kindly request that you arrange for the amendment/modification of the Export Item Description as mentioned above, at the earliest possible time, as our export consignment is currently held at customs. discussed the matter at length and noted that the comments of Norms Committee on the PRC request have been forwarded to the concerned RA for attempting resolution. Therefore, the case is closed in PRC. Firm may approach the RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting. (Action: Applicant/ RA Kanpur) Case No.53 M/s. M K U Limited, Kanpur F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00013015AM25

Subject: Request for consideration of shipping bill number 8096424 dated 6th

March 2024 against Advance Authorization No. 0611002455 dated 12/02/2024. Applicant Statement: We have imported a consignment of Image Intensifier tube (52 Pcs) vide bill of entry no.2110677 dated 12.02.2024 valued at Rs.67,66,169.74 (Assessable value) under Advance License No.0611002455 dated 29.01.2024 issued by JDGFT office, Kanpur for a CIF value of Rs. 73,33,840 for export of Night tape ar |

Vision Binocular with Accessories to the Army of Uruguay. Since, the export items fall under SCOMET category so that we had taken Advance Authorization after export authorization issued by MoD bearing EA/2023/5511-D(EPC) dated 28.11.2023 and the same was recorded in the application for grant of AA. The input imported have been used in the manufacture of export goods and the same has been exported vide shipping bill number 8096424 dated 06.03.2024 but inadvertently the advance authorization was not mentioned in the export invoice no. EXP-102-24-0058 dated 04.03.2024 discussed the matter at length and decided to reject the matter and to send an advisory email to the applicant for exploring the option of amendment from Customs. (Action: Applicant/PRC) Case No.54 M/s. AMI Organics Limited, Surat F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00012770AM25

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 5211001058 dated

27/07/2021. Applicant Statement: We had fulfilled 72% export obligation (i.e. 360MT out of 500MT) in quantity terms in the stipulated period allowed. We had completed most of the export orders received in hand. However, some of the customers was reduced the given orders & are ready to take the goods after January end due to Christmas & long year end vacation & some of the customer was cancelled the order due to financial crunch in this financial year. Now, most of the buyers are re- confirm the order but due to Christmas vacation & year end, all the dispatches will commence from 1st February 2025 only. Attached herewith copy of email dated 30 November 2024 received from oversees consignee for PO No. PCCOP109485. Also, attached herewith new export orders received for your ready reference. Total we have received the orders of 2.05MT. and allowed EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 5211001058 dated 27.07.2021 for a further period upto 31.07.2025 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 Surat) Case No.55 M/s. Louis Dreyfus Company India Private Limited, Gurugram A] = ४१

F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00013116AM25

Subject: Waiver of Procedural requirement as per HBP against Advance

Authorization No. 0510411511 dated 16/08/2019, 0510411623 dated 26/08/2019, 0510411624 dated 26/08/2019, 0510411625 dated 26/08/2019, 0510413906 dated 18/03/2020, 0510413909 dated 18/03/2020. Applicant Statement: Review of PRC decision in meeting number 10/AM24 dated 12.07.2023 (Case No 10) and request for waiver of procedural requirement as per HBP and allow EODC and Revalidation of the under stated Advance Licenses for a period of six months from the date of endorsement. Reference: Advance License Numbers (1)0510411511 Dated 16.08.2019 (2)0510411623 Dated 26.08.2019 (2)0510411624 Dated 26.08.2019 (3)0510411625 Dated 26.08.2019 (4) (5)0510413906 Dated 18.03.2020 (6)0510413909 Dated 18.03.2020 Our earlier submission before PRC was incorrect, which led to rejection of our case. We request you to kindly reconsider our case on the basis of fresh grounds as under and request you to allow above stated relief. We were issued Advance licenses for import of crude edible oils against export of refined edible oil under SION E121. A special condition was endorsed at Sr No 22 of the condition sheet stating that ? First export will take place and after that grant of EODC only import will be allowed as per Policy Circular 13 dated 29.06.2005?. We in order to abide with the specific pre-export condition endorsed on the license manufactured the export product from custom duty paid imported raw material available with us and fulfilled the EO by way of deemed export to an EOU unit in India and submitted our application to CLA for issue of EODC with revalidation request as per exim policy within the validity of licenses to enable us to import the duty paid inputs consumed and replenish our stocks. We are enclosing BOE?s and statement giving the details of Custom Duty paid Soyabean Oil available with us and used in exports us before exports were affected by us is enclosed as Annexure-1 with dates of submitting our EODC applications. This statement will confirm to the committee that we had used Custom Duty paid Oil for fulfilling the EO as by using significant imports made before exports and thus in no way have contributed to domestic shortage. Further all EODC applications were made within the validity of licenses. However, CLA did not allow the EODC stating that the authorizations were wrongly issued by them under Policy Circular No 13 dated 29.06.2005 instead of Para 4.05(i) of HBP with prior import condition. Thus, we were denied benefit of Import of Custom Duty-free inputs used in exports for the mistake committed by CLA New Delhi even after fulfilling the export obligation. Copy of their deficiency letter admitting their mistake attached. We on further enquiry came to know that the pre-export condition was changed to pre-import condition by P.N. No 57 dated 25.01.2018. We made the exports in a bona-fide belief that the licenses were issued to us correctly by CLA New Delhi and we came to know of the error in issue of licenses by CLA and amended policy only after receiving their deficiency letter. Our bonafide is further established as we were issued some licenses with similar condition earlier also and these EODC were issued against those licenses after we fulfilled the EO and we imported the item allowed after EODC was issued. Hence, we assumed these licenses were also issued correctly. The Custom Duty paid by us for the inputs used in export was 35%, while our profit margin was only 5%. Our exports become

unviable and we are discouraged in our export efforts if we are denied duty free imports after fulfilling our EO. Further our exports were made to an EOU unit and do not cause any shortage of oil in India. We wish to further point out that ours is not a matter regarding GST exemption availed on first import condition as our licenses were issued post 31.01.2019 and remain unaffected by recent Supreme Court Judgment. CLA New Delhi is a statutory Government authority responsible to implement the EXIM policy and issue licenses according to the policy provisions and we as importers and exporters have to follow the specific condition endorsed on the licenses issued to us by them. Decision: The Committee reviewed and examined the caseand discussed the matter at length. After detailed discussion the Committee observed that the applicant has faced difficulty beyond their control and there is merit in the case. Accordingly, the Committee decided to accede to the request and allowed relaxation of pre-import condition only in those cases in which pre-export condition was endorsed by RA on the Authorisations, along with revalidation for a period of 6 months from the date of endorsement for the purpose of EODC/ redemption subject to compliance of other policy provisions.The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting. Case No.56 M/s. Ganges Internationale Private Limited, Chennai F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00012657AM25

Subject: Change in HS code of import item against DFIA Authorization No.

0411007436 dated 20/05/2024, 0411007444 dated 20/05/2024. Applicant Statement: We import and use simple H R Coil in our export product, which is not pickled. Mistakenly, we have mentioned in DFIAs applications HS Code 72082790 for H R Coil size less than 3.00mm and HS Code 72082590 for H R Coil 4.75mm to 10mm which is pickled H R Coil and which we can not use in our export product. The same is rarely imported in India. The correct H S Code for our simple H R Coil of our use is HS 72083990 for size less than 3.00mm and HS 72083790 for size 4.75mm to 10mm used in our exports. We had approached RA Chennai to correct the mistake by putting right HS Code, but could not succeed. Request your kind self to give us Policy Relaxation of amending Transferable DFIA by facilitating following changes: DFIA No. 0411007436 dt. 20.05.2024 at Import Item Serial 1-H R Coil less than 03.00mm ,to put correct HS Code 72083990. And DFIA No. 0411007444 dt.20.05.2024 at Import serial 1 -H.R.Coil 4.75mm to 10mm , to put correct HS Code 72083790. The correction is technically in line with the SION C220 in which DFIAs are applied. While we request your kind consideration to relax to amend Transferable DFIA, we also will like to mention that a considerable life of DFIA is already gone, an expeditious positive will help our exports.

application and it decided to refer the case to PC-4 Division to check whether the import items are covered under SION. Thereafter the case may be brought back again before PRC for a decision. (Action: Applicant/ PC-4 Division) Case No.57 M/s. Smitabh Intercon Ltd, Kolkata F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00013027AM25

