IN FORCE SEZ / EOU / FTWZ

Agenda for the 91st meeting of the BoA to be held on 06.08.2019

Reliability

In force — no superseding record on file.

Document text

No. F.2/4/2019-SEZ, Government of India Ministry of Commerce and Industry Department of Commerce (SEZ Section) Udyog Bhawan, New Delhi Dated 0०270, 2019 OFFICE MEMORANDUM Subject: 1" Meeting of the Board of Approval (BoA) for Special Economic Zones (SEZs) scheduled to be held on 6" August, 2019 at 11.30 A.M in Room No. 108 - forwarding of Agenda thereof — Reg. In continuation to this Department’s O.M. of even number dated 8" July, 2019 on the above mentioned subject, the undersigned is directed to enclose herewith the Agenda for the 91* meeting of the BoA for SEZs scheduled to be held on 6" August, 2019 at 11:30 A.M. in Room No. 108 for information and necessary action, Soft copy of the agenda has also been hosted on the website: www.sezindia.gov.in. The addressees located outside Delhi are requested to download the agenda from the above mentioned website, 2, The addressees are requested to make it convenient to attend the eee ॥ (Sumit Kumar Sachan) Under Secretary to the Government of India Tel: 2306 2496 Email: sumit.sachan@nic.in To 1. Central Board of Excise and Customs, Member (Customs), Department of Revenue, North Block, New Delhi. (Fax: 23092628). 2, Central Board of Direct Taxes, Member (IT), Department of Revenue, North Block, New Delhi. (Telefax: 23092107), 3. Joint Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Department of Financial Services, Banking Division, Jeevan Deep Building, New Delhi (Fax: 23344462/23366797). 4. Joint Secretary, Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion, Udyog Bhawan, New Delhi. 5.

ment of Financial Services, Banking Division, Jeevan Deep Building, New Delhi (Fax: 23344462/23366797). 4. Joint Secretary, Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion, Udyog Bhawan, New Delhi. 5. Joint Secretary, Ministry of Shipping, Transport Bhawan, New Delhi, 6. Joint Secretary (8), Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi 7. Joint Secretary, Ministry of Agriculture, Plant Protection, Krishi Bhawan, New Delhi, 8. Ministry of Science and Technology, Sc 'G’ & Head (TDT), Technology Bhavan, Mehrauli Road, New Delhi. (Telefax: 26862512) 9. Joint Secretary, Department of Biotechnology, Ministry of Science and Technology, 7" Floor, Block 2, CGO Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi - 110 003.

10, Additional Secretary and Development Commissioner (Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Scale Industry), Room No. 701, Nirman Bhavan, New Delhi (Pax: 23062315). 11, Secretary, Department of Electronics & Information Technology, Electronics Niketan, 6, CGO Complex, New Delhi. (Fax: 24363101) 12, Joint Secretary (5-), Ministry of Home Affairs, North Block, New Delhi (ax: 23092569) 13, Joint Secretary (C&W), Ministry of Defence, Fax: 23015444, South Block, New Delhi. 14, Joint Secretary, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Pariyavaran Bhavan, CGO Complex, New Delhi ~ 110003 (Fax: 24363577) 15, Joint Secretary & Legislative Counsel, Legislative Department, M/o Law & Justice, ‘A-Wing, Shastri Bhavan, New Delhi, (Tel: 23387095). 16.

Bhavan, CGO Complex, New Delhi ~ 110003 (Fax: 24363577) 15, Joint Secretary & Legislative Counsel, Legislative Department, M/o Law & Justice, ‘A-Wing, Shastri Bhavan, New Delhi, (Tel: 23387095). 16. Department of Legal Affairs (Shri Hemant Kumar, Assistant Legal Adviser), M/o Law & Justice, New Delhi. 17, Secretary, Department of Chemicals & Petrochemicals, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi 18, Joint Secretary, Ministry of Overseas Indian Affairs, Akbar Bhawan, Chanakyapuri, New Delhi, (Fax: 24674140) 19, Chief Planner, Department of Urban Affairs, Town Country Planning Organisation, Vikas Bhavan (E-Block), 1.7, Estate, New Delhi. (Fax: 23073678/23379197) 20. Director General, Director General of Foreign Trade, Department of Commerce, Udyog Bhavan, New Delhi. 21. Director General, Export Promotion Council for EOUs/SEZs, 8G, 8" Floor, Hansalaya Building, 15, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi ~ 110 001 (Fax: 223329770) 22.Dr. Rupa Chanda, Professor, Indian Institute of Management, Bangalore, Bennerghata Road, Bangalore, Karnataka 23, Development Commissioner, Noida Special Economic Zone, Noida, 24, Development Commissioner, Kandla Special Economic Zone, Gandhidham, 25. Development Commissioner, Falta Special Economie Zone, Kolkata, 26, Development Commissioner, SEEPZ, Special Economic Zone, Mumba 27. Development Commissioner, Madras Special Economic Zone, Chennai 28. Development Commissioner, Visakhapatnam Special Economic Zone, Visakhapatnam 29, Development Commissioner, Cochin Special Economic Zone, Cochin, 30.

er, Madras Special Economic Zone, Chennai 28. Development Commissioner, Visakhapatnam Special Economic Zone, Visakhapatnam 29, Development Commissioner, Cochin Special Economic Zone, Cochin, 30. Development Commissioner, Indore Special Economic Zone, Indore. 31. Development Commissioner, Mundra Special Economic Zone, 4" Floor, C Wing, Port Users Building, Mundra (Kutch) Gujarat, 32. Development Commissioner, Dahej Special Economic Zone, Fadia Chambers, Ashram Road, Ahmedabad, Gujarat 33. Development Commissioner, Navi Mumbai Special Economic Zone, SEEPZ Service Center, Central Road, Andheri (East), Mumbai ~400 096 34, Development Commissioner, Sterling Special Economic Zone, Sandesara Estate, Atladra Padra Road, Vadodara - 390012 35. Development Commissioner, Andhra Pradesh Special Economic Zone, Udyog. Bhawan, 9" Floor, Siripuram, Visakhapatnam — 3 36, Development Commissioner, Reliance Jamnagar Special Economic Zone, Jamnagar, Gujarat 37. Development Commissioner, Surat Special Economic Zone, Surat, Gujarat 38, Development Commissioner, Mihan Special Economic Zone, Nagpur, Maharashtra 39, Development Commissioner, Sricity Special Economic Zone, Andhra Pradesh, 40. Development Commissioner, Mangalore Special Economic Zone, Mangalore.

han Special Economic Zone, Nagpur, Maharashtra 39, Development Commissioner, Sricity Special Economic Zone, Andhra Pradesh, 40. Development Commissioner, Mangalore Special Economic Zone, Mangalore.

Government of Andhra Pradesh, Principal Secretary and CIP, Industries and ‘Commerce Department, A.P. Secretariat, Hyderabad ~ 500022. (Fax: 040-23452895)., 42.Government of Telangana, Special Chief Secretary, Industries and Commerce Department, Telangana Secretariat Khairatabad, Hyderabad, Telangana,
Government of Karnataka, Principal Secretary, Commerce and Industry Department, Vikas Saudha, Bangalore - 560001. (Fax: 080-22259870)
Government of Maharashtra, Principal Secretary (Industries), Energy and Labour Department, Mumbai - 400 032.
Government of Gujarat, Principal Secretary, Industries and Mines Department Sardar Patel Bhawan, Block No. 5, 3rd Floor, Gandhinagar ~ 382010 (Fax: 079-23250844).. 46.Government of West Bengal, Principal Secretary, (Commerce and Industry), IP Branch (4" Floor), SEZ Section, 4, Abanindranath Tagore Sarani (Camac Street) Kolkata — 700 016 47, Government of Tamil Nadu, Principal Secretary (Industries), Fort St. George, Chennai — 600009 (Fax: 044-25370822),
Government of Kerala, Principal Secretary (Industries), Government Secretariat, ‘Trivandrum - 695001 (Fax: 0471-2333017).
Government of Haryana, Financial Commissioner and Principal Secretary), Department of industries, Haryana Civil_—Secretariat, Chandigarh (ax: 0172-2740526).

01 (Fax: 0471-2333017). 49. Government of Haryana, Financial Commissioner and Principal Secretary), Department of industries, Haryana Civil_—Secretariat, Chandigarh (ax: 0172-2740526). 50. Government of Rajasthan, Principal Secretary (Industries), Secretariat Campus, Bhagwan Das Road, Jaipur ~ 302005 (0141-2227788).. 51. Government of Uttar Pradesh, Principal Secretary, (Industries), Lal Bahadur Shastri Bhawan, Lucknow ~ 226001 (Fax: 0522-2238255). 52. Government of Punjab, Principal Secretary Department of Industry & Commerce Udyog Bhawan), Sector -17, Chandigarh- 160017, 53. Government of Puducherry, Secretary, Department of Industries, Chief Secretariat, Puducherry, 54.Government of Odisha, Principal Secretary (Industries), Odisha Secretariat, Bhubaneshwar ~ 751001 (Fax: 0671-536819/2406299), हि 55, Government of Madhya Pradesh, Chief Secretary, (Commerce and Industry), Vallabh Bhavan, Bhopal (Fax: 0755-2559974) 56, Government of Uttarakhand, Principal Secretary, (Industries), No. 4, Subhash Road, Secretariat, Dehradun, Uttarakhand 57. Government of Jharkhand (Secretary), Department of Industries Nepal House, Doranda, Ranchi ~ $34002. 58. Union Territory of Daman and Diu and Dadra Nagar Haveli, Secretary (Industries), Department of Industries, Secretariat, Moti Daman ~ 396220 (Fax: 0260-23075). 59. Government of Nagaland, Principal Secretary, Department of Industries and Commerce), Kohima, Nagaland, 60.

stries), Department of Industries, Secretariat, Moti Daman ~ 396220 (Fax: 0260-23075). 59. Government of Nagaland, Principal Secretary, Department of Industries and Commerce), Kohima, Nagaland, 60. Government of Chattishgarh, Commissioner-cum-Secretary Industries, Directorate of Industries, LIC Building Campus, 2" Floor, Pandri, Raipur, Chhattisgarh (Fax: 0771-2583651). Copy to: PPS to CS/ PPS to AS (BBS) / PPS to DS (SNS).

Agenda for the 91“ meeting of the Board of Approval to be held on. 60.40205 2019 at 11.00 A.M. in Room No. 108, Udvog Bhawan, New Delhi 2019 at 11.00 A.M. in Room No. 108, Udyog Bhawan, New Delhi Item No. 91.1; Confirmation of minutes of the meeting of the 90"BoA held on 18" June, 2019. Item No, 91.2: Requests for extension of validity of formal approval (six proposals) BoA in its meeting held on 14" September, 2012, while examining such proposals observed as under: - “The Board advised the Development Commissioners to recommend the requests for extension of formal approval beyond 5" year and onwards only after satisfying that the developer has taken sufficient steps towards operationalisation of the project and further extension is based on justifiable reasons. Board also observed that extensions may not be granted as a matter of routine unless some progress has been made on ground by the developers.

ct and further extension is based on justifiable reasons. Board also observed that extensions may not be granted as a matter of routine unless some progress has been made on ground by the developers. The Board, therefore, after deliberations, extended the validity of the formal approval to the requests for extensions beyond Jifth years for a period of one year and those beyond sixth year for a period of 6 ‘months from the date of expiry of last extension”. 91.20) Request of M/s. Electronics Corporation of Tamil Nadu Ltd. (ELCOT Ltd.) for further extension of the validity period of formal approval, granted for setting up of sector specific IT/ITES SEZ, at Gangaikondan, Tirunelveli for a further period of six months beyond 07.05.2019 up to 7.11.2019. Name of the developer : M/s. Electronics Corporation of Tamil Nadu Ltd. Sector : IT/ITES Location: Gangaikondan, Tirunelveli Extension: Formal approval to the developer was granted on 26.07.2007 and the SEZ was notified on 08.06.2009. The developer has been granted nine extensions and last extension of validity period of LoA was up to 7.5.2019. The developer has requested for further extension for another six months 1.०. upto 07.11.2019. The SEZ stands notified on 08.06.2009. As informed by DC, MEPZ, the developer has created common infrastructure facilities for 100 acres of land and construction of 50000 sq.ft.

1.०. upto 07.11.2019. The SEZ stands notified on 08.06.2009. As informed by DC, MEPZ, the developer has created common infrastructure facilities for 100 acres of land and construction of 50000 sq.ft. IT building has been completed. Present Progress: (a) Details of business Plan:- [Sr No._[ Type of cost Proposed Investment (RS, In crores | 1 | Land Cost eS 2 | 2 [Construction Cost [33.00 Total [4550 Page 1 of 48

(b) Incremental investment since last extensic | Type of Cost Total Investment made so | Incremental __ investment No. far (Rs. In crores) since last extension (Rs. in crores) 1_ Land cost 12.50

2 | Construetion 34.00 [ कछ २ २]]| Total 46.50

_id (©) Details of physical progress till date:- Sr. | Authorised activity % completion as on date No, [ | The creation of infrastructure for water 100% facility for the cost of Rs. 1,42,22,000/- az Extension of RCC road work for the estimate 100 % of Rs, 1,24,35,545/- is completed. a M/s. Syntel International Pvt. Ltd. the co- 100% developer has started their own unit called | The work has already M/s.

f RCC road work for the estimate 100 % of Rs, 1,24,35,545/- is completed. a M/s. Syntel International Pvt. Ltd. the co- 100% developer has started their own unit called | The work has already M/s. Syntel Software LLP on 29.04.2019 and been completed the commencement of production is expected in September, 2019. Reason for seeking extension: ‘The developer is very keen to start their SEZ as soon as they get the extension of LoA. Two units are likely to set up their business shortly and expected to be in operation by September, 2019, Rule position: ‘The ELCOT SEZ at Gangaikondan is covered under Category ‘C’ city as per Rule 5(2)(b)(ii) of SEZ Rules, 2006 and was notified on 8.6.2009. ‘As per Rule 5(7) of SEZ Rules, 2006, “The Developer or ;Co-developer shall have to construct the minimum built up area (25,000 Sqm, in case of IT/ATES SEZ for category C city) within a period of ten years from the date of notification of the Special Economic Zone in which atleast fifty percent of such area to be constructed within a period of five years from the date of such notification.” As informed by DC, the details of constructed area so far is as follows: Details of built up area constructed Area in sq.ft. ‘Area in sq.mtr. Built up area constructed so far by developer | 50,000 4,647 ELCOT SEZ Built up area constructed by co-developer 2,30,000 21,375 Total built up area constructed 2,80,000 26,022 The developer was supposed to built up an area of 25000 sqm. As informed by DC the developer and co-developer have jointly constructed 26,022 sqm.area. Page 2 of 48

rea constructed 2,80,000 26,022 The developer was supposed to built up an area of 25000 sqm. As informed by DC the developer and co-developer have jointly constructed 26,022 sqm.area. Page 2 of 48

Recommendation by DC: DC, MEPZ SEZ has recommended the request of extension of LoA for a period of six months up to 07.11.2019. The request is placed before BOA for its consideration. 91.24i) Request of M/s. Electronics Corporation of Tamil Nadu Ltd. (ELCOT Ltd.) for further extension of the validity period of formal approval, granted for setting up of sector specific IT/ITES SEZ at Viswanathapuram, Hosur, Tamil Nadu for a further period of six months beyond 7.5.2019 up to 7.11.2019. Name of the developer : Mis, Electronics Corporation of Tamil Nadu Ltd. Sector : IT/ATES Location : Viswanathapuram, Hosur Extension | Formal approval to the developer was granted on 26.7.2007 and the SEZ was notified on 04.05.2009, The developer has been granted nine extensions and last extension of validity period of LoA was up to 7.5.2019. The developer has requested for further extension of six months upto 7.11.2019, As informed by DC, MEPZ, the developer has created common infrastructure facilities such as road, compound wall, administrative block, STP, Water pipeline ete. and construction of 50000 sq.ft IT building and administrative block has been completed. Present Progress: 'b) Details of business Plan: [ Sr.No. | Type of cost ___| Proposed Investment (Rs.

ne ete. and construction of 50000 sq.ft IT building and administrative block has been completed. Present Progress: 'b) Details of business Plan: [ Sr.No. | Type of cost | Proposed Investment (Rs. In erores) [Peeosed investment (is fn storey [1 [Land Cost ————| 1.75 [2 [Construction Cost 40.00 [रे Total 5 (b) Incremental investment since last extension:~ St. | Type of Cost Total Investment made so | Incremental investment No, far (Rs. In crores) since last extension (Rs. in crores) [1 | Land cost 1.75 | 2| Construction 44.70 470 Total [46.45 4.70 ०) Details of physical progress till date:- Sr. | Authorised activity % completion as on] % completion during last No. date one year rt | Creation of common 100% [ = | infrastructure facilities 2. | Construction of 50,000 sq.ft. 100% 15% IT building Page 3 of 48

Reasons for seeking extension: ‘The developer is very keen to start their SEZ as soon as they get the extension of Loa. ‘Two units are likely to set up their business shortly and expected to be in operation by September, 2019. Rule position: The ELCOT SEZ at Hosur is covered under Category ‘C’ city as per Rule 5(2)(b)(ii) of SEZ Rules, 2006 and was notified on 04.5.2009, As per Rule 5(7) of SEZ Rules, 2006, “The Developer or; Co-developer shall have to construct the minimum built up area (25,000 Sqmt.

Rule 5(2)(b)(ii) of SEZ Rules, 2006 and was notified on 04.5.2009, As per Rule 5(7) of SEZ Rules, 2006, “The Developer or; Co-developer shall have to construct the minimum built up area (25,000 Sqmt. in case of ITATES SEZ for category C city) within a period of ten years from the date of notification of the Special Economic Zone in which at least fifty percent of such area to be constructed within a period of five years from the date of such notification. As informed by DC, the details of constructed area so far is as follows: Details of built up area constructed Area in sq.ft. Area in sq.mtr, Built up area constructed so far by developer ELCOT SEZ | 50,000 4,647 ‘The developer was supposed to built up an area of 25000 sqm. As informed by DC the total area constructed so far is 4,647 sqm. DC, MEPZ SEZ has recommended the request of extension of LoA for a period of six months up to 07.11.2019. ‘The request is placed before BOA for its consideration. 91.2Gii) Request of M/s. Electronics Corporation of Tamil Nadu Ltd. (ELCOT Ltd.) for further extension of the validity period of formal approval, granted for setting up of sector specific IT/ITES SEZ at Vadapalanji, Madurai for a further period of one year beyond 7.5.2019 up to 7.5.2020. Name of the developer : Mis. Electronics Corporation of Tamil Nadu Ltd. Sector 4 IT/ATES Location H Vadapalanji, Madurai Extension t Formal approval to the developer was granted on 26.07.2007 and the SEZ was notified on 30.04.2008.

cs Corporation of Tamil Nadu Ltd. Sector 4 IT/ATES Location H Vadapalanji, Madurai Extension t Formal approval to the developer was granted on 26.07.2007 and the SEZ was notified on 30.04.2008. The developer has been granted nine extensions and last extension of validity period of LoA was up to 07.05.2019. The developer has requested for further extension upto 7.05.2020. As informed by DC, MEPZ, the developer has created common infrastructure facilities for 100 acres of land and construction of 50000 sq.ft. IT building has been completed. Page 4 of 48

Present Progress (©) Details of business Plan:- [_ Sr.No. | Type of cost Proposed Investment (Rs. In crores) [1 | Land Cost [94g || 2 Construction Cost [ ३326... [Total iG 7ै] (b) Incremental investment since last extension:- Sr. [Type of Cost | Total Investment made | Incremental investment since last No. so far (Rs. In crores) extension (Rs. in crores) [1 | Land cost i as i "शान | 3 [Construction | 6266._/ह[ उठ ___| Total 72.06 [20.00 (©) Details of physical progress till date: Sr. | Authorised activity % completion as on | % completion during No. date last one year | | Creation of common infrastructure 100% 100% facilities were completed at the cost of Rs. 14.50 crores a Construction of Road Over Bridge 100% 100% work by the Highways Department and the work pertaining to Southern Railway are completed 3, | Construction of 50,000 sq.ft.

e cost of Rs. 14.50 crores a Construction of Road Over Bridge 100% 100% work by the Highways Department and the work pertaining to Southern Railway are completed 3, | Construction of 50,000 sq.ft. IT- 100% 25% ‘cum-Administrative block completed and shall commence its operations by Sep, 2019 after the prospective allottee unit holder obtaining necessary permission from the DC, MEPZ, Chennai, M/s, ELCOT further informed that M/s. Chain-sys Software Exports Pvt, Lid. have obtained the co-developer status and expected to start their construction activities. M/s. HCL Limited is also applying for co- developer status. Reasons for seeking extension: The developer is very keen to start their SEZ as soon as they get the extension of LoA. Two units are likely to set up their business shortly and expected to be in operation by September, 2019. Page 5 of 48

Rule position: The ELCOT SEZ at Vadapalanji, Madurai is covered under Category * Rule 5(2)(b)(ii) of SEZ Rules, 2006 and was notified on 30.04.2008. city as per As per Rule 5(7) of SEZ Rules, 2006, “The Developer or ;Co-developer shall have to construct the minimum built up area (50,000Sqmt.