Subject: Condone the delay in submitting our application within the stipulated time

of one year, considering our genuine hardship, technical glitch and adverse impact on account of covid pandemic for no fault of ours in terms of provision of paragraph 2.59 of the foreign trade policy, 2023 against DFIA Authorization No. 02/21/076/00007/ AM18 dated 20/12/2018. Applicant Statement: This is for your kind information that against the DFIA Pre- Export File we have completed the entire export in respects of the shipping bills, enclosed as per Annexure- ?A? hereto. In usual manner, we attempted to file our claim for issuance of DFIA, with the endorsement of transferability in terms of provision of paragraph 4.54 (C) of the Handbook of Procedures, 2015-20. Ab initio, we encountered the issue that the concerned shipping bills (which were already used for obtaining the MEIS Scrip) were not showing up in the systems for linking the same with the DFIA applications due to some technical glitch, which was beyond our control. The difficulties were duly intimated to Contact ? DGFT with the request to remove the technical glitch for a number of times but problem remained. This situation, back and forth, continued from 20.11.2018 up to 11.05.2019 and only resolved after introduction of BO portal on 10.12.2020. Finally, our DFIA application was successfully submitted to DGFT, Kolkata on 19.07.2021 through BO portal. In terms of provision of paragraph 4.54 (c) of the Handbook of Procedures 2015-20, after completion of exports and realization of proceeds, request for issue of transferrable DFIA is required to be submitted within one year from the date of exports. The date of last shipping bill being 12.01.2018, we were liable to file application for transferrable DFIA within 12.01.2019. Unfortunately, we could not do so, despite our continued and relentless effort because of the system glitch and have been successfully submitted the application only on 19.07.2021 through BO portal, after recovering from the COVID Pandemic Protocol during 2020-2021. This being the reason that our claim stands rejected by DGFT, Kolkata as time barred with the advice to approach PRC for necessary relaxation in condonation of the delay, so occurred in filing. Hence, this representation. ? For actual appraisal of the case, a complete tabular presentation describing the entire sequence of events involved in this case has been annexed as per Annex.?B?. ? The statement, as above, clearly exhibits that the complete DFIA Application could not be filed in time because of the system glitch, which could not be resolved despite our repeated reporting in Contact-DGFT. Thus, the delay so occurred, was

beyond our control. ? Nonetheless, it is apropos to allude to that an automatic extension for a period of six months was allowed to all varieties of the Authorizations in terms of Public Notice No.46 dated 31.03.2020, which has a consequential effect to add up to the validity of the DFIA to be issued. ? The technical glitch, however, automatically removed after inception of BO Portal on 10.12.2020 and the application was successfully submitted to DGFT (RA-Kolkata) on 19.07.2021 and meanwhile, one year from the date of export has passed. ? It is a matter of fact on record that since generation of the Pre-Export file No., the projected exports have been effected and realization of proceeds have been made well with side the due time line. At this stage, sudden rejection of our claim as time-barred has put us to incur huge financial loss. In this backdrop, we would pray to your kindness to condone the delay in submitting our Application within the stipulated time of one year, considering our genuine hardship, technical glitch and adverse impact on account of COVID Pandemic for no fault of ours in terms of provision of paragraph 2.59 of the Foreign Trade Policy, 2023. We would ever remain beholden for your kind consideration in the matter. Decision: (Action: Applicant) Case No.58 M/s. Tholasi Prints India Private Limited, Bangalore F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00013035AM25 Subject: Extension of Total EO Period against EPCG Authorization No. 0730005451 dated 28/03/2007. Applicant Statement: We humbly request to extend the export obligation from 2015 to 2019 and fulfillment of export obligation completed during the above mentioned period without having condition of 1st block or 2nd block, since we have completed export obligation in the entire extension period only. We also humbly request to consider that we had two EPCG licenses as mentioned below 1. 0730012227 did. 20/3/2013 2. 0730005451 dtd. 28/3/2007 In the shipping bill we mentioned the license no. 0730012227 instead of 0730005451. However, we completed the export obligation for license no. 0730012227 and enclosed the copy of redemption letter. Reasons for the above request as follows: 1. As we are in the process of applying for extension during the period of 2019, Covid-19 effected a lot and we are forced to close down our unit for a period of 2 years which is a universal truth. 2. Our unit has started functioning in 2022, however we incurred huge loss hence we could not concentrate on EPCG license matter If we do not get the amendment for the above mentioned license we are force to close down the operations of the printing material for the following reasons : a. Due to huge competition between electronic media our factory operations has been reduced to तु]

50% hence we are forced to lay off the employees to the extent of 50 members. b. As our printing product been exported to Bangladesh mainly through third party export has been stopped because of the relationship between India and Bangladesh has been deteriorating. Hence, we request to condone the error and permit us to submit the document to Regional Authority office for the further process and closure of the license. We humbly request to consider the above amendment for the approval granted against the file 10. HQRPRCAPPLY00011511AM25 Decision: (Action: Applicant) Case No.59 M/s. Subra International Private Limited, Delhi F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY0006897AM25

Subject: Request for revalidation of Authorization/Certificate against Advance

Authorization No. 0510407940 dated 28.09.2018. Applicant Statement: Application seeking extension of the validity/EO fulfillment period of the Advance Authorization No. 0510407940 dated 28.09.2018 considering the benefit of Relaxation given in Public Notice No.67/2015-2020 dated 31/03/2020 & Notification No.28/2015-20 dated 23/09/2021 in view of the liberty given by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi Order dated 17/08/2023 in W.P.(C) No.2571/2021. Initial application submitted by the Applicant dated 18.10.2023 before the Additional DGFT seeking revalidation of the Advance Authorization No. 0510407940 dated 28.09.2018 and extension of export obligation period has been rejected _vide letter dated 21.02.2024 issued vide Fi No. 05/28/040/00147/AM/19/DES-IV/CLA/16 dated 21.02.2024 with the direction to approach the Policy Relaxation Committee (PRC), DGFT (HQ). The Applicant submitted a detailed reply dated 24.04.2024 against the letter dated 21.02.2024 in view of the fact that the said rejection was made without due consideration of the facts and submissions of the Applicant. The Applicant is constrained to move the present Application, as till date, despite the lapse of more than 3 months, the Applicant has not received any response, to the reply dated 24.04.2024 requesting review of the letter dated 21.02.2024, from the Department. application and it decided to refer the case to PC-4 Division to seek detailed report from CLA as the information received from CLA is not clear. Thereafter the case may be brought back again before PRC for a decision. ' ८७6८

(Action: Applicant/ PC-4 Division/ CLA New Delhi) Case No.60 M/s. Tathya Texfab Private Limited, Maharashtra F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00012261AM25 Subject: Extension of Total EO Period against EPCG Authorization No. 0330042302 dated 30/07/2015. Applicant Statement: Extension of export obligation period for our EPCG License No. 0330042302 dt 30.07.2015 File No. 039702100323 due to the current market situation and impact on companies due to the pandemic and lock down the functioning of our company and factory is completely slowdown .we have not been able to fulfill the export obligation. We now request you to kindly extend EOP for the above EPCG licence Decision: (Action: Applicant) Case No.61 M/s. G V Ventures, Mumbai F.No. HQRPRCAPPLYO00460AM24

Subject: Request for allowing / Counting of excess exports against one Licence

towards other advance Licence i.e. Clubbing of Licence against Advance Authorization No. 0310828521. Applicant Statement: Adv. Licence Number - 0310828521 Dear Sir, We are a two star status holder & we had imported fabric for the manufacturing of garments. Kindly allow us to consider excess exports of one Licence towards shortfall of another Licence. There is excess exports in Advance Licence No 0310836465 & Shortfall in Advance Licence 0310828521. We are unable to club the Licenses at local RA level as Licence No 0310836465 is issued on SION basis & 0310828521 is issued on Adhoc norms basis. The import item under both Licence is one & the same i.e. Fabrics We further declare that:- ? ? All exports are our direct exports. ? There is no free shipping bill in any exports. ? There are no third party exports. ? All exports are made during valid E.O. Period. ? Both the Licenses are issued within 18 months We are enclosing: a) Copy of Shipping bill No 4555231 dated 18.08.2020 which we intend to use towards 0310828521 dated 23.04.2019 b) Copy of Advance Licence No 0310828521 & 0310836465 c) Copy of Adhoc norms fixed d) Statement of exports individually e) Statement of exports after clubbing Request oo" — z=

you to kindly allow clubbing of the two Licence. application and it decided to defer the case and refer the matter to the concerned RA to provide (i) details of actual import to be clubbed in each Advance Authorization and whether imports are common, and (ii) which provision of FTP/ HBP requires relaxation. Case No.62 M/s. Modern Threads (India) Limited, Rajasthan F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00012334AM25

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0311011928 dated

25/02/2022, 0311004995 dated 29/06/2021, 0310834224 dated 16/01/2020, 0310837931 dated 27/08/2020, 0311017401 dated 22/08/2022, 0311006836 dated 09/09/2021, 0311008393 dated 10/11/2021, 0310838819 dated 09/10/2020, 0310838780 dated 07/10/2020. Applicant Statement: We have taken 9 Advance License from Jt.DGFT Mumbai where in the EOP mentioned is 18 months , whereas there is a condition in the license to complete the EO within 90 days as per Appendix 4 J, which did not come to our notice as such we could not complete the EO within 90 days. However we have completed the EO within 18 months against all 8 Licenses. In one license there is some shortly fall in EO which can be completed if we are getting the EOP extension for further 6 months. Hence we request to your good self to kindly grand Policy Relaxation in all the 9 License by removing the condition of 9009५ for EO fulfillment and consider 18 month EOP in 8 Licence and extend the EOP till 30.06 2025 in one Licence to complete the pending EO and allowed EOP extension of only 8 Advance Authorizations (except 0310834224 dated 16.01.2020) for a period up to 22.01.2023, subject to payment of composition fee as per policy provisions, for regularization of exports made. Pre- import condition is not relaxed in any of the above-mentioned Authorizations. The firm shall approach RA concerned within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting. Case No.63 M/s. Agronic Food Private Limited, Jodhpur F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00012332AM25 ५ ला Se