(ii) of SEZ Rules, 2006 and was notified on 30.04.2008. city as per As per Rule 5(7) of SEZ Rules, 2006, “The Developer or ;Co-developer shall have to construct the minimum built up area (50,000Sqmt. in case of IT/ITES SEZ, for Category B city) within a period of ten years from the date of notification of the Special Economic Zone in which at least fifiy percent of such area to be constructed within a period of five years from the date of such notification.” ‘As informed by DC, MEPZ, the details of construction done so far: Details of built up area constructed ‘Area in sq.ft._| Area in sq.mtr. Built up area constructed so far by developer ELCOT | 50,000 4,647 SEZ ‘The developer was supposed to built up an area of 50,000 sqm. As informed by DC, the total area constructed so far is 4,647 sqm. DC, MEPZ SEZ has recommended the request of extension of LoA for a period of one year up to 07.05.2020, 91.2(iv) Request of M/s. HBS Auto and ANC SEZ Pvt. Ltd., for further extension of the validity period of formal approval, granted for setting up of sector specific SEZ now changed to Automobile, Automobile Ancillary & Engineering sector at Panoli Industrial Estate, District Bharuch, Gujarat beyond 16.06.2019 upto 16.06.2020. Name of the developer: M/s. HBS Auto and ANC SEZ Private Limited Sector : Automobile, Automobile Ancillary & Engineering Location ५. Panoli Industrial Estate, District Bharuch, Gujarat Extension : Formal approval to the developer was granted on 17.06.2008 and the SEZ was notified on 09.01.2009.

illary & Engineering Location ५. Panoli Industrial Estate, District Bharuch, Gujarat Extension : Formal approval to the developer was granted on 17.06.2008 and the SEZ was notified on 09.01.2009. The last extension was granted on 28.06.2018 validity period of which was extended upto 16.06.2019. The developer has requested for further extension in validity by one more year viz. upto 16.06.2020. Present Progress: (a) Details of business Plan:- Sr.No. [Type ofeost | Proposed Investment (Rs. in lakhs [1. | Land Cost 6990.00 2. | Construction Cost 3060.00 Total 1505000, Page 6 of 48

(b) Incremental investment since last extension:- [Particulars S=«Y~sAmount in crores, Land Cost [| »9»# |] Construction Cost | 222 | ‘Admin/Other Exp 3.07 Professional/Legal Fees [030d Interest / Principal 38.04 [Total 860 _] (० Details of physical progress till date:- ‘The Developer had already carried out all infrastructure work relating to the development of notified SEZ area like preparation of site, boundary walls, administrative block, electrification, roads, water pipelines, ete, Detailed Reasons for delay: The developer had recently sought approval of the Government for change of sector from Pharmaceutical to Automobile, Automobile Ancillary & Engineering, and at present they have leased substantial area of the SEZ to green field tyre manufacturing company i.e. M/s. Mahansaria Tyres Pvt, Ltd. The said unit has been successful to obtain LOA from the office of the Development Commissioner, KASEZ for setting-up of unit in SEZ.

d tyre manufacturing company i.e. M/s. Mahansaria Tyres Pvt, Ltd. The said unit has been successful to obtain LOA from the office of the Development Commissioner, KASEZ for setting-up of unit in SEZ. The said unit has started construction work and has planned an additional investment of Rs. 1000 crores for setting-up their manufacturing unit, over three phase. As per project report of the unit i.e. M/s, Mahansaria Tyres Pvt. Ltd., will export goods worth more than Rs. 1500 crores to over 100 countries across the globe. This project is expected to create approximately 1500employment opportunities, Recommendation by DC: DC, Kandla-SEZ has recommended the request of extension of LOA for a period of ‘one year upto 16-06-2020, 91.2(v) Request of M/s. Electronics Technology Parks Kerala (ETP IV) for further extension of the validity period of formal approval, granted for setting up of sector specific IT/ITES SEZ at Andoorkonam Village, Trivandrum, Kerala for a further period of one year beyond 15.05.2019 up to 15.05.2020. Name of the Developer : Electronics Technology Parks —Kerala (ETP SEZ-IV) Sector i IT/ITES Location : AndoorkonamVillage, ‘Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala Extension: Formal approval to the developer was granted on 16.05.2012 and the SEZ was notified on 29.11.2012. The developer has been granted four extensions and last extension of validity period of LoA was up to 15.05.2019. The developer has requested for further extension for another one year i.e. upto15.05.2020. Page 7 of 48

en granted four extensions and last extension of validity period of LoA was up to 15.05.2019. The developer has requested for further extension for another one year i.e. upto15.05.2020. Page 7 of 48

Present Progress a) Details of Business plan:- S.No | Type of Cost Proposed Investment (Rs. in Lakhs [1 [Land Cost | 6600 (as provided in SEZ application) 2 | Construction Cost_| 50000 (as provided in SEZ application) Total 56600 b) Total Investment & incremental investment since last extension:~ _ S.No | TypeofCost | Total Investment made | Incremental investment since last so far (Rs. In Lakhs) up | extension (Rs. In lakhs) ie., 2018- to March 2019 19 [1 [Land Cost 6600 Nil | | Material | 200 Procurement Cost 3. | Costandover | 5000 =e | heads Total 13708 3200 ©) Details of physical progress till date SIN | Authorised Activity | % % completion | Deadline for completion ० completion | during one year | of balance work. son date up | (2018-19) to March, 2019 वि [SuntecIT Building [80 [60 | December 2019 [2 [1OKV Substation [100 [5 | Completed 3[20 lakhs litres sump [100 | 0 —‘| Completed 0) Steps taken during 2018-19 such as submission for permissions iii. iv. ve Suntec (Co-developer) construction of 3.1 lakhs Sq.ft IT Building commenced ‘on 01 September, 2017.

0 | 0 —‘| Completed 0) Steps taken during 2018-19 such as submission for permissions iii. iv. ve Suntec (Co-developer) construction of 3.1 lakhs Sq.ft IT Building commenced ‘on 01 September, 2017. Dead line for building completion is December, 2019.Suntec IT building is a pre fab structure. 11069 digital substation which caters to entire Technocity project has been completed. ‘The 20 lakhs litre water sump is completed Site preparation work, survey and road connectivity cleared for smooth movement of materials, Boundary wall of SEZ constructed. e) Reasons for delay ( during 2018-19) : From thhe start of construction of Suntec’s IT building, the construction progress is as per the timeline. The 14+3 storeyed IT building of Suntec is under construction. It is a pre fab structure. Out of 14 floor 9 floors are completed. Apart from the 14 floors, the building has ground and two basement floors. Balance works are progressing at the site and the project is expected to complete by December, 2019 and facility will be operational then. Page 8 of 48

building has ground and two basement floors. Balance works are progressing at the site and the project is expected to complete by December, 2019 and facility will be operational then. Page 8 of 48

DC Cochin SEZ has recommended the request of the Developer for extension of Formal Letter of Approval for a period of one year from 16.5.2019 to 15.05.2020. 91.2(vi) _ Request of M/s. Electronics Technology Parks Kerala (ETP V) for further extension of the validity period of formal approval, granted for setting up of sector specific ITATES SEZ at Pallipuram and Veiloor Village, Trivandrum, Kerala for a further period of one year beyond 15.05.2019 up to 15.05.2020, Name of the Developer : Electronics Technology Parks —Kerala (ETP SEZ-V) Sector s ITATES Location : Pallipuram and Veiloor Village, ‘Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala Extension 4 Formal approval to the developer was granted on 16.05.2012 and the SEZ was notified on 13.02.2013. The developer has been granted four extensions and last extension of validity period of LoA was up to 15.05.2019, The developer has requested for further extension for another one year i.e. upto15.05,2020. Present Progress a) Details of Business plan:- S.No | Type of Cost Proposed Investment ( Rs. in Lakhs ) [1 | Land Cost 10800 (as provided in SEZ application) 2 Construction Cost_| 75000 (as provided in SEZ application Total 85800 b) Total Investment & incremental investment since last extension:~ | | Type of Cost Total Investment made | Incremental investment since last extension No so far (Rs. In Lakhs) up| (Rs.

©) Details of physical progress till date SN] Authorised Activity | % completion up | % completion during | Deadline for ° to March, 2019 | one year completion of 2018-19) balance work. [1 [T10KV Substation [700 I'S Completed 2 | 20 lakhs litres a a Completed Water sump d) Steps taken during 2018-19 such as submission for permissions i, MoU executed with Nissan Digital India LLP for 30 acres of land with first right of revival for adjacent 40 acres of land at Technocity. ii, To set up Space Technology Centre for excellence at 16.07 acres of land at Technocity , VSSC iii, 1069 digital substation which caters to entire Technocity project completed. iv. The 20 lakhs litre water sump is completed e) Reasons for delay ( during 2018-19) : i, The developer stated that there were some local issues with private property there. This is getting resolved through intervention at the highest level. DC, Cochin SEZ has recommended the request of the Developer for extension of Formal Letter of Approval for a period of one year from 16,5.2019 to 15.05.2020. ‘The request is placed before BOA for its consideration. Item No.

mended the request of the Developer for extension of Formal Letter of Approval for a period of one year from 16,5.2019 to 15.05.2020. ‘The request is placed before BOA for its consideration. Item No. 91.3 Requests for extension of LoP beyond 3" Year onwards (six proposals) © Asper Rule 18(1) of the SEZ Rules, the Approval Committee may approve or reject a proposal for setting up of Unit in a Special Economic Zone. © Cases for consideration of extension of Letter of Permission (LoP)s i.r.0 units in SEZs are governed by Rule 19(4) of SEZ Rules. © Rule 19(4) states that an LoP shall be valid for one year. First Proviso grants power to DCs for extending the LoP not exceeding 2 years. Second Proviso grants further power to DCs for extending the LoP for one more year but subject to the condition that two-thirds of activities including construction, relating to the setting up of the Unit is complete and a Chartered Engineer’s certificate to this effect is submitted by the entrepreneur. © Extensions beyond 3“ year (in cases where two-third activities are not complete) and 4" year are granted by BoA. © BoA can extend the validity for a period of one year at a time. There is no time limit up to which the Board can extend the validity. Page 10 of 48

re not complete) and 4" year are granted by BoA. © BoA can extend the validity for a period of one year at a time. There is no time limit up to which the Board can extend the validity. Page 10 of 48

91.3()) Request of M/s. Gaston Energy India Pvt. Ltd. a unit in M/s. Mahindra World City Jaipur) Ltd., Multi Product SEZ at Village Kalwara, Tehsil-Sanganer, Jaipur for extension of Letter of Permission (LoP) for a further period of six months ie. upto 10.12.2019, © Name of Unit © LOP issued on (Date) © Nature of business of the unit * No. of Extensions * Request Present Progress: a) Details of Business Plan: : M/s, Gaston Energy India Pvt. Ltd. 2 11,06.2014 : Manufacturing of Valve Regulated Acid Batteries with the installed capacity of 01 million KVAH per year i.e. 10,00,000 pes, 2V500 AH Monoblock or 12V100 AH Battery : Three extensions (Last extension granted by BoA for 2 years upto 10.06.2019) : For further extension for six months i.e. upto 10.12.2019 Les] SrNo | TypeofCost__| Proposed Investment (Rs, In crore 1 शत 2 ॒ ऊ_ऋऊोऊ [ 2 Construction cost es ] [3 Plant & Machin« ey | |]] [4 | Other Overheads [0.50 | Total [7.00 b) Incremental Investment made so far and incremental investment since last extension: "| No ‘Type of Cost Total Investment | Incremental Investment made so far (Rsin | since last extension (Rs Cr in Cr) [1 | Cand cost 2.33 NIL. 2. | Material Procurement for 0.80 0.80 construction 3._| Service cost [040020 +S [4 | Machinery ————it 2.00 2.00 | 5. | Other overheads [0.06 0.01 Total [ 5.59 3.