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 1311001121 dated

28/03/2022. Applicant Statement: We had taken advance license from your office and we had made export 35450 kg and import made 52520 kg against this license. We had taken extension upto 28.09.2024. But due to Russia problem we had unable to export balance qty. So please consider our request and give us further six months E.O. extension from the date of endorsement. We shall be highly obliged to your office and allowed EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 1311001121 dated 28.03.2022 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) Case No.64 M/s. Banaras Beads Limited, Varanasi F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00012337AM25

Subject: Non Fixation Of Norms By Nc And The Review Was Time Barred against

Advance Authorization No. 1510022221 dated 06/08/2020. Applicant Statement: Our norms has been rejected by NC due to not getting reply from our side. We have never received any email with discrepancy so we have neither replied nor the discrepancy resolved. We should be given the chance to reply for the query and get it resolved resulting fixation of norms for our AA and its redemption which is on HOLD. the firm and discussed the matter at length. After detailed discussion it was decided to refer to the concerned Norms Committee for the grounds as stated ( not responding to DL) for examination & resolution, provided it is a first Review. Case No.65 M/s. Banaras Beads Limited, Varanasi F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00012336AM25 Subject: Non Fixation Of Norms By NC And The Review Was Time Barred against Advance Authorization No. 1510022208 dated 06/02/2020. SP a Wig

Applicant Statement: Our norms has been rejected by NC due to not getting reply from our side. We have never received any email with discrepancy so we have neither replied nor the discrepancy resolved. We should be given the chance to reply for the query and get it resolved resulting fixation of norms for our AA and its redemption which is on HOLD. responding to DL) for examination & resolution, provided it is a first Application/ first Review. Case No.66 M/s. Fredun Pharmaceuticals Ltd, Mumbai F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00012338AM25

Subject: Consideration of shipping bill for fulfillment of export obligation against

Advance Authorization No. 0310814094 dated 20.06.2017. Applicant Statement: We had been issued with the subject advance authorization with PC ? 9 condition By RA Mumbai We had other authorizations in the same period So were unable to fulfill the complete export obligation Under the subject authorization for which we Applied and issued extension for 6 months from the RA Mumbai Due to some changes in the export orders we tried our best to fulfill the obligation on time but unfortunately our Export shipping bill got filed on dt.08.06.2019 Which is 2 days delay from the expiry of the Export obligation period and allowed EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0310814094 dated 20.06.2017 for a further period up to 30.06.2019 for regularization of exports made, 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. Case No.67 M/s. Indian Allied Exports, Moradabad F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00012341AM25

Subject: For Revocation Of Shipping Bills against MEIS Scrip Numbers.

' Ea

Applicant Statement: Our shipping bills have been expired .Due to some unavoidable circumstances we could not able to apply MEIS claim. Now we want to apply but shipping bills have been expired ,so kindly revoke our shipping bills. We attached all relevant documents therefore kindly see this matter & pls revoke our expired shipping bills. discussed the matter at length and found itself unable to accede to the request. (Action: Applicant) Case No.68 M/s. Indian Allied Exports, Moradabad F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00012340AM25

Subject: File the MEIS application against MEIS Scrip Numbers

Applicant Statement: Due to some unavoidable circumstances we could not apply MEIS incentives. ON requisite time period . Now our matter resolved and we want to submit our MEIS application and We can submitted reliable document to proven this. So we are requested to solve our matter as soon as possible. We also submit all relevant documents discussed the matter at length and found itself unable to accede to the request. (Action: Applicant) Case No.69 M/s. Balgopal Jewellers Private Limited, Delhi F.No. HQRPRCAPPLYOO006903AM25

Subject: Request for revalidation of Authorization/Certificate against Advance

Authorization No. 0510411478 dated 09.08.2019. Applicant Statement: The present Application is being filed seeking the extension of the validity/EO fulfillment period of the Advance Authorization No 0510411478 dated 09/08/2019 considering the benefit of Relaxation given in Public Notice No.67/2015-2020 dated 31/03/2020 & Notification No.28/2015-20 dated 23/09/2021, in view of the liberty given by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi vide Order dated 17/08/2023 in W.P.(C) no. 2042/2021. Application dated 25.10.2020 was submitted by the Applicant pursuant to the Hon'ble Court order dated 17.08.2023, to the Additional DGFT seeking revalidation/Extension of EO period of “a

the Advance Authorization No. 0510407940 dated 28.09.2018. The said Application was kept pending for a period of 8 months after which the Applicant received an email on 28.06.2024 from Assistant DGFT, CLA with the direction to file for amendment of the license on DGFT portal for the license first. Further stating that Once the license is validated on BO portal the Applicant can apply for EO extension. Applicant duly followed the aforesaid direction, however after the successful amendment of the Advance Authorization No 0510411478 the applicant could not apply for the extension of EO period on the online portal of DGFT as it was found that the portal accepts request for E.O extension only till 2021. Thereafter the Competent Authority has advised the Applicant to approach the Policy Relaxation Committee (PRC) for revalidation of the Advance Authorization No 0510411478 dated 09/08/2019 and extension of export obligation period. Decision: The Committee went through the submissions made by the firm and also examined the Report submitted by the RA and discussed the matter at length. It was noted by the Committee that for the purpose of implementation of an Order of the Hon'ble Court, no relaxation from the PRC is required. Decision in the matter may be taken by the RA and if any support from EGTF is required, the same may be obtained. Case No.70 M/s. Medreich Limited, Bengaluru F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00012342AM25

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0710108254 dated

22/05/2015. Applicant Statement: We have imported Simvastatin and made exports of Simvastatin 20mg/40mg/80mg tablets during 2015-17. We have made imports from Registered Source. The 1st import has been made on 23 June 2015 and the last import has been made on 05 April 2016. Though we have made the imports from the same supplier, we don't have the Form-41 for the last import made from the supplier as the validity of Form-41 expired on 31 January 2016. We have made the 1st Export on 16 July 2015. We have made the last one export beyond 24 months period from the date of authorization i.e. on 02 June 2017. 76% of our Exports have been made within 18 months from the date of authorization. Remaining exports have been from 18 - 25 months period. In view of the above, we hereby request you to extend and allowed EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0710108254 dated 22/05/2015 for a further period up to 30.06.2017 for regularization of exports made, , —G 2- én

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 Bengaluru) Case No.71 M/s. VEM Technologies Private Limited, Hyderabad F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00012345AM25

Subject: Reopening of Adhoc Norm Rejected before 30 days and grant of Adhoc

Norm 0911000698 against Advance Authorization No. 0911000698 dated 16/04/2021. Reopening of Adhoc Norm Rejected before 30 days and grant of Adhoc Norm 0911000698 the norm fixation request got rejected on 21.12.2023 i.e., within 30 days from the date of Deficiency. In view of the above, we hereby request your good selves to kindly Re-open the case and grant the Adhoc Norm as applied for and oblige. responding to DL) for examination & resolution, provided it is a first Application/ first Review. Case No.72 M/s. VEM Technologies Private Limited, Hyderabad F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00012348AM25

Subject: Relaxation For Fixation Of Adhoc Norm against Advance Authorization

No. 0910066924 dated 29/11/2018. With reference to above we are to inform you that the norm fixation request got rejected on 21.12.2023, as we have not replied the quarries raised vide your DL dated 30.07.2020 which was during the peak time of COVID-19 and the concern person who is well versed with DGFT procedures has left the company. Hence we could not reply the DL immediately. Whereas, the NORM REVIEW module is not allowing us to submit application for review in terms of PC 3 dated 30.05.2024. Copy of Screen shot enclosed. In view of the above, we hereby request your goods elves to kindly consider the problem, REVIEW and Re- open the case in terms of Policy Circular 3 dated 30.05.2024 and grant the Adhoc Norm as applied for and oblige.

responding to DL) for examination & resolution, provided it is a first Application/ first Review. Case No.73 M/s. R.N. Laboratories Private Limited, Mumbai F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00012343AM25

Subject: Request for Relaxation to Claim MEIS Benefits of 81-Shipping Bills

against MEIS Scrip No. 4009439 dated 22/11/2019, 4002834 dated 28/05/2019. Applicant Statement: We wish to bring to your attention that we could not submit our claim for MEIS benefits due to being time-barred. Our major shipments during the 201972020 periods were significantly affected by the COVID-19 pandemic and related lockdown restrictions. The nationwide lockdown resulted in limited operational capacity as our staff transitioned to working from home. Although the government allowed partial relaxation of the lockdown, the delayed resumption of office operations caused disruptions in coordinating, updating export documents, and uploading of e-BRCs banks has taken time 3 to 12 months. Once operations normalized, we promptly updated the Shipping Bills and e-BRCs on the DGFT portal. However, the MEIS scheme was withdrawn on December 31, 2020, and we were unable to submit our claims for 81 Shipping Bills due to this policy change. Our auditors advised us to seek MEIS benefits for these shipments, as they were exported before the policy withdrawal date. Despite multiple attempts to upload our claims on the DGFT portal, we found the MEIS application functionality deactivated due to the scheme's discontinuation. We are attaching a statement detailing the 81 Shipping Bills with a total FOB value of ?30,00,41,642.00, and an eligible MEIS benefit amount of ?59,43,000.00. Given the financial crisis affecting today?s industrial sectors, including ours, the inability to claim these benefits imposes a severe financial burden. The potential loss will adversely impact our export turnover and operational sustainability. We humbly request the Policy Relaxation Committee to consider granting an exception to enable us to claim the MEIS benefits for these shipments. Such consideration would provide vital relief and support to our organization during these challenging times. Decision: (Action: Applicant) Lf |

Case No.74 M/s. Technichem Organics Limited, Anmedabad F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00012347AM25

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0811001062 dated

19/03/2021. Applicant Statement: We request you to please consider the export made after EOP for regularization of AA. We present our case as under. We obtained subject AA for following export and imports. EXPORT DETAILS S.No. Export item name Export qty as per AA FOB value as per AA Export made after EOP FOB value realized % of EO fulfilled 1 PARA AMINO BENZMIDE 82000 kgs USD 656454 14000 kgs USD 62231 17.07% Qty wise and 9.48% value wise IMPORT DETAILS S.No. Import item name Import qty as per AA CIF value as per AA Import made within validated AA CIF value of import made % of import made 1 PARA NITRO BENZOIC ACID 120294 KGS USD 553450 20000 kgs USD 122000 16.62% (qty wise) 22.04% (value wise) We have got first EO extension of the AA till 18.03.2023. Sir, kindly note that due to very poor demand for the said export product in the international market, we were unable to fulfill export obligation within the initial and extended EO period. However, we exported 14000 kgs in proportionate to actual imports made after expiry of EOP vide s/bill number 5225064 dated 08.11.2023 Due to the poor demand for the product, export price also decreased drastically even below the import price at which we imported earlier under the advance licence. We had no other option but to export at the reduced price to fulfill EO proportionately and incurred heavy financial loss resulting shortfall in value wise export. We already paid Rs. 62400/- towards composition fee @ 1% on value wise shortfall as per RA DL letter dt 22.05.2024. Thereafter RA issued DL dated 26.10.2024 stating both export and import made after EO extension and revalidation date asked us to regularize by paying duty whereas import made well within the revalidated date. We have got first EO EXRTENSION till 18.03.2023 and if we consider second EO extension as per Para 4.40 (f) of HBP, the export made just 50 days late. We humbly request you to please consider the said proportionate exports already made after EOP for regularization and save us from paying duty and interest. As mentioned above we already incurred heavy losses in this transaction. For your reference we attached herewith the following. 1) Advance licence print out with EO extension and revalidation letters. 2) Copy of S/bill of proportionate export and ebrc 3) Copy of Bill of entry of import. 4) DL of RA for paying composition fee for shortfall in FOB value DL of RA asking us to regularize by paying duty 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. 0811001062 dated 19/03/2021 for a further period up to 30.11.2023 for regularization of exports made, 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. -S-

(Action: Applicant/ RA Ahmadabad) Case No.75 M/s. B. N. Jewellers India Private Limited, Mumbai F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00012346AM25

Subject: Closure of Authorizations against Advance Authorization No. 0310823518

dated 04/09/2018. Applicant Statement: With reference to the above we would like to inform you that the above License was issued under pre-import condition, but at that period policy says we can first export the goods than we can import the raw materials so we have done first export than import the raw material in some cases. Earlier our case was referred to HQ for the same and as there is provision in policy against our Gold Plain Platinum Jewellery Advance License first export than import allowed the HQ has give relaxation in our case (as per HQ mail enclosed herewith) In this connection we once again request you that this is our last License in which we have done first export than import whereas in others Advance Licensees issued to us we have followed pre-import condition and duly get EODC. We therefore request you to kindly give relaxation in this License to enable us to close the same and in future License we are tacking care and there will be no complain for pre- import condition. discussed the matter at length and decided to defer the case. (Action: Applicant/ PRC) Case No.76 M/s. Balaji Speciality Chemicals Limited, Maharashtra F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00012351AM25 Subject: Closure of Authorizations against Advance Authorization No. 3111001665 dated 01/09/2022. Applicant Statement: Exempt materials are not mentioned in the invoices. As regards the endorsement of exempt materials in the invoices, it may be stated that our export product is a chemical item, generic in nature, which can only be manufactured, with the inputs allowed in the NC Ratification and there cannot be any substitutes to any of the imports allowed by the NC. This clearly attributes to the accountability of the import items used/consumed in the manufacturing of the ultimate exported product. It may also be stated that imports have been made against the licence, against which the Export Obligation has been fulfilled 100%, than imposed on the licence, in terms of both qty and value. We have moved against deemed exports for our Authorization No 3111001665 Dtd oe Ea

01.09.2022.While dispatching the material we had mentioned respected Authorization No &File No on Tax Invoice as this is deemed exports. However, our R.A.ofiice Pune had issued deficiency letter no 31AE04000760AM25 that Exempted material not mentioned in tax invoice as per FTP para 4.12. As we have already done 100% import and completed 100% export obligation, We request you to kindly consider our case and guide us to resolve this issue. Decision: Accordingly, the Committee decided to reject the request and applicant may approach the RA in the matter. (Action: Applicant) Case No.77 M/s. Balaji Speciality Chemicals Limited, Maharashtra F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00012356AM25 Subject: Closure of Authorizations against | Advance Authorization No. 3111001953 dated 12/01/2023. Applicant Statement: Exempt materials are not mentioned in the invoices. As regards the endorsement of exempt materials in the invoices, it may be stated that our export product is a chemical item, generic in nature, which can only be manufactured, with the inputs allowed in the NC Ratification and there cannot be any substitutes to any of the imports allowed by the NC. This clearly attributes to the accountability of the import items used/consumed in the manufacturing of the ultimate exported product. It may also be stated that imports have been made against the licence, against which the Export Obligation has been fulfilled 100%, than imposed on the licence, in terms of both qty and value. We have moved against deemed exports for our Authorization No 3111001953 Dtd 12.01.2023.While dispatching the material we had mentioned respected Authorization No &File No on Tax Invoice as this is deemed exports. However, our R.A.ofiice Pune had issued deficiency letter no 31AE04000776AM25 that Exempted material not mentioned in tax invoice as per FTP para 4.12 . As we have already done 100% import and completed 100% export obligation, We request you to kindly consider our case and guide us to resolve this issue. Decision: Accordingly, the Committee decided to reject the request and applicant may approach the RA in the matter. 4 तु! ~ मु फल

(Action: Applicant) Case No.78 M/s. Shahi Exports Private Limited, Delhi F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00012350AM25

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0710115888 dated

20/12/2019. Applicant Statement: We obtained the AA, as mentioned above, to import Linen Fabric with an obligation to export Ladies' Dresses. After?importing the said Fabric in January 2020, COVID-19 started globally, and our customer canceled this order due to poor sales and shutdown in the USA. As per Paragraph 4.40(i) of the current HBP, the export obligation period expired on 31.12.2021. We could not make exports during this period. ? The fabric imported under the AA was of special quality (Linen), for which there are generally no export orders. We discussed obtaining export orders for the imported inputs with various buyers but could not succeed. After much effort, we now have an export order for which the inputs imported under the said AA will be used. Therefore, we earnestly request you to extend the EOP of this AA up to 31.12.2024. In terms of Para 4.40 (i), we undertake to achieve 5% extra EO in value and also undertake to pay a composition fee under Para 4.40 (e) & (f) of HBP. We want to inform you that we are very particular about fulfilling the export obligation for all the authorizations we obtain from time to time. During the four financial years, i.e., 2019-20 to 2022-23, we obtained 1505 AAs, of which we completed EO in 1504 cases. This is an exceptional situation where we could not fulfill the export obligation due to reasons beyond our control. Globally, COVID has played havoc with businesses. With great difficulty, we have obtained an export order to utilize the fabric imported under this Authorization. We look forward to your support in settling an old pending case in such an exceptional situation. In view of the circumstances explained above, please grant an extension in the EOP until 31.12.2024 with an appropriate composition fee. Decision: (Action: Applicant) Case No.79 M/s. Diamond Engineering (Chennai) Private Limited, Chennai F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00012349AM25 बल्कि|} ता

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0410167329 dated

23/11/2020. Applicant Statement: Request for granting extension of additional time limit of 30 days validity from 24.12.2024 to 24.01.2025 for completing export obligation in full under Advance Authorization - Due to external factors, the last shipment of the concerned ship did not berth at Chennai port as per the scheduled time between 22.12.24 and 24.12.2024 and our loaded vehicles were also returned to our factory premises. Decision: The Commitiee went through the justification made by the applicant and and allowed EOP extension of Advance Authorization No. 0410167329 dated 23.11.2020 for a further period up to 30.11.2024 only to regularize exports made , 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 Chennai) Case No.80 M/s. Deepak Nitrite Limited, Vadodara F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00012357AM25

Subject: Policy Relaxation under Para 2 59 of the FTP.