3 [Approval ofCTOfromPCB[ कर | 50 Aug, 2019) [6 [Completion of construction | 80 | 80 Jun, 2019 7_[nstallation of machineries | 50/_ 50 __ 100, 2019 _ 8 Trial production [so | 50 ___ June, 2019 [i | ‘Commercial production & || [| = | ‘Aug-Sep, 2019 Export [16 [Export orders Inhand Detailed Reasons for Del: ‘The unit has stated that first consignment for export from the SEZ factory is ready for export, however due to SGS pre-shipment inspection requirement and also stringent quality control;

ns for Del: ‘The unit has stated that first consignment for export from the SEZ factory is ready for export, however due to SGS pre-shipment inspection requirement and also stringent quality control; this being very first export from the factory, they seek extension for further two months to execute export documentation for cargo, Unit has further mentioned that they had planned to build two plants: Domestic Tariff Area (DTA) for domestic sales and exports- Unit has stated that this plant has been operational for the last two years, exporting to Nigeria, UAC, Kenya, Yamen, China & Iran, In addition they also sell to the Indian domestic market from the DTA plant, this is full production already Special Economic Zone (SEZ)- Unit has stated that they had planned to start their SEZ unit and move their export orders to this facility. They are witnessing a business growth and it has already become imperative to move their export orders to their new SEZ plant. However, after last extension of LoA, they worked hard to meet the target date of 10.06.2019 but due to various reasons they are running behind time and trial production has already started. Besides they have already started.

ion of LoA, they worked hard to meet the target date of 10.06.2019 but due to various reasons they are running behind time and trial production has already started. Besides they have already started. Besides they have already started work in earnest moving ahead rapidly with first export shipment from SEZ plant. Unit has mentioned following steps taken by them for implementation of unit:- ayaene They have consent to Establish from Rajasthan Pollution Control Board already. They have constructed factory shed. All the machines have been imported and reached to the site already. All the raw materials have been ordered for full scale production. They have received purchase order for export Trial production has started and quality control and analysis is ongoing. Further the unit has mentioned that they seek the indulgence of the BoA to accept their confirmed time frame of starting the export by 30.09.2019 and they are already manufacturing ‘State of the Art’ products in their DTA plant under technical assistance from their foreign partners who are already manufacturing the same products under the same Gaston Brand Name in their two Chinese Plants and enjoy a strong reputation in all or their chosen export markets. ‘They are successfully exporting from their DTA plant. They plant to move this production to SEZ. Steady flow of export orders are already in hand and being executed at their DTA facility. Page 12 of 48

y are successfully exporting from their DTA plant. They plant to move this production to SEZ. Steady flow of export orders are already in hand and being executed at their DTA facility. Page 12 of 48

Recommendation by DC:- DC, NSEZ has recommended the extension of LoP for a further period of six months beyond 10.06.2019. 930) ‘Request of M/s, Bremels Rubber Industries Pvt. Ltd., a unit in Plot No. 12 of M/s. Aspen Infrastructure Ltd. SEZ, Padubidri, Udupi for extension in the validity period of Letter of Approval beyond 26.06.2019 for a further period of one year i.e. up to 25.06.2020. © Name of Unit © LOA issued on (Date) © Nature of business of the unit : M/s. Bremels Rubber Industries Pvt. Ltd, 6.06.2013 : (i) Solid tyres for Heavy Engineering Industries (ii) Automotive support components and allied products for Heavy Engineering Sectors * No. of Extensions 2 Three extensions by DC, CSEZ and two extensions by BoA. © Request : For further extension for one year upto 25.06.2020 Present Progress: (a) Details of Business plan: SINo. | Type of Cost Proposed Investment (Rs. in crores) a है Land 3.461 [ 2 | [Building =i [15366 | 3. Electrical & Fittings 2.310 4, | Machinery-Impors | 437 is) Machinery-Indigenous | Total 29.067 (b) Incremental Investment made so far and incremental investment since last extension: 81. No. ‘Type of Cost Total investment Incremental made so far Investment since last (In Rs. crores) extension: (in Rs. crores) [1] Land 3.461 | ७ 0.

remental investment since last extension: 81. No. ‘Type of Cost Total investment Incremental made so far Investment since last (In Rs. crores) extension: (in Rs. crores) [1] Land 3.461 | ७ 0. | [2 | Building 15.106 2.09 3 Electrical & Fittings [isi 0.025 4 ‘Machinery- Imports 1.38 || 0 | | 5 | Machinery- Indigenous 1.98 0.039 Total 23.737 | आह | (54 Page 13 of 48

(c)__ Details of physical progress till da | No. Activity Acompletion | %completion | Deadline for duringlast one | completion of year balance work [1 _| Land & Building 99% 3% 17.08.2019 [2 [Machinery 98% 8% 1,08.2019 Detailed reasons for delay:- M/s Bremels Rubber Industries Pvt. Ltd. informed that the machinery required for first phase of production has been commissioned and that their plant is now ready for commercial production, However, they are unable to do so as permanent power supply from the Developer is still awaited, Deposit for 600 kVA of power has been made to the Developer and required set of drawings also has been submitted before the Electrical Inspectorate, Goverment of Kamataka for approval. As it may take some more time to obtain these, they have sought extension in the validity of LoA for a period of one more year i.e, from 26,06.2019-25.06.2020. Recommendation by DC: DC, CSEZ has recommended the proposal for extension of LoP. The request is placed before BOA for its consideration, 913(ii) Request of M/s.

r i.e, from 26,06.2019-25.06.2020. Recommendation by DC: DC, CSEZ has recommended the proposal for extension of LoP. The request is placed before BOA for its consideration, 913(ii) Request of M/s. Raghukaushal Textile Pvt Ltd in the Apparel Park SEZ, Khokhra, Ahmedabad for extension of Letter of Permission (LOP) beyond 24.07.2019for 1 year upto 24.07.2020. © [1.07 issued on (date) 26/07/2017. Nature of business of the Unit : Export of Home Textiles & Textile Articles © No of Extensions: 1 year by DC Apparal Park SEZ. © LOP valid upto (date) 24/07/2019 © Request: For further extension for 1 year, up to (date) 23.07.2020. Present Progress: (a) Details of Business plan: [SI. No. | Type of Cost Proposed Investment (Rs. in crores) [1 [Land Rs.3.73, 2 [Buildmg | Rs.5.20 3 [Machinery (| Rs.1.47 Total | 72510.40 | Page 14 of 48

0% [ | |__| Ground Floor) 2, | Brickwork & 80% 80% September-2019 Plaster work [> | Plumbing & 50% | | October-2019 Electrical work 4, | Flooring & 40% 40% November-2019 Finishing work 5. | Plot Development | | 20% December-2019 & Other Ancillary work Detailed reasons for delay:- As informed by DC, KASEZ the said construction plan was approved very late by GIDC and they got final permission on the plan on 02.07.2018. They immediately started construction upon receipt of approval and they are on schedule to finish construction by this year ending. The unit states that the Capital Goods order under process & procurement & installation will complete immediately after completion of construction work. Recommendation by DC : DC, KASEZ has stated that as per the provisions of Rule 19(4) of the SEZ Rules, 2006.The said unit has not completed 2/3 of the activities including construction, relating to setting up of unit till date, Therefore, the said application by the unit requesting for extension of LoA is to be taken up by the BoA for suitable consideration, DC further states that the unit has submitted an affidavit dated 21.06.2019 stating that the construction work of Ground Floor (production floor) is likely to be completed by December, 2019 and the production is also likely to be commenced by end of December, 2019. DC, KASEZ has recommended the request of extension of LOP for a period of One year up to24.07.2020. The request is placed before BoA for its consideration. Page 15 of 48

ed by end of December, 2019. DC, KASEZ has recommended the request of extension of LOP for a period of One year up to24.07.2020. The request is placed before BoA for its consideration. Page 15 of 48

91.3¢v) Request of M/s, BEML Ltd, a unit in KIADB: Aerospace SEZ located at Bangalore, Karnataka for extension of validity of Letter of Approval (Lo) beyond 05.01.2019 for a period of one year i.e. upto 05.01.2020. © Name of Unit : M/s, BEML Ltd, © LOA issued on (Date) : 06.01.2012 © Nature of business of the unit : Aerospace mechanical Components © No. of Extensions : extensions by DC, CSEZ and two extensions by BoA © Request : For further extension upto 05.01.2020 Present Progress: (a) Details of Business plan: cual No. ‘Type of Cost [Proposed Investment (Rs. in crores) [1 | Land 51.26 2. Construction cost [250 Total [301.26 | (b) Incremental Investment made so far and incremental investment since last extension: | | No. | Type of Cost Total investment Incremental (ins. crores) | Investment since last extension Cin Rs, crores) [1 शव [3126 | Nil 2. Construction | 09 | Nil 3___ | Material procurement 13.00 | का | [4 _| Statutory fees ete 0.78 [Nis 3 Total | ७.9 | का | ©) Details of physical progress till date:- Activity % completion | % completion | Deadline for during last one | completion of ear balance work Land, construction a P| Until of compound wall, completion of a machinery and other| City Civil Court statutory fees etc proceedings Detailed reasons for delay:- M/s.

ion of ear balance work Land, construction a P| Until of compound wall, completion of a machinery and other| City Civil Court statutory fees etc proceedings Detailed reasons for delay:- M/s. BEML Limited informed that Civil and PEB works of their unit came to a standstill when the Civil/PEB works executing contractor invoked arbitration clause. Issues Page 16 of 48

were heard and Arbitration award was passed by Arbitration Centre of Kamataka High Court on 20.08.2016. Contractor ~ M/s. URC — sent Notice on 14.11.2016 challenging this Award before the City Civil Court, Bangalore (Nos. 175 & 176 dated 16.11.2016) Two suits (Civil & PEB works separately) have been filed by the contractor. BEML has filed objections and appeals, The court proceedings are in progress, DC, CSEZ has recommended the proposal for extension of LoP. 91.3(v) Request of M/s. ET Elastomer Technik Pvt Ltd in the Electronic Park SEZ located at Gandhinagar for extension of validity of Letter of Permission (LOP) w.e.f. 13.03.2019 for 1 year upto 12.03.2020. * Name of the unit: ET Elastomer Technik Pvt.

in the Electronic Park SEZ located at Gandhinagar for extension of validity of Letter of Permission (LOP) w.e.f. 13.03.2019 for 1 year upto 12.03.2020. * Name of the unit: ET Elastomer Technik Pvt. Ltd. * 1.07 issued on (date): 15.03.2016. © Nature of business of the Unit :Silicon Moulded Articles/Parts, Parts of Sparking Plugs, Part of Automotive Lighting equipment, Buds of Earphones, Cap of Radio Transmitter in tanks, Enkopplungsring for parking sensors, Connector for cables, Rubber insulated electric conductors etc. © No of Extensions: 01 (one) by DC, KASEZ upto 13.03.2018, ¢ 1.07 was valid upto (date) 13.03.2018 © Request: For further extension for 1 year, up to2.03.2020. Present Progress: (०0 Details of Business plan: SINo. | Type of Cost Proposed Investment (RS, in crores [1 [Cand Acquisition a _| 2 [Construction of 3 domes (First Phase) |] उक | 3 1901 of six new machine ey | [* | Construction of 2 domes (Second Phase CL 8 after 3 years 5 [Import of six new machine es _ै| [Pot 90g (व) Incremental Investment made so far and incremental investment since last extension: SL.No. | Type of Cost [Total investment | Incremental Investment made so far (Rs cr) _ | since last extension (Rs cr) [1 खत pss sd Total 1.35 | Page 17 of 48,

investment since last extension: SL.No. | Type of Cost [Total investment | Incremental Investment made so far (Rs cr) _ | since last extension (Rs cr) [1 खत pss sd Total 1.35 | Page 17 of 48,

Detailed reasons for delay:~ The unit has submitted that due to unforeseen circumstances in the international market and medical emergency of their Promoter they could not move their application ahead. The unit has stated that in 2018 they submitted plan to GIDC for approval which took a long period (almost a year) for said approval and they could be able to get letter for payment of scrutiny fees on 16.04.2019. And now, they are very much interested to start the project which will generate employment and foreign exchange earnings for the country and accordingly requested to grant extension of validity of LoA. They have also offered/sanctioned a loan from bank and also submitted sanction letter from Bank of Baroda. DC, KASEZ has stated that as on date; unit could not be able to start the construction. Hence, the condition of “Completion of 2/3" activities” is not fulfilled and accordingly; the same will not be covered under the 2 proviso to said Rule 19 (4) under which the Development Commissioner may grant further extension of one year.