Applicant Statement: The Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat, in its judgment dated October 3, 2024, in the case of M/s Deepak Nitrite Limited v. Union of India (R/Special Civil Application No. 16051 of 2021), has passed the following order: 1. Recognition of Revised Codes: The revised HS Codes (29214920 and 29215940) were carved out from the old HS Codes (29214390 and 29215990) and remain part of the MEIS scheme. There was no explicit exclusion of these products in any notifications or public notices issued during the period. 2. Entitlement to Benefits: The court categorically ruled that MEIS benefits for Para Cumidine and DASDA should be extended for the period January 1, 2020, to December 31, 2020, as the products were not excluded under any valid notification. The judgment recognized the ambiguity caused by procedural lapses and emphasized the need to uphold exporters entitlements. 3. Policy Alignment: The revisions made under Notification No. 38/2015-2020 were intended to align ITC HS Codes with international standards, not to deny trade benefits to exporters who had legitimately availed them prior to the revision. B. REQUEST FOR POLICY RELAXATION In light of the above Gujarat High Court Judgement dt.03.10.2024, and the significant contributions of our exports to the economy, we respectfully request: The issuance of a notification or public notice to include HS Codes 29214920 and 29215940 under Appendix 3B, Table 2, of the FTP 2015-2020, retrospectively for the period January 1, 2020, to December 31, 2020. A directive to the concerned RA viz. RA, Vadodara to grant MEIS benefits for our exports of Para Cumidine (2921 49 20) and DASDA (2921 59 40) during the period of January 1, 2020, to December 31, Sof ~ 54 -

2020 to rectify the unintended omission and ensure fairness. discussed the matter at length and decided to seek comments from concerned RA and Policy-3. Thereafter, case may be brought back to PRC. (Action: Applicant/ RA Vadodara / PC-3) Case No.81 F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00012354AM25 Subject: Review of rejected norm against Advance Authorization No. 0910068668 dated 24/04/2020. Applicant Statement: vide Norms Committee Minutes of meeting No. 8/202122 DTD 24.09.2021 our request for fixation of Adhoc Norm was REJECTED, which is covered under Policy circular 03 DATED 30.05.2024. 3. But, Alphamed Formulations Pvt Ltd ' DASHBOARD ‘ Initiate Review, is showing the Rejection Minutes of Meeting (MOM) rejection date as 02.07.2023. Hence, Norms Review module is not accepting the application for Review of Adhoc Norms in terms of Policy circular 03 DATED 30.05.2024. responding to DL) for examination & resolution, provided it is a first Application/ first Review. Case No.82 F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00012353AM25

Subject: Review Of Adhoc Norm Through Pre As We Could File Application

against Advance Authorization No. 0910067997 dated 13/09/2019. Applicant Statement: we are to inform you that we could not submit our request for Review of Adhoc Norms rejection decision dated 13.08.2021, as the 7?NORMS REVIEW? is showing the date of REJECTION (MOM) date as ?11.12.2023? which is not correct. In view of the above, we are submitting this request to PRC to rectify the above and fix the Adhoc norms as per the clarification given below to earlier DL. ’

responding to DL) for examination & resolution, provided it is a first Application/ first Review. Case No.83 F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00012344AM25

Subject: Fixation Of Adhoc Norm Advance License No. 0910068801 against

Advance Authorization No. 0910068801 dated 26/05/2020. Applicant Statement: Advance Authorization No. 0910068801 dated 26.05.2020- against the instant Advance license No. 0910068801 dated 26.05.2020, vide email dated 19.11.2020, we have been asked to submit 2 sets of complete application alongwith copy of Advance License, Appendix-4E, Production consumption data etc in terms of PC No. 23/2015-20 dated 15.05.2019. We have submitted these documents vide our email dated 30.11.2020 and followed by a speed post vide reference No. EN423020891IN dated 27.11.2020. 2. Subsequently vide ALC meeting No. NC/3/MEET/sep/202122/8 dated 24.09.2021, the Adhoc Norm request got rejected stating that the firm has not furnished the 4.07 application asked by NC-3, which is covered under Policy circular 03 DATED 30.05.2024. 3. But, Alphamed Formulations Pvt Ltd ? DASHBOARD ? Initiate Review, is showing the Rejection Minutes of Meeting (MOM) rejection date as 02.07.2023. In view of this wrong date of Rejection, Norms Review module is not accepting the application for Review of Adhoc Norms in terms of Policy circular 03 DATED 30.05.2024. responding to DL) for examination & resolution, provided it is a first Application/ first Review. Case No.84 F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00012355AM25

Subject: Request To PRC For Review Of Adhoc Norm Pc 3 against Advance

Authorization No. 0910068804 dated 27/05/2020. “| — 6l-

Applicant Statement: The Norms Committee decided to reject the case on 24.09.2021 stating ?the firm has not furnished the 4.07 application asked for by NC-3 in its Meeting No. 2/82-ALC4/2020 dated 10.07.2020, 5/82-ALC4/ 2020 dated 09.10.2020, followed by Reminder to firm on 18.09.2020. Reply still awaited from the firm.? We have submitted complete reply to the DL vide our letter dated 20.07.2021 by Speed post vide receipt No. EN419056665IN dated 03.08.2021. Copy enclosed. However, sub-sequent, the said Adhoc Norm application got rejected on 24.09.2021 which is correct. Whereas, in the ?Norms Review? module the date of rejection (MOM) is shown as 02.07.2023. Hence, the system is not allowing us to submit our ?NORMS REVIEW? responding to DL) for examination & resolution, provided it is a first Application/ first Review. Case No.85 M/s. Gupta Oxygen Private Limited, Haryana F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00012358AM25

Subject: Relaxation for import of restricted items: HFC Gases for which Import

Cargo is loaded with BL date before the date of grant of Import Authorization No. 0111022100 dated 01/01/2025. Applicant Statement: Relaxation for import of restricted items: HFC Gases for which Import Cargo is loaded with BL No. 0XNB24120170-1 dated 15.12.2024 before the date of grant of Import Authorization No. 0111022100 dated 01.01.2025. As per Para 2.18 of the HBP-2023, the import authorization must be valid on the date of imports i.e. BL date. We have already placed order for import of goods in anticipation of issuance3 of authorization in November, 2024. Our supplier was insisting for dispatch of shipment but we kept the same on hold as import authorization was not issued till December, 2024. We have sent various mail to the EFC Cell to expedite our case and issue the authorization as our import shipment was on hold for dispatch. As per para 2.18 of the HBP, the import authorization must be valid on the date of imports and as per para 2.17 of HBP the date of reckoning of import is decided with reference to date of shipment/dispatch of goods from supplying country as given in Paragraph 11.11 of HBP and not the date of arrival of goods in Indian Port. As per Para 11.11 of HBP Date of Shipment/dispatch for import w2ill be reckoned for Sea shipments as the date affixed on the Bill of Lading. Therefore, the date of BL must be after grant of import authorization. (2 शत

discussed the matter at length and decided to refer the matter to PC-2 for suitable action. (Action: Applicant/ PC-2) Case No.86 M/s. Concord Biotech Limited, Ahmedabad F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00012360AM25 Subject: Rejection of application of MEIS application. Applicant Statement: We would like to request to re consider our MEIS Application as per FTP 2015-2020 Export from India scheme under chapter no 3. (Detail as per Annexure A) We refer Minutes of PRC dtd 23.10.2024 vide Minutes File No HQRPRCAPPLY00000097AM25 wherein committee has rejected our MEIS Application even though we had submitted to Require documents like VOSTRO Certificate in case of Export shipment at IRAN to RA Ahmedabad and for further application our shipping bills are mapped with E BRC under Online application. Further inform you that we have executed the export shipment at Notified Countries as per MEIS Group ?A ?, ?28 ?& ?C ?and also Bank Realization done which is a mapped along with On line Application. As per Policy we had applied since quite long in the year 2020, still we are awaiting our eligible incentives as per FT. Also inform to your office that we have already provided Vostro Certificate from IDB! Bank against our export shipment at Iran to RA Ahmedabad. We humble request to re consider our all MEIS Application on merit basis with a view to associated cost for Freight in high Temperature cost for export shipment, and to motivate us in export competitiveness by reducing Freight cost. Further we had approached many times to RA Ahmedabad for request to approve our MEIS Claim. But still date we are awaiting approval of our MEIS Application. We are sorry for inconvenience caused to your office. Kindly acknowledge our MEIS Claim again and approve as ap. Decision: The Committee went through the justification made by the applicant and discussed the matter at length and decided to refer to Policy-3 Division for examination. (Action: Applicant/ PC-3) Case No.87 M/s. Jain Recycling Private Limited, Chennai F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00012359AM25

Subject: Re-validation of Authorization/Certificate against Advance Authorization

No. 3210079645 dated 18/08/2020, 3210079610 dated 16/07/2020. Applicant Statement: We have made an excess export of 436461 Kgs of

Refined Copper Billets against the said authorization No. 3210079645. Due to unavailability of our input item Copper Scrap Druid (CU 37.5% to 42.5%) in the market, we couldn?t able to import the material within the time limit. Whereas we are required to import 1026389 Kgs of Copper Scrap Druid (CU 37.5% to 42.5%) against the excess export made. The License was issued on 13-08-2020 and the revalidation for the said license is expired on 13-08-2021. Hence, we request that please grant us 1 year extension of revalidation period for import of the said material. We have made an excess export of 285066 kg of Refined Copper Billets against the said authorization No. 3210079610. Due to the unavailability of our input item Copper Scrap Druid in the market , we could not import the material within the time limit. Whereas we are required to import 683957 kgs of Copper Druid against excess export made. The License was issued on 16.07.2020 and import validity expired on 16.07.2021. Hence, we request to grant us 1 year extension of revalidation period for import of the said material. (Action: Applicant) Case No.88 M/s. Ebullient Packaging Private Limited, Mumbai F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00012361AM25

Subject: Re-validation of Authorization/Certificate against Advance Authorization

No. 0311000012 dated 10/12/2020. Applicant Statement: We have obtained above advance authorization on 10.12.2020 and obtained invalidation letter File no. 03AK04015171AM21 dated 20.01.2021 for procurement of 425216 kgs. of polypropylene granules from Reliance Industries Ltd. SEZ. We have exported a quantity of 3,98,490 kgs. We could only utilize 356275 kgs. of Polypropylene from SEZ, and therefore obtained non- utilization certificate for the balance quantity of 84413 kgs vide F. No RSEZ/utilization/22-23 dated 24.06.2022. Vide our letter Ref. No. 22/06/0166 dated 19.07.2022, we submitted a request letter to Addl. DGFT office in Mumbai requesting for amendment of CIF/FOB/quantity values in the licence. Vide D/L issued under File No. 03AB04006031AM23, RA has informed that advance authorization QTN of imports is 00, why you required enhancement in value against imports item No 1,3,4 pl. clarify. We replied to the D/L vide our letter dated 01.09.2022. However, the balance quantities as per non-utilization certificate were not properly credited/reflecting in the DGFT portal as well as in the Custom Portal and therefore, we could not import the raw material within licence validity period. In the meanwhile, licence has expired on 10.12.2022 (extended period). Therefore, ,

we have registered several complaints vide service requests as per copies enclosed. Due to the aforesaid reasons, we have applied to PRC for the second time for revalidation for further 6 months. On our request the PRC has granted us revalidation for further 6 months i.e. up to 31.08.2023. However, this time also the balance quantities as per non-utilization certificate were also not credited / reflected in the DGFT Portal as well as in the Custom Portal and we could not utilize our imports and now the licence has been expired. In spite of our several re- transmissions and amendments the exact quantity and value has not been reflecting on the Custom Site and hence we have to keep approaching PRC for revalidation to utilize the said licence. Therefore, we are approaching your office third time for revalidation of Advance Licence for further 6 months from the date of endorsement to enable us to utilize the balance quantity. Also, we earnestly request your good office to direct the system technical team to upload the unutilized quantities in the system as per the non-utilization certificate obtained. discussed the matter at length and decided to refer to the EGTF Division for a detailed report on technical difficulty faced ,if any, in the matter. (Action: Applicant/ EGTF Division) Case No.89 M/s. S K Industries, Vadodara F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00012365AM25

Subject: NOC/Clarification is required for allow of import of Cronidur 30 Stainless

Steel Round Bars of different dia on account of non-availability from any manufacturer anywhere in India & non-willingness of any manufacturer within India even to manufacture the same on account of limited consumption against Technical Division under Ministry of Steel New Delhi in terms of Quality Control Order, 2024 against Authorization No. 3411005776 dated 09/12/2024. Applicant Statement: NOC/Clarification is required for allow of import of Cronidur 30 Stainless Steel Round Bars of different dia on account of non-availability from any manufacturer anywhere in India & non-willingness of any manufacturer within India even to manufacture the same on account of limited consumption. Despite admission of the fact, we are being directed to import only through Advance Authorization whereas import have been liberally allowed under 2(Two) cases F.Nos. 1(9)/2019-TD-Part(2)/Royal/00004 of M/s. Royal Italian Jewellery Pvt Ltd., Thane & 1(9)/2019-TD-Part(2) of M/s. Vimal Chrome-Tech Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai. the firm and discussed the matter at length. The Committee noted that it is not a PRC matter and hence the case is withdrawn. (Action: Applicant)

Case No.90 M/s. Rishikesh Filaments Private Limited, Mumbai F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00004525AM25 Subject: Extension of Total EO Period against EPCG Authorization No. 0330009523 dated 23/08/2005. Applicant Statement: 1)EOP extension for 2 years by paying 2% composition fees for each year 2) ANOTHER 2 YEARS EOP EXTENSION I.E. (10+2 YEARS) BY PAYING 50% OF DUTY SAVED AS PER PARA 5.11 OF H.B.P. EPCG LICENCE NO. 0330009523 Dt. 23.08.2005 File No. 03/97/021/00592/AM06 Respected Sir, We request you to grant us extension of Export Obligation for 2 year by paying 2% each year. Calculation of EOP extension (8+2 Year):- Duty Saved value = Rs. 19, 20,000.00 4% of Duty saved = Rs. 76,800.00 We are enclosing E-Challan of Rs. 76,800.00 as 2% composition fees for EOP extension for 2 year. We are also enclosing E-Challan of Rs. 5000/- for Onetime condonation of time period in respect of obtaining extension in Export Obligation period under EPCG Scheme as per P.N 36/2015-20. We also request you for further extension upto 2 years with a condition that 50% of duty payable in proportion to the unfulfilled export obligation. i.e. (10+2 years) (Action: Applicant) Case No.91 M/s. Sreem Overseas Inc, Telangana F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00007189AM25 के Meeting No.26AM25 held 01 25.02.2025 & 27.02.2025

Subject: Request for PRC relaxation for grant of FMS.

Applicant Statement: Request is for issue of FMS Scrip FMS scrip for Rs.23.66 for the year 2010-2011 already applied to RA, Hyderabad on 08-06-2011, 31-05- 2011 and 30-05-2011 and also to issue FMS for year 2010-2011 for Rs. 14.11 Lac and for Rs. 15.91. Lac for the year 2011-2012 which we could not claim / apply due to commencement of investigation by DRI and Customs authorities from 24.6.2011 and subsequently decided in favour of our company between 17.11.2017 to 15.5.2023, as the same was beyond our control and the entire delay in on part of the Government Department of DRI and Customs authorities. Decision:

(Action: Applicant) Case No.92 M/s. Jindal Cocoa Llp, Mumbai F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00012405AM25

Subject: Request for condonation of 225 days delay in fulfilling physical export

liability on Interest as per export credit Rebate under Interest Equalization Scheme. Applicant Statement: REQUEST FOR CONDONATION OF 225 DAYS DELAY BEYOND 360 DAYS PERIOD IN FULFILMENT OF EXPORT LIABILITY ON INTEREST REBATE ON PRE EXPORT CREDIT UNDER INTEREST EQUALISATION SCHEME (IES) Of DGFT UNDER TRADE NOTICE NO 09/2015 DT 18.12.2015: (A) The amount of Pre Export Credit under IES for year 2021-2022 has been obtained for Rs.154.75 Cr on which Interest Rebate is for Rs.7.232 Cr only. (B) We are main exporter of Cocoa Butter since 2008 to International Branded Chocolate companies and during years 2019-2020 to 2023-2024 our exports constitutes to more than 90% of India’s annual exports of Cocoa Butter.(C) Unfortunately during the years 2020-2021 and 2021-2022 due to the sever impact of Carona Epidemic’s there has been huge downfall in India’s overall production and exports of Cocoa Butter in International markets world over by 84.56% and 77.61% resp. (D) Our company’s export of Cocoa Butter of 2020-2021 and 2021- 2022 had also downfall for 67.41% and 88.06% resp. (E) There has been huge fluctuation in Import price of Cocoa Beans and export product of Cocoa Butter every year. (F) The imported inputs of Cocoa Beans are neither grown in India but are only grown / imported from main African Countries of Congo D Rep, Ecuador, Dominic Rep and Uganda with seasonal production during October to June and imports to India are made only during July to September and also that it is very costly to store Cocoa Beans and very damaging due to high temperature in these African countries. (G) The IES for export promotion was introduced by DGFT vide Trade Notice No 09/2015 dated 8.12.2015 and extended from time to time and further vide Trade Notice No 11 dated 14.5.2020 has requested exporters to make maximum use of this IES scheme and difficulties be brought to the notice of DGFT (H) To provide a justified relief due to sever impact of Carona Epidemics sever in India and world over DGFT vide Notification No 28 dated 23.9.2021 had also provided Amnesty Scheme providing relief to exporters for grant of automatic EOP extension upto 31.12.2021 beyond 31.7.2021 under Advance/EPCG Authorization Scheme (I) During earlier years of 2020-2021 we had made exports within 360 days under IES. (J) During the year 2021-2022 our exports of Cocoa Butter are for Rs. 434.58 Cr (73.74%) within prescribed 360 days for IES and balance exports for Rs. 154.75 Cr (26.26%) have been made for a delay between 10 days to 225 days mainly due to very highly sever impact of Carona Epidemics when there was very less production due to highly shortage of workers and export demand in international market and huge shortage of foreign shipping vessels. (K) Our a: ~— ei