3" activities” is not fulfilled and accordingly; the same will not be covered under the 2 proviso to said Rule 19 (4) under which the Development Commissioner may grant further extension of one year. Hence, unit's request is submitted to BOA for suitable consideration in terms of 3" proviso to Rule 19 (4) of SEZ Rules underwhich BOA may grant extension for a further period not exceeding one year, at a time. DC KASEZ has recommended the request of extension of LOP for a period of One year up to 12.03.2020, The request is placed before BoA for its consideration. 91.3(vi) Request of M/s. Omni Lens Pvt Ltdin the Electronic Park SEZ, located at Gandhinagar for extension of Letter of Permission (LOP) beyond 01.09.2019 for 1 year upto 31.08.2020. © Name of the unit: M/s, Omni Lens Pvt. Ltd. © LoP issued on (date): 04.09.2015. © Nature of business of the Unit :1) Electronic Equipments used in Opthalmic & Dental Industries; and 2) Medical Devices like IOL (Intra Ocular Lens) & Lens Delivery Systems etc. © No of Extensions: 02 (two) extensions by DC KASEZ upto 02.09.2018 and 01 (one) by BOA upto 01.09.2019. © LOP valid upto (date) 01.09.2019 © Request: For further extension for 1 year, up to 31.08.2020. Page 18 of 48

2 (two) extensions by DC KASEZ upto 02.09.2018 and 01 (one) by BOA upto 01.09.2019. © LOP valid upto (date) 01.09.2019 © Request: For further extension for 1 year, up to 31.08.2020. Page 18 of 48

Present Progress: (a) Details of Business plan: SI.No. | Type ofCost______| Proposed Investment (Rs. in crores [1 [Lana [mH 2 Factory Building [5.00 S—~*TMS a 7 _] (b) Incremental Investment made so far and incremental investment since last extension: SI.No. | Type of Cost Total investment | Incremental Investment made so far (In | since last extension Rs crores) Cin Rs crores [1 | Land 2.74 || की | | 2 | Factory Building 3.11 2.45 Total [| 585 [as id (c )Details of physical progress till date:- P| No. | Activity % % Deadline for completion | completion | completion of during last | balance work ‘one year | 1. ] Factory Building 70 | 40 | Dec 2019 [ 2. [| Plant Machiner Nil Nil Mar,2020. Detailed reasons for delay:- ‘The unit has submitted that “they had a break of more than one month from expiry of LOA dated 01.09.18 and later got the permission for tax paid procurement to continue work on dtd.13.10.18. Meanwhile, labour shifted to another site & work got slowed down. Thereafter, started Navratri, Dussehra & Diwali festival season, labour were not available upto third week of Nov,2018. LOA got approved on 13.11.18, Labour is not under their control & work as per their convenience. They have approximately seven months for completion of construction work.

upto third week of Nov,2018. LOA got approved on 13.11.18, Labour is not under their control & work as per their convenience. They have approximately seven months for completion of construction work. Also civil work got delayed due to flat slab of one feet took long time for curing as advised by Architect, resulted in delay in Construction work”, Recommendation by DC : DC KASEZ has recommended the request of extension of LOP for a period of One year up to 31.08.2020. ‘The request is placed before BoA for its consideration. Page 19 of 48

91.3(vii) Request of M/s. JBF Petrochemicals Limited, a unit in Mangalore SEZ at Mangalore, Bangalore for extension of LoP beyond 15" September, 2019 © LoP issued : 16" September, 2011. ‘© Nature of Business of the unit: Purified Terephthalic Acid (PTA) & Polyethylene Terephthate (PET) © No. of Extensions : 7 (seven) extensions up to 15" September, 2019 © Request: For further extension for one year upto1 5.09.2020 Present Progress : ‘The unit already invested Rs, 5990 crores in the PTA plant from inception and Rs. 387 crores from the last extension period, At this point of time, the overall project is 99.6% complete and expected to finish by end April 2020. The mechanical testing process has almost completed and simultaneously they have done individual equipment commissioning also. (a) Progress in terms of completion of work: S. | Description | Status on last LoA date | Current Status No % of work | % of work | % of work | % of work completed | yet to be | completed | yet to be completed completed __1.

idual equipment’s finished 3. | Nitrogen PSA Commissioned 4._ | FWsystem Commissioned 5.__ | 6 Nos of bagging machine Ready for trial run [6 | Cooling Water System Commissioned Page 20 of 48

%. Insulation & Paining Completed | Commercial production 30.04.2020 Reason for delay: (i) ‘The project was initiated with the technology given by Invista (Du Pont). After 1 year, British Petroleum offered to sell its superior state of the art technology which ‘was accepted by the unit, (ii) The unit has faced excessive delay in supply of some imported and indigenous equipments/machinaries. Some of the most important titanium cladded distillation columns from L&T were delayed because of IR problems (strike) to the tune of over 6 months despite L&T shifting half made vessel to some other place to avoid IR issues. Finally, vessel landed at site just before monsoon, which further delayed erection of the vessel followed by delay in piping. (iii) The reactor which is the heart of the mother plant was delayed by TSM of South Korea by over six months as company became sick and closed down. Their reactor was the last vessel TSM made with considerable delay, (iv) Strike by their own employees recruited under ‘Project Disposed Family’ scheme by Govt, of Karnataka to the tune of two months. (v) Delay in release of payment by bankers/consortium, (vi) Delay in their financial restructuring. Although JBF has made substantial investment of Rs.

Govt, of Karnataka to the tune of two months. (v) Delay in release of payment by bankers/consortium, (vi) Delay in their financial restructuring. Although JBF has made substantial investment of Rs. 5990 crore in setting up the Unit, it is understood that despite the six extensions (7 years) already given to the Unit, the financial stress of the Unit is still continuing and the Unit is still not in a position to commence production. It is also understood that the Unit has to pay pending dues to the tune of around Rs. 190 crore to the developer in respect of water charges, land lease rental, Right of Way (RoW) charges, Zone O&M charges ete. Further, out of the total investments of Rs. 387 crore made by the Unit from the last LoA extension, Rs. 261 crore is against borrowing cost (interest) and very less has been spent on plant & machinery. The Unit is finding difficulties to give salaries to its employees for the last two years and was selling scraps to DTA for their earnings. ‘Their case is akin to Still birth with remote chances of revival or survival and there is a doctrine in tort law "Res ipsa loquitur" (Latin), which means "the thing speaks for itself’, Going by this doctrine a visit to the plant would reflect the current state of affairs especially given the fact that this is a "Open to Sky" chemical plant and Mangalore being a coastal place already scaffoldings supporting the machinery has started rusting and allowing the plant to commence production could be a public hazard also especially

ical plant and Mangalore being a coastal place already scaffoldings supporting the machinery has started rusting and allowing the plant to commence production could be a public hazard also especially given the inflammable propensity of this Zone being primarily a Petrochemical one. Moreover the plant is occupying around 10% of the zone's processing area and already the revenues are tight to run this zone and on the top of it this unit occupying roughly 10% area and not paying O&M charges coupled with 20% of processing area still lying unoccupied thereby not generating any revenue, it is very difficult to maintain even the basic amenities like proper security etc. that too in a sensitive, vulnerable & inflammable surroundings. Page 21 of 48

91.46) In view of the foregoing as such, it is not advisable to grant any more extension to the Unit. The request is placed before BoA for its consideration. Item No.91.4 Proposal for setting up of new SEZ (FTWZ) (One Proposal) Request of M/s. Integrated Chennai Business Park (India) Private Limited seeking formal approval for setting up of a Free Trade Warehousing Zone (FTWZ) at Vallur & Edyanchavadi Villages in Ponneri Taluk, Thiruvallur District, Tamil Nadu over an area of 50.49 hectares (124.765 Acres). Documents required for setting up of new SEZ for the consideration of the BoA and grant of LoA:- li: | Conditions/Documents required aes | N. A.

adu over an area of 50.49 hectares (124.765 Acres). Documents required for setting up of new SEZ for the consideration of the BoA and grant of LoA:- li: | Conditions/Documents required aes | N. A. | Documents required for setting up of SEZ in terms of Rule 3 of SEZ Rules, 2006; (| Completed Form A (with enclosures) Yeu, provided a) Total Proposed Investments + Rs, 24,770 (Lakhs) ‘b) Incase of FDI amount & Source of origin : Nil ¢) Proposed Employment 2. 1500 (in Nos.) 0 Proposed Exports £_ Rs. 7,000 (Crores) ‘DC's Inspection Report ‘Yeu, provided (iii) | State Government's recommendation ‘Yes, provided (iv) | Recommendation for National Security Clearance (NSC) from Ministry of Home | DC has stated that Affairs as per Rule 3 of SEZ Rules, 2006 based on self declaration of “the developer NSC may ot be required | Minimum requirements in terms of Rule 5 of SEZ Rules, 2006: हु Fulfitiment of minimum fand area (le. 40 hectares for FTWZ) requirement in terms | तक of the Rule 5 of the SEZ Rules, 2006 A C.

red | Minimum requirements in terms of Rule 5 of SEZ Rules, 2006: हु Fulfitiment of minimum fand area (le. 40 hectares for FTWZ) requirement in terms | तक of the Rule 5 of the SEZ Rules, 2006 A C. | Details to be furnished for issue of notification for declaration of an area as SEZ in terms of Rule 7 of SEZ Rules, 2006: Certificate from the concerned State Government or its authorized agency stating that the Developer(s) have; Legal possession Irrevocable rights to develop the said area as SEZ, ‘Yes, provided that the said area is free from all encumbrances ‘Where the Developer has leasehold right over the identified area, the lease shall be for | NA period not less than twenty years (as per sale deeds, land is in possession of the develop ‘The identified area shall be Contiguous, Vacant and No public thoroughfare Yes, Tahsildar has certified the same Page 22 of 48

DC, MEPZ, SEZ has recommended the proposal for formal approval. The proposal is placed before the BoA for consideration. Item No. 91.5 Requests for co-developer (five proposals) 91.5(i) Request of M/s. Phoenix Infobuild India Pyt. Ltd. for co-developer status in M/s. Phoenix Spaces Pvt. Ltd. SEZ at Sy. No. 285 (P), Puppalguda Village, Gandipet District, Telangana for development, operation and maintenance of the SEZ. and other activities. The above mentioned SEZ stands notified on 17.01.2019 over an area of 5.77 hectares, M/s. Phoenix Infobuild India Pvt. Ltd.