request dated 14.2.2022 to condone delay in exports made against Pre Export Credit under IES has been denied by our HDFC Bank, Mumbai on grounds that there is no provisions for condonation of delay in exports under RBI?s Pre Export Credit under IES (L) We had made a request to our HDFC Bank to condone delay and continue to provide relief and condone delay between 10 to 225 days in completing balance exports 26.26% beyond original 360 days under IES (M) Policy Relaxation Committee is kindly requested to provide suitable relief in our case Interest Equalization Scheme announced by DGFT vide Trade Notice No 09 dated 8.12.2015, on account of sever impact of Carona Epidemics and at par with the automatic EOP extension. the firm and discussed the matter at length. The Committee noted that it is not a PRC matter and hence the case is withdrawn and closed. (Action: Applicant) Case No.93 M/s. Harimohan Agro Industries, Maharashtra F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00012414AM25

Subject: Removal of AU condition against Tariff Rate Quota Authorization No.

0550001826 dated 05/07/2010. This is a review case of PRC Meeting No.01AM25 held on 04.04.2024 (Case No.46) wherein the Committee reject the case. Applicant Statement: We have been issued above license with AU condition for import of 1040 MTs of Maize, through STC for CIF value of Rs. 27,372,800 (USD 582400) under para 2.11 of FTP 2009-14e r/w Para 2.59 of HBP. Accordingly, the said license was utilized for importation of said import items during 2009-10. However, Customs intervened and adjudicated the issue for violation of AU condition by passing an 010 dt 28.02.2017 after issuing a Notice dt 09.10.2013. Aggrieved by the said OIL, applicant preferred an appeal befoOre Hon'ble CESTAT, Mumbai, vide appeal no.87321 of 2017. This is also to mention that Ld Jt. DGFT, CLA, New Delhi also issued a SCN dt 27.07.2023, however as per our knowledge the said SCN is not adjudicated so far. These submissions are being made by the applicant light of order passed by Hon’ble Bombay High Court on 09.12.2024 (uploaded on 10.12.2024) in support of removal of Actual User conditions in the captioned license(s) issued for import of maize (pop-corn Exim Code 10059000) under the Tariff Rate Quota Scheme in terms of para 2.11 of the FTP r/w Para 2.59 of the HBP Vol.1 The importers crave leave to submit copy of WP if required by Ld.PRC. In view of the above, being an identical case with complete merits, the applicants filed application for relaxation of AU condition in the subject import license. The Hon'ble PRC in its meeting No.01AM25 dt 04.04.2024 considered the same and rejected the case. The Hon'ble High Court directed petitioners to apply to PRC a proper application as per procedure within four week time and with direction to DGFT/PRC to dispose of application as expeditiously as possible and in event three months from the date of this order. +

Court Order in the matter was seen. Decision: The committee went through the statement made by the firm in its application and noted that the facts of the case have not been clearly specified by the firm and hence decided to call the firm for Personal Hearing. (Action: Applicant) Case No.94 M/s. Jawahar Lal & Sons, Indore F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00012419AM25

Subject: Removal Of AU Condition against TRQ Authorization No. 0550001614

dated 06/10/2009, 0550001822 dated 26/04/2010. This is a review case of PRC Meeting No.01AM25 held on 04.04.2024 (Case No.47) wherein the Committee reject the case. Applicant Statement: We have been issued above license with AU condition for import of 498.980 MTs of Maize, through STC for CIF value of Rs. 136,46,622 (USD 283652.40) under para 2.11 of ETP 2009-14e r/w Para 2.59 of HBP. Accordingly, the said license was utilized for importation of said import items during 2009-10. However, Customs intervened and adjudicated the issue for violation of AU condition by passing an 010 dt 28.02.2017 after issuing a Notice dt 09.10.2013. Aggrieved by the said OIL, applicant preferred an appeal befoOre Hon'ble CESTAT, Mumbai, vide appeal no.87321 of 2017. This is also to mention that Ld Jt.DGFT, CLA, New Delhi also issued a SCN dt 27.07.2023, however as per our knowledge the said SCN is not adjudicated so far. These submissions are being made by the applicant light of order passed by Hon'ble Bombay High Court on 09.12.2024 (uploaded on 10.12.2024) in support of removal of Actual User conditions in the captioned license(s) issued for import of maize (pop-corn Exim Code 10059000) under the Tariff Rate Quota Scheme in terms of para 2.11 of the FTP r/w Para 2.59 of the HBP Vol.1 The importers crave leave to submit copy of WP if required by Ld.PRC. In view of the above, being an identical case with complete merits, the applicants filed application for relaxation of AU condition in the subject import license. The Hon'ble PRC in its meeting No.01AM25 dt 04.04.2024 considered the same and rejected the case. The Hon'ble High Court directed petitioners to apply to PRC a proper application as per procedure within four week time and with direction to DGFT/PRC to dispose of application as expeditiously as possible and in event three months from the date of this order. Court Order in the matter was seen. Decision: The committee went through the statement made by the firm in its application and noted that the facts of the case have not been clearly specified by the firm and hence decided to call the firm for Personal Hearing. —C4-

(Action: Applicant) Case No.95 M/s. Jawahar Exim Limited, Mumbai F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00012421AM25

Subject: Removal Of Au Condition against TRQ Authorization No. 0550001575

dated 20/08/2009. This is a review case of PRC Meeting No.01AM25 held on 04.04.2024 (Case No.48) wherein the Committee reject the case. Applicant Statement: We have been issued above license with AU condition for import of 288 MTs of Maize, through STC for CIF value of Rs. 82,94,400 (USD 172800) under para 2.11 of FTP 2009-14e r/w Para 2.59 of HBP. Accordingly, the said license was utilized for importation of said import items during 2009-10. However, Customs intervened and adjudicated the issue for violation of AU condition by passing an 010 dt 28.02.2017 after issuing a Notice dt 09.10.2013. Aggrieved by the said OIL, applicant preferred an appeal befoOre Hon'ble CESTAT, Mumbai, vide appeal no.87321 of 2017. This is also to mention that Ld Jt.DGFT, CLA, New Delhi also issued a SCN dt 27.07.2023, however as per our knowledge the said SCN is not adjudicated so far. These submissions are being made by the applicant light of order passed by Hon’ble Bombay High Court on 09.12.2024 (uploaded on 10.12.2024) in support of removal of Actual User conditions in the captioned license(s) issued for import of maize (pop-corn Exim Code 10059000) under the Tariff Rate Quota Scheme in terms of para 2.11 of the FTP r/w Para 2.59 of the HBP Vol.1 The importers crave leave to submit copy of WP if required by Ld.PRC. In view of the above, being an identical case with complete merits, the applicants filed application for relaxation of AU condition in the subject import license. The Hon'ble PRC in its meeting No.01AM25 dt 04.04.2024 considered the same and rejected the case. The Hon'ble High Court directed petitioners to apply to PRC a proper application as per procedure within four week time and with direction to DGFT/PRC to dispose of application as expeditiously as possible and in event three months from the date of this order. Court Order in the matter was seen. Decision: The committee went through the statement made by the firm in its application and noted that the facts of the case have not been clearly specified by the firm and hence decided to call the firm for Personal Hearing. (Action: Applicant) Case No.96 M/s. Deco Mica Limited, Anmedabad F.No. HARPRCAPPLY0O0012425AM25 <a “Jo

Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0810146642 dated

26/11/2019. Applicant Statement: Advance Licence No. 0810146642 dt 26.11.2019 Reg: Extension of EO period for six months. Sir, We kindly request you to please grant us extension of EOP for six months. We present our case as under. We obtained subject AA for export and import as under. EXPORT DETAILS S.No. Export item name Export qty as per AA FOB value as per AA Export made FOB value realised % of EO fulfilled 1 Double side decorative laminates with barrier paper thickness 3.00 mm 14884 sq. meter USD 60429 Rs. 4350888 2232.6 sq. meter USD 7537.49 12.47% value wise 15% quantity wise. IMPORT DETAILS S.No. Import item name Import qty as per AA CIF value as per AA Import made within validated AA CIF value of import made (USD) % of of import made 1 Kraft paper 40856 kgs TOTAL USD 60429 Nil Nil 2 Base paper 3185 kgs 3017 kgs 15057.9 94.72% qty wise 3 Barrier paper 2560 kgs 2560 kgs 5376 100% 4 Tissue paper 401 kgs Nil Nil 5 Phenol 15717 kgs 15717 kgs 13406 100% 6 Melamine 5388 kgs 5388 kgs 4175 100% 7 Methanol 17191 kgs 17191 kgs 4324 100% 8 BOPP Film 148 kgs TOTAL USD60429 nil Nil TOTAL TOTAL USD60429 42340 Sir, we are genuine exporter having status holder certificate and exporting exporting single/double side decorative laminates with maximum thickness 0.5 mm, 0.8 mm, 1 mm, 2.3 mm and 2.5 mm since last eight years. So far we obtained 81 Nos. of AAs and 10 Nos. of EPCG licences and fulfilled EO in all the cases and never failed in EO in any licence. Our track record is very good. We developed higher obtained AA first time for 3 mm double side decorative laminates on the basis of confirmed export order. After obtaining AA, COVID pandemic started and our client cancelled the export order and the demand for 3.0 mm was very slow. We could fulfill only 12.47% EO within the initial EOP and our balance export order for 3 mm thickness material cancelled. The unutilized inputs are lying in our plant. At present also, we regularly export decorative laminates of less thickness (0.5 mm, 0.8 mm, 2.3 mm and 2.5 mm) under advance licence. Now we are negotiating with our regular client for 3 mm thickness material and hope to fulfill balance export within next six months. We kindly request you to please grant us six months EOP extension to enable us to fulfill balance EO and avoid duty and interest on the excess import. For your reference we attached following. 1) List of AAs and EPCGs obtained by us 2) Export and import statement. Decision: (Action: Applicant) Case No.97 M/s. Kalp Impex, Jalgaon F.No. HARPRCAPPLY00012514AM25 act HN

Subject: Removal Of Au Condition against TRQ Authorization No. 0550001577

dated 20/08/2009. This is a review case of PRC Meeting No.01AM25 held on 04.04.2024 (Case No.20) wherein the Committee reject the case. Applicant Statement: We have been issued above license with AU condition for import of1069.300 MTs of Maize Argentina, through STC for CIF value of Rs. 29,715,856 USD 617,169) under para 2.11 of FTP 2009-14e r/w Para 2.59 of HBP. Accordingly, the said license was utilized for importation of said import items during 2009-10. However, Customs intervened and adjudicated the issue for violation of AU condition by passing an 010 dt 28.02.2017 after issuing a Notice dt 09.10.2013. Aggrieved by the said OIL, applicant preferred an appeal befoOre Hon'ble CESTAT, Mumbai, vide appeal no.87321 of 2017. This is also to mention that Ld Jt.DGFT, CLA, New Delhi also issued a SCN dt 27.07.2023, however as per our knowledge the said SCN is not adjudicated so far. These submissions are being made by the applicant light of order passed by Hon’ble Bombay High Court on 09.12.2024 (uploaded on 10.12.2024) in support of removal of Actual User conditions in the captioned license(s) issued for import of maize (pop-corn Exim Code 10059000) under the Tariff Rate Quota Scheme in terms of para 2.11 of the FTP r/w Para 2.59 of the HBP Vol.1 The importers crave leave to submit copy of WP if required by Ld.PRC. In view of the above, being an identical case with complete merits, the applicants filed application for relaxation of AU condition in the subject import license. The Hon'ble PRC in its meeting No.01AM25 dt 04.04.2024 considered the same and rejected the case. The Hon'ble High Court directed petitioners to apply to PRC a proper application as per procedure within four week time and with direction to DGFT/PRC to dispose of application as expeditiously as possible and in event three months from the date of this order. Court Order in the matter was seen. Decision: The committee went through the statement made by the firm in its application and noted that the facts of the case have not been clearly specified by the firm and hence decided to call the firm for Personal Hearing. (Action: Applicant) Case No.98 M/s. Niaksh Jewels Lip, Bikaner F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00012519AM25

Subject: Condonation for inadvertently neglect to mention Nominated Agency i.e.

Diamond India Limited (DIL) BOE No 6299599 dt 07-Jun-23, Port Code: INDEL4 including their Invoice No OX23G1KDEL105 dt 23.06.2023 in Shipping Bill 3472826 dt 25.08.2023, 3898754 dt 13.09.2023 & 3219670 dt 16.08.2023. Applicant Statement: We are a MSME and ist time exporter of Plain and

Studded Gold Jewellery. We have ist time procured 1000 gms of Gold from Nominated agency (NA) i.e. Diamond India Ltd for export of Gold Jewellery to a USA buyer. The gold was procured from DIL vide Invoice No OX23G1KDEL105 dt 23.06.2023 and it was imported by DIL vide BOE No 6299599 dt 07-Jun-23. Against this we have made exports for total quantity of 996.37 gms vide Shipping Bill No 3472826 dt 25.08.2023, 3898754 dt 13.09.2023 &3219670 dt 16.08.2023 complying FTP and HBP norms i.e. Value addition, wastage, etc. However, we inadvertently forgot to mention Nominated Agency i.e. Diamond India Limited (DIL) BOE No 6299599 dt 07-Jun-23, Port Code: INDEL4 including their Invoice No OX23G1KDEL105 dt 23.06.2023 in above Shipping Bills though it was mentioned in export invoices and export invoice is considered part of SB. Reasons/Justification: 1. This was our 1st export availing gold from a Nominated agency (NA) and it was an urgent order. The designs finalization took some time initially and all designs selected were too antique and too much customization was desired by the overseas buyer but wanted the product to be delivered on urgent basis. It was our 1st export order, so we ensured the highest quality product is delivered to the buyer. Immense time and energy were invested as multiple time rework was done for manufacturing the desired product. Finally, when the products were ready and approved by the buyer, the buyer insisted on shipping the goods the next day itself else its client may cancel the order. Being a 1st time exporter it was really hard to ship the goods complying with all the rules and regulations in a day. We prepared an export invoice, packing list etc. consulting many and entrusted the customs formalities to Customs House Agent (CHA) including filling of the shipping bills. The DIL sale invoice details were mentioned in the export invoice and reference of export invoice was mentioned in the shipping bill. The order must be exported in a day, or it may have got cancelled but we tried our best to get the draft export documents vet by Nominated Agency however as per their practice they scrutinize post exports only and council don?t guide on it. 2. There is no concise manual for 1st time exporters like us and has to follow CHA/customs advice only. We went by their advice, complied all norms and successfully completed the exports. Post exports, when documents were submitted to DIL, it was informed by DIL that we should have mentioned DIL BOE No, date and their invoice details in shipping bill also though it was mentioned in our export invoice and export invoice is part of shipping bill. 3. This being our 1st urgent export order, neither export experience nor time was there to go through the complete FTP/HBP (beyond what is being advised by customs/CHA), understand and implement the same in our shipping bills in a day though it was already mentioned in export invoice and export invoice is part of SBs. It was beyond our control to envisage NA requirement over and above what is required by customs for export. 4. We have also attached CA certificate with UDIN No: 23078035BGVAYD3364 dt 14.11.23 confirming usage of said gold for export of jewellery vide above SBs. Prayer: From all the reasons/justifications provided above it was beyond our control to envisage and implement NAs requirement in SBs also though it was mentioned in export invoice and export invoice is part of SB. This NA requirement is beyond what is being required by customs for allowing exports as per FTP/HBP. We may have implemented this NA requirement on own if enough time would have been allowed by buyer to export goods. In sum, we reiterate it was beyond our control to avoid hence we request for condonation for inadvertently forget to mention Nominated Agency BOE No and Date including their sale invoice details in Shipping Bills 1 a"

though it was mentioned in our export invoices. Decision: (Action: Applicant) Case No.99 M/s. Adcock Ingram Limited, Bangalore F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00012567AM25 Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0710113013 dated 23/03/2018. Applicant Statement: We were imported the input item based on the Export projection orders and it was unfortunate due to various market condition is the foreign countries; we could not complete the export obligation in time but completed entire export obligation by clubbing and realized export proceeds against the same. we have to regularize the license with the total exports made against the license. (Action: Applicant)

Case No.100

M/s. Adcock Ingram Limited, Bangalore F.No. HQRPRCAPPLY00012568AM25 Subject: Extension of EOP against Advance Authorization No. 0710115926 dated 26/12/2019. Applicant Statement: We were imported the input item based on the Export projection orders and it was unfortunate due to various market condition is the foreign countries; we could not complete the export obligation in time but completed entire export obligation by clubbing and realized export proceeds against the same. we have to regularize the license with the total exports made against the license. ' _ धन शत!

Decision: oA (Action: Applicant) g | 5