or development, operation and maintenance of the SEZ. and other activities. The above mentioned SEZ stands notified on 17.01.2019 over an area of 5.77 hectares, M/s. Phoenix Infobuild India Pvt. Ltd. has submitted a proposal for becoming a co-developer in the aforesaid SEZ for construction of IT/ITES building and operating and maintaining the facility within the framework of SEZ. in an area of 1.214 hectares. As informed by DC, VSEZ, M/s. Phoenix Infobuild India Pvt. Ltd. is a joint venture company between M/s, Phoenix Infratech (India) Pvt. Ltd. (PIPL) and M/s. Verus Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Singapore with PIPL presently holding 49.90% and Verus holding 50.10% ownership in the company on a fully diluted basis. In accordance with the terms agreed between the parties, Verus intends to acquire 100% ownership in the company subject to applicable law including the provisions of the SEZ Act and the rules made thereunder. Co-developer agreement dated 21.05.2019 entered into with the developer has been provided. ‘The proposed amount of investment by the co-developer in the SEZ is Rs. 290 crores, has submitted ॥ proposal for becoming a co-developer in the aforesaid SEZ for development, operation and maintenance of the SEZ and other activities. DC, VSEZ has recommended the proposal 91.5(ii) Request of M/s. Phoenix IT Hub Pvt. Ltd. for co-developer status in M/s. Phoenix Tech Zone Pvt. Limited SEZ at Sy. No.

f the SEZ and other activities. DC, VSEZ has recommended the proposal 91.5(ii) Request of M/s. Phoenix IT Hub Pvt. Ltd. for co-developer status in M/s. Phoenix Tech Zone Pvt. Limited SEZ at Sy. No. 115/35, Nanakramguda Village, Serilingampally District, Telangana for development, operation and maintenance of the SEZ and other activities. ‘The above mentioned SEZ stands notified on 17.03.2017 over an area of 2.02 hectares, Mis.Phoenix IT Hub Pvt. Ltd, has submitted a proposal for becoming a co-developer in the aforesaid SEZ for construction of IT/ITES building and operating and maintaining the facility within the framework of SEZ in an area of 0.49 hectares. As informed by DC, VSEZ. the company is a 100% subsidiary of M/s. Phoenix Tech Zone Pvt. Ltd. Page 23 of 48,

Co-developer agreement dated 22.06.2019 entered into with the developer has been provided. ‘The proposed amount of investment by the co-developer in the SEZ.is Rs. 218 crores. has submitted 4 proposal for becoming a co-developer in the aforesaid SEZ for development, operation and maintenance of the SEZ and other activities. DC, VSEZ has recommended the proposal ‘The request is placed before BOA for its consideration. .5(iii) Request of M/s. Phoenix SEZ Spaces Pvt. Ltd. for co-developer status in M/s. Phoenix Tech Zone Pvt. Limited SEZ at Sy. No. 115/35, Nanakramguda Village, Serilingampally District, Telangana for development, operation and maintenance of the SEZ and other activities. ‘The above mentioned SEZ stands notified on 17.03.2017 over an area of 2.02 hectares. M/s. Phoenix SEZ Spaces Pvt.

elangana for development, operation and maintenance of the SEZ and other activities. ‘The above mentioned SEZ stands notified on 17.03.2017 over an area of 2.02 hectares. M/s. Phoenix SEZ Spaces Pvt. Ltd, has submitted a proposal for becoming a co-developer in the aforesaid SEZ for construction of IT/ITES building and operating and maintaining the facility within the framework of SEZ in an area of 0.45 hectares. As informed by DC, VSEZ the company is 100% subsidiary of M/s. Phoenix Tech Zone Pvt. Ltd. Co-developer agreement dated 22.06.2019 entered into with the developer has been provided. ‘The proposed amount of investment by the co-developer in the SEZ is Rs. 201 crores. has submitted a proposal for becoming a co-developer in the aforesaid SEZ for development, operation and maintenance of the SEZ and other activities. DC, VSEZ has recommended the proposal The request is placed before BOA for its consideration, 91.5) Request of M/s. ANSR Global Corporation Pvt. Ltd for co-developer status in the M/s. Laxmi Infobahn Pvt. Ltd SEZ at 59. No. 107 (P), Kokapet Village, GandipetMandal, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana for development of the SEZ area specifically to undertake the authorized operations of conversion of warm shell buildings into fully fitted office spaces and to lease the built-up space in the SEZ as contracted ‘The above mentioned SEZ stands notified on 08.11.2016 over an area of 2.22 hectares. M/s.ANSR Global Corporation Pvt.

ly fitted office spaces and to lease the built-up space in the SEZ as contracted ‘The above mentioned SEZ stands notified on 08.11.2016 over an area of 2.22 hectares. M/s.ANSR Global Corporation Pvt. Ltd has submitted a proposal for becoming a co- developer in the aforesaid SEZ for development of the SEZ area specifically to undertake the authorized operations of conversion of warm shell buildings into fully fitted office spaces and to lease the built-up space in the SEZ as contracted. M/s. GAR & Son Builders LLP was granted approval as a co-developer in the above Page 24 of 48

SEZ on 19.07.2017 to invest, further develop, internal and external infrastructure, lease of premises and undertake operation and maintenance of Tower-III and Tower-IV of the aforesaid SEZ on a land admeasuring 2.63 acres out of the entire notified land measuring 5.475 acres. As informed by DC, VSEZ, the developer now intends to further lease the aforesaid premises to ANSR who intends to become a Co-developer for a space of 2,08,221sq.ft comprising of the (a) 81,852 sq.ft. in 14" and 15" Floor in Tower 4; (b) 1,23,369 sq.ft. in 110 to 13" Floors in Tower 4 and (०) 3,000 sq.ft. in ground floor lobby. The proposed amount of investment by the co-developer in the SEZ is Rs.

n 14" and 15" Floor in Tower 4; (b) 1,23,369 sq.ft. in 110 to 13" Floors in Tower 4 and (०) 3,000 sq.ft. in ground floor lobby. The proposed amount of investment by the co-developer in the SEZ is Rs. 72.88 Crores, A Co-developer agreement dated 1* April, 2019 has been entered into between the three parties. As per the co-developer agreement, the developer does not have any objection to recognize ANSR as a co-developer for the scheduled area, provided consideration is received by GAR LLP from the developer in the form of rentals under a lease agreement for the scheduled area to be entered into with the developer and subject to ANSR obtaining a co- developer license and LoA as per SEZ Regulations. DC, VSEZ has recommended the proposal The request of the co-developer is submitted for consideration of BoA. 91.5() Request of M/s. Sak Synergy Realty Pvt, Ltd. for Co-developer status in the IT/ITES SEZ of M/s. ASF Insignia SEZ Pvt. Ltd, at IT/ITES SEZ at Village Gwal Pahari, Gurugram (Haryana). The above mentioned SEZ. stands notified on 17.12.2007 & subsequent Notification dated 27.08,2010 over an area of 19,3028 hectare. The approved demarcation of Processing Area & Non-Processing Area of said SEZ are as under;- Processing Area: 11.5883 Hectare Non-Processing Area: 07.7145 Hectare Total: 19.3028 Hectare M/s, Sak Synergy Realty Private Limited has submitted a proposal for becoming a co- developer in the aforesaid SEZ for Construction, development, operations, management and maintenance of “Office cum Training Centre Facility” to the extent of 3,10,000 Sqft.

oposal for becoming a co- developer in the aforesaid SEZ for Construction, development, operations, management and maintenance of “Office cum Training Centre Facility” to the extent of 3,10,000 Sqft. (FAR), including maintenance / operation / management of electrical and mechanical installations, fire detection and fire-fighting equipment, water supply and waste disposal system and car parking spaces pertaining to said Facility and rendering of security and cleaning services at the said facility, and for providing / leasing spaces / infrastructure so constructed / developed within the Office cum Training Centre Facility to cligible entities and management of such relationship within the SAK Synergy Private Campus Land admeasuring 1.627 Actes (0,6583 Hectares) (as per detailed activity mentioned in Annexure-I) in Non-Processing Area of SEZ. Board of Approval in its meeting held on 16.05.2008, conveyed vide DOC’s letter dated 30.05.2008, had granted approval to M/s. ASF Insignia SEZ Pvt. Ltd., Developer (formerly M/s, Canton Buildwell Pvt. Ltd.) for authorized operations namely ‘Office space not exceeding Page 25 of 48

d 30.05.2008, had granted approval to M/s. ASF Insignia SEZ Pvt. Ltd., Developer (formerly M/s, Canton Buildwell Pvt. Ltd.) for authorized operations namely ‘Office space not exceeding Page 25 of 48

10,000 Sqmt. and Training Centre over an area of 20,000 Sqmt.in Non-Processing Area of the said SEZ. DC, NSEZ has informed that Co-developer agreement dated 28,06.2019 has been entered into with the developer. The proposed amount of investment by the co-developer in the SEZ is Rs.175 Crore. DC, NSEZ has recommended the proposal. Item No, 91.6 Change of Shareholding Pattern/Change of name (four proposals) In terms of DoC’s Instruction No. 89 dated 17.05.2018, re-organization in respect of developer and co-developer including change in shareholding pattern, court approved mergers and de-mergers in case of developer/co-developer are to be undertaken by the Board of Approval. 91.66) Request of M/s. Embassy VIV Infrastructure Management Private Limited a co-developer in M/s Vikas Telecom Private Limited SEZ located in Bangalore for change of name from “Embassy VTV Infrastructure Management Private Ltd” to “VTV Infrastructure Management Private limited”. The above mentioned Co Developer was granted co-developer status on 07.04.2006. ‘The co-developer has requested for approval of name change from Embassy VTV Infrastructure Management Private Ltd to VTV Infrastructure Management Private limited, They have provided Certificate of Incorporation dated 09.01.2019 pursuant to change of name, DC, CSEZ has stated the statutory document for the name change is ROC only and there are

Private limited, They have provided Certificate of Incorporation dated 09.01.2019 pursuant to change of name, DC, CSEZ has stated the statutory document for the name change is ROC only and there are no other changes in Directors or share holding pattern, DC, CSEZ has recommended the proposal. ‘The request is placed before BOA for its consideration, 91.60) Request of M/s. Brookefields Real Estates and Projects Pvt. Ltd SEZ located at Bangalore (Developer) for transfer amalgamation/merger as per the Scheme of Amalgamation, M/s. Brookefields Real Estates and Projects Pvt. 110 was granted Formal Approval on 313.2010 for IT &ITES /BPO/Electronic Hardware at Brookefields, Kundalahalli, Marthahalli Post, Bangalore. Details of shareholding pattern of the company are given below: Page 26 of 48

Shareholding pattern before transfer: Name of shareholder ___| % of shareholding | Brigade Properties Pvt Limited 99.99 Roshin Mathew [001 0 1“ “ “ऑघ " [ [100 Shareholding pattern after transfer : 1) Class A Equity shares ‘Name of shareholder | % of shareholding Brigade Enterprises Ltd. 51.06 Reco Begonia Pte Lid. 49.00 ‘Total | 100.00 2) Class B Equity shares ‘Name of shareholder % of shareholding Reco Begonia Pte Ltd.

of shareholder | % of shareholding Brigade Enterprises Ltd. 51.06 Reco Begonia Pte Lid. 49.00 ‘Total | 100.00 2) Class B Equity shares ‘Name of shareholder % of shareholding Reco Begonia Pte Ltd. 100.00 Total | 100.00 3) Class C Equity shares * ‘Naine of shareholder % of shareholding | | Brigade Enterprises Limited 100.00 Total | 100.00 4) Redeemable Preference shares Name of shareholder % of shareholding Brigade Enterprises Limited 100.00 Total | 100.00 As informed by DC, CSEZ the confirmation order of Scheme of Amalgamation issued by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, RO, Hyderabad on 25.04.2019 has also been furnished by the developer. DC, CSEZ has recommended the proposal The proposal is submitted for consideration of BoA. Page 27 of 48,

91.6(iii) Request of M/s. TSI Business Parks (Hyderabad) Pyt. Ltd, Co-Developer in M/s. TSHC SEZ, IT/ATES SEZ at Nanakramguda Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana for change in Shareholding Pattern of their company. The above mentioned Co-Developer was granted co-developer status on 7.5.2007 for developing total infrastructure in 4.91 Hectares of land in M/s. 7510 Limited IT/ITES SEZ at Nanakramguda Village, Serilingampally Mandal, Ranga Reddy District, Telangana. The SEZ is operational w.e.f. 01.12.2007. Details of shareholding pattern of the company are given below: Shareholding pattern before transfer Name of shareholders No. of shares held Reco Rock Pvt.

The SEZ is operational w.e.f. 01.12.2007. Details of shareholding pattern of the company are given below: Shareholding pattern before transfer Name of shareholders No. of shares held Reco Rock Pvt. Ltd 5,41,95,091 TS Hyderabad 12A 5,41,95,091 Total 10,83,90,182 Fully & compulsorily convertible debentures (FCCD's) Name of shareholders No. of shares held Reco Rock Pvt. Ltd 80,00,000 TS Hyderabad 12A 80,00,000 1,60,00,000 Shareholding pattern after transfer Name of shareholders No. of shares held Millenial Business Park Pvt. Ltd 1,08,390,181, Millenial, Shapoorji Pallonji__ Investment Advisors Pvt. Ltd Total 108,390,182 Fully & compulsorily convertible debentures (FCCD's) [Name of shareholders | _No. of shares held Millenial Business Park Pvt. Ltd 1,60,00,00 Millenial) 1,60,00,000 DC, VSEZ has recommended the proposal. The proposal is submitted for consideration of BoA. Page 28 of 48

91.6) Request of M/s Nalanda Shelter Pvt. Ltd. SEZ Developer, Pune, for approval for change in shareholding pattern of the company. The above mentioned SEZ was granted formal approval on 31.03.2017. The SEZ was notified on 14,03.2018. Details of shareholding patter of the company are given below: Existing shareholding pattern Shareholding pattern after proposed transfer of shares S.No. [Name ~~ of equity] %age _ | Name of equity shareholders | Yeage shareholders | | Reifen Investment | 8.31% | Ascendas Property Fund | 99.99% Services Pvt. Ltd. (India) Pte. Ltd. 2. | Pushpa P Paranjape 16.60% Nominee of Ascendas | 00.01% Property Fund (India) Pte. Lid. 3.

ifen Investment | 8.31% | Ascendas Property Fund | 99.99% Services Pvt. Ltd. (India) Pte. Ltd. 2. | Pushpa P Paranjape 16.60% Nominee of Ascendas | 00.01% Property Fund (India) Pte. Lid. 3. | Purushotiam V Parannjape | 8.31% HUF) | 4. | ShrikantParanjape 8.46% | 5. | ShashankParanjap 8.46% | 6. | Varsha 5 Paranjape 8.31% 7. Meenal 5 Paranjap 8.31% | 8. | Rahul Paranje 8.31% | 9. | AmitParanjap 8.31% __10. | ShahitParanjape | 8.31% | 11. [YashParanjape | 8.31% [Total «| 100% [100% | DC, SEEPZ has informed that BoA in its 82" Meeting held on 4" April, 2018 have approved the proposal of the developer for transfer of share to Xander Investment Management Pte. Ltd. However, as informed by developer arrangement with Xander has been cancelled. ‘Therefore, they have request for above changes in shareholding pattern, ‘Recommendation by DC: DC, SEEPZ SEZ has recommended the proposal. The proposal is submitted for consideration of BoA. Item No. 91.7 Change in Sector/Broad-banding (two proposals) 91.70) Request of M/s. Flextronics Technologies India Private Limited a sector specific SEZ for Electronic Hardware at Sriperumbudur, Tamil Nadu for change in sector to IT/ITES Electronic components & Hardware manufacturing & related services sector. The above mentioned SEZ stands notified over an area of 76.14 hectares, Page 29 of 48

l Nadu for change in sector to IT/ITES Electronic components & Hardware manufacturing & related services sector. The above mentioned SEZ stands notified over an area of 76.14 hectares, Page 29 of 48

The developer has requested for sectoral change from electronic Hardware sector to IT/ITES Electronic components & Hardware manufacturing & related services sector vide Form 0-3 as per Rule 6A(i) of SEZ Rules, 2006. DC, MEPZ has stated that the change in the status of the sector will meet the eligibility criteria of the developer as per Rule 5(2)(ii) of SEZ Rules, 2006 which states that for SEZs to be set up exclusively for electronics hardware and Software (including ITES) the area requirement shall be 10 hectares or more and the built up area shall be minimum of 25,000 sq. mtrs. Since the SEZ falls under category *C’ of Annexure IVA to SEZ Rules, 2006. Reasons for seeking change in sector:~ The business model after Government of India announced make in India Concept, does not intend to benefit manufacturing from SEZ. The developer also intends to de-notify an area of 60.72 hectares which shall be separately taken up on file. Recommended by DC: DC, MEPZ SEZ has recommended the proposal. ‘The request is placed before BOA for its consideration, 91.70) Proposal of M/s. Artha Infratech Pvt. Ltd., Developer at Plot No. 21, Sector-Techzone IV, Greater Noida (Uttar Pradesh) for amendment in sector nomenclature of "Electronic Hardware & Software including 1T/ITES SEZ" into "IT/ITES Sector". M/s. Artha Infratech Pvt.

. 21, Sector-Techzone IV, Greater Noida (Uttar Pradesh) for amendment in sector nomenclature of "Electronic Hardware & Software including 1T/ITES SEZ" into "IT/ITES Sector". M/s. Artha Infratech Pvt. Ltd., Developer had proposed for decrease in area of 5.00 Hectare from the 10.006754 Hectare notified area of the Electronic Hardware & Software including IT/ITES SEZ at Plot No. 21, Sector Techzone IV, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh. It was observed that the resultant area of 5.006754 Hectare, does not comply with the minimum area requirement ie. 10 Hectares for the Electronic Hardware & Software including IT/ITES SEZ, as per the Rule 5(ii) of the SEZ Rules, 2006 and the proposal was referred back to DC, NSEZ. DC, NSEZ requested the developer to submit clarification as to how they will meet the area requirement as prescribed in Rule 501) of the SEZ Rules, 2006, after de-notification of 5 hectare land from the total notified area of 10,006754 hectares. Subsequently, the developer, M/s, Artha Infratech Pvt. Ltd, has submitted a proposal for amendment in sector nomenclature of its "Electronic Hardware & Software including IT/ITES SEZ" at Plot No, 21, Sector Techzone IV, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh, into IT/ITES Sector. The Developer has stated that they did not want to continue its SEZ for Electronic Hardware they required only IT/ITES.

No, 21, Sector Techzone IV, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh, into IT/ITES Sector. The Developer has stated that they did not want to continue its SEZ for Electronic Hardware they required only IT/ITES. Accordingly, after this amendment only IT/ITES Units will be operating, DC, NSEZ has stated that in view of the proposed amendment in sector nomenclature, the developer has also requested to consider its request for de-notification of 5.00 hectare of land from the total notified area of 10,006754 hectares of the said SEZ. Further, that there is no minimum land requirement of ‘IT/ITES’ SEZ. However, the developer needs to construct minimum built up area of 1 lakh sq. mt. within 10 years from the date of notification i.e. 11.05.2011. Page 30 of 48

Keeping in view of above, DC, NSEZ has proposed the following:~ (i) Partial de-notification of 5.00 hectare of land from the total notified area of 10.006754 hectares of the said SEZ, as already recommended by DC, NSEZ vide their letter dated 20.06.2019. (ii) Amendment in sector nomenclature of "Electronic Hardware & Software including IT/ITES SEZ" into "IT/ITES Sector". Further, DC, NSEZ has stated that as per Para 6 of DoC’s clarification letter dated 13.09.2013, ITATES, Electronic Components and Hardware manufacturing, is a single sector and hence this office is of the view that removing “Electronic Hardware & software” from the approved sector may not be change in sector, However, as requested by DoC, the duly filled in form C-3 as per Rule 6A(i) of SEZ Rules, 2006.

ew that removing “Electronic Hardware & software” from the approved sector may not be change in sector, However, as requested by DoC, the duly filled in form C-3 as per Rule 6A(i) of SEZ Rules, 2006. While the request for de-notification is to be processed separately on file, the proposal for change in sector is required to be placed before the Board of Approval. Recommendation of DC: DC, NSEZ has recommended the proposal for consideration of the BoA. The request is placed before BoA for consideration. 91,8 Miscellaneous Cases (Five proposals) 91.8(i) Request of M/s Aarti Industries Limited at (Plot No.Z/103/H) for permission for laying steam pipe rack above ground from Plot No. Z/103/H to Z/111/B inDahej SEZ M/s, Aarti Industries Limited has requested for granting permission for laying proposed ( Seamless Pipe ASTM A106 Gr B Pipeline OD 406.4mm, wall thickness 9.53mm, LRB Insulated) Steam Pipeline from Aarti Industries Limited (Plot No. Z/103/H) to Aarti Industries Limited (Plot No. Z/111/B) at Dahej GIDC/ SEZ within Dahej SEZ land limit, ‘The pipeline will be laid above ground at minimum distance of 6000mm above finished road level. At road crossing location it will be laid at higher level 15000mm and in front of company gate crossing it will be laid at 1200mm underground through FUJI make culvert with close condition. Mis Aarti Industries Limited was issued Letter of Approval on 14.02.2012, as amended from time to time, for setting up a unit in Dahej SEZ to manufacture and export of chemical items under chapter 29 of ITC (HS) code.

es Limited was issued Letter of Approval on 14.02.2012, as amended from time to time, for setting up a unit in Dahej SEZ to manufacture and export of chemical items under chapter 29 of ITC (HS) code. The unit started their commercial production from 15.08.2016 and exported products of Rs. 76.48 Crs in the FY 2018-19. M/s Dahej SEZ Limited, a Developer of Dahej SEZ issued in principal approval to M/s Aarti Industries Limited (ATL) for offering land on RoU subject to certain conditions including M/s AIL has to obtain permission for DC,SEZ/BoA for laying pipe rack in Dahej SEZ area. M/s AIL has to follow the rules and regulation prevailing in SEZ area. M/s AIL has to comply the norms/instruction of GPCB/CPCB and GIDC/DSL. Page 31 of 48

DC, Dahej SEZ has informed that the total length of the proposed steam pipeline from ‘Aarti Industries Limited (Plot No. Z/103/H) to Aarti Industries Limited (Plot No. Z/111/B), Dahej, Tal- Vagra, Bharuch, Gujrat is 750 meters. The proposal was placed before the 91% Approval Committee of Dahej SEZ held on 27.06.2019 and the committee observed that the case would require approval of the Board of Approval. DC, Dahej has stated that the unit submitted Chartered Engineer’s certificate that installed steam supply pipe line from plot no. Z/103/H to Plot no,Z/111/B for 750 mts. in SEZ-II, Dahej utility corridor. The same pipe line will be starting from boiler inside the Plot No.Z/103/H which is 450 mt length. The civil foundation, M.S.

/103/H to Plot no,Z/111/B for 750 mts. in SEZ-II, Dahej utility corridor. The same pipe line will be starting from boiler inside the Plot No.Z/103/H which is 450 mt length. The civil foundation, M.S. structure for pipe rack, CS steam pipe line and its insulation altogether the total project cost is estimated as 1006 Lakhs. Recommendation by DC The proposal of M/s Aarti Industries Limited(Plot No.Z/103/H) for granting permission for laying proposed ( Seamless Pipe ASTM A106 Gr B Pipeline OD 406.4mm, wall thickness 9.53mm, LRB Insulated) Steam Pipeline from Aarti Industries Limited (Plot No. Z/\03/H) to Aarti Industries Limited (Plot No. Z/111/B) at Dahej GIDC/ SEZ within Dahej SEZ land limit, is recommended to the Board of Approval for consideration. ‘The request is placed before BOA for its consideration, 91.8(4i) Request of M/s. Abhiject Ferro Tech Ltd, of APSEZ, Visakhapatnam for import of Ferro Manganese slag for a quantity of 50,000 mts. M's. Abhijeet Ferro Tech Ltd. has been granted LoA on 05.03.2010 for manufacture and export of Ferro Manganese and Silicon Manganese etc. The unit commenced production ‘on 24.03.2012 and hold a valid consent order from the AP PCB upto 31.12.2022 to operate a facility for collection, storage, treatment & transport etc. for Ferro Manganese and Silico Manganese upto a capacity of 2,38,082 TPA and a hazardous waste authorization order issued vide letter dated 01.12.2017. The unit effected exports for a value of Rs.

. for Ferro Manganese and Silico Manganese upto a capacity of 2,38,082 TPA and a hazardous waste authorization order issued vide letter dated 01.12.2017. The unit effected exports for a value of Rs. 1956.78 crores during the 1५ 5 years block period and achieved positive NFE to the tune of Rs, 852.67 crores during this period. The unit was granted extension of SEZ status for a further period of 5 years from 24.03.2017 to 23.03.2022. The unit effected exports for a value of Rs. 2475.06 crores during the period from 2017-18 & 2018-19. ‘The unit requires Ferro Manganese Slag as one of the raw materials for their authorised operations to re-cycle & manufacture Silico Manganese, Earlier, the request of the unit for import of Ferro Manganese Slag was considered and approved by the BoA in its 880 meeting held on 25.02.2019 for a quantity of 50,000 MT based on the NoC given by the MoEF& Climate change. DC, APSEZ has stated that the unit has requested for permission to Import Ferro Manganese Slag for a quantity of 50,000 MT for their authorised operations. The unit also enclosed the Agenda of the 97" meeting of Expert Committee of MoEF (HSM Division) held on 37rd — 4" June, 2019, in which the matter of granting NoC for their unit was examined and stated that their NoC is expected to be received shortly. Page 32 of 48

ittee of MoEF (HSM Division) held on 37rd — 4" June, 2019, in which the matter of granting NoC for their unit was examined and stated that their NoC is expected to be received shortly. Page 32 of 48

As per section 26 of the SEZ Act, BoA needs to grant approval for import to the SEZ Units, if any permission is required under any other Law. Since this item may require permission from MoEF&CC, the present case is being put up as per past practice under Instruction No. 47. DC, APSEZ recommends the request of M/s. Abhijet Ferro Tech Ltd. for import of Ferro Manganese slag for a quantity of 50,000 MTs, subject to submission of NOC from the Ministry of Environment, Forests & Climate change. 91,861) Review of lease period in case of developer, co-developer and units in Special Economic Zones, As per Rule 7(1) of the SEZ Rules, 2006, where the Developer has leaschold rights over the identified area, the lease shall be for a period not less than twenty years.

its in Special Economic Zones, As per Rule 7(1) of the SEZ Rules, 2006, where the Developer has leaschold rights over the identified area, the lease shall be for a period not less than twenty years. As such, there is no upper limit stipulated in the SEZ Act/Rules for the lease period, The Board of Approval in its 65" meeting held on 19.05.2015 while considering the requests for grant of Co-developer status held that approvals for co-developers are subject to the condition that particular terms and conditions of lease agreement/co-developer agreement will not have any bearing on the treatment of the income by way of lease rentals/down payment/premium ete., for the purposes of assessment under the Income Tax Act and Rules. The Assessing Officer, will have the right to examine the taxability of these amounts under the SEZ Act and Income Tax Act and Rules. The Board decided that the lease period be reduced to a period not exceeding 30 years(renewable) in all cases, Further, the BoA in its 66" meeting held on 27.08.2015, noted that the Government of Kerala leases out land for industrial purpose for a period of 90 years, as per its policy and requested to permit for continuation of lease period as envisaged in the lease agreement. The Board decided to restore the period of lease, as per the lease agreement signed between the Developer and the Co-developer.

t for continuation of lease period as envisaged in the lease agreement. The Board decided to restore the period of lease, as per the lease agreement signed between the Developer and the Co-developer. The Board, however, held that this would be applicable in respect of the SEZ projects located in the State of Kerala only and in all other cases, the lease period will continue to be a period not exceeding 30 years (renewable). Department of Commerce has been receiving a number of representations from the developers and co-developers for not reducing the lease period on the ground that the same shall not be applicable in cases where the co-developer approval was granted before 2015; if the lease period would have been 30 years, then they would not have accepted to become the co-developer and that they have been granted loan after consideration of lease period and it was not possible to repay the loan immediately. A Group headed by Shri Baba Kalyani, Chairman M/s. Bharat Forge was constituted by the Department of Commerce to study the Special Economic Zone (SEZ) Policy of India in June, 2018. The Group took into consideration numerous representations received by them from the stakeholders on various issues including that of Raheja group wherein it was suggested that the restriction of 30 years for lease period of co-developer needs to be removed. Since the co-developer is also involved in infrastructure creation and is responsible for Page 33 of 48

gested that the restriction of 30 years for lease period of co-developer needs to be removed. Since the co-developer is also involved in infrastructure creation and is responsible for Page 33 of 48

managing specific operations within the SEZ, discrimination between the developer and co- developer for lease rights should be avoided. ‘The Group held that the developer is prohibited to sell land in zone as per Rule 11(9) of the SEZ Rules, 2006 and can only enter into lease arrangements with stakeholders ०.९. units/co-developers etc. The current practice of 30 years lease is unattractive for potential investors looking to develop zones including associated infrastructure. Therefore, they opt for alternative options or destinations with more generous terms, Hence, flexibility on lease period for units and developers will enable taking a long term view on the project and enable financing for their development. The Group in its final report submitted in 19.11.2018 has recommended that the developer should be allowed flexibility to enter into a long term lease agreement with stakeholders including both the co- developers and units in zones in line with the State Policies.

nded that the developer should be allowed flexibility to enter into a long term lease agreement with stakeholders including both the co- developers and units in zones in line with the State Policies. The recommendations of the Group are under active consideration in consultation with the Department of Revenue and this Department has set up a time frame for execution/implementation of the recommendations of the Group. ‘The matter of renewal of lease deed was also deliberated in this Department in the past on receipt of references from DC, SEEPZ and it emerged that as per Section 34 and 38 of the SEZ Act, 2005 and Rule 6(1)(i) of the SEZ Authority Rules, 2009, the power of lease of lands to the units is vested with the SEZ Authority concerned, Later, a Committee of three 1005 was constituted on 20.07.2018 for uniformity in Administrative/Financial Decision Making Process by Development Commissioners/SEZ Authorities. Along with the other important issues, the matter of standard lease deed was also deliberated by the said Committee. The recommendations of the Committee on standard lease deed are as follows: (a) There is no uniformity in the period of lease agreement. While some zones adopt a 5 years lease period, some have allowed 15 years or 30 years or even 95 years lease period, One of the reasons attributed for a longer lease period is that it facilitates the units in availing loans and credit from Financial Institutions. It also leads to administrative convenience since the lease agreements are to be renewed only once in 15 or 30 years.

t facilitates the units in availing loans and credit from Financial Institutions. It also leads to administrative convenience since the lease agreements are to be renewed only once in 15 or 30 years. Shorter lease period will also lead to frequent registration of the lease deeds and the consequent cost of registration. (b) Allowing longer lease periods should not be harmful to the interest of the zone since the lease deeds have a provision for termination of the lease deed (termination clause) by following the due procedure as prescribed in the deed. Moreover, the LoA and the lease are co-terminus and therefore if the LoA of any unit gets cancelled due to any reason, its lease deed also would automatically get terminated. (c) Considering all these aspects, it has been recommended that the lease period across all the zones should be uniformly for a period of 15 years. This will facilitate units in getting credit facilities, will obviate the need for frequent registration of the lease agreements and the accompanying cost involved and will also lead to administrative convenience. Page 34 of 48

getting credit facilities, will obviate the need for frequent registration of the lease agreements and the accompanying cost involved and will also lead to administrative convenience. Page 34 of 48

(9) It is scen that in some zones there is no insistence on the registration of the lease deeds. It is also observed that while registration of lease deed for plots have been. made mandatory, it is not the case with the registration of lease deed for SDF modules. It is said that once there is no exemption from payment of Registration Charges in some states, the registration of the lease deeds have not been made mandatory by some zones. (०) Committee strongly recommends that all lease deeds should be registered mandatorily, whether the lease is for Plot or SDF modules, Registration gives legal sanctity to the documents and the contents of the agreement would be legally enforceable. Moreover as per the existing provisions of law any agreement relating to an immovable property for a period of more than 11 months has to be necessarily registered, failing which the validity of such agreement would be in question, In view of the recommendations of the Group lead by Shri Baba Kalyani, the recommendations of the Uniformity Committee with the intent of having uniformity across the zones and the objective of having a simple policy in place enabling the co-developers and the units to arrange finance from the Financial Institutions for the sake of ease of doing business, the Board of Approval may consider the following course of action: (i)

ling the co-developers and the units to arrange finance from the Financial Institutions for the sake of ease of doing business, the Board of Approval may consider the following course of action: (i) As stipulated in Rule 11(5) of the SEZ Rules, 2006, the lease rights cease to exist in case of the expiry or cancellation of the Letter of Approval, therefore, the BoA may consider allowing the lease period for developer, co-developer as well as the units to be for a maximum period as per the respective State Government policy. (0). The existing bar of 30 years lease period as laid down by the Board of Approval in its 65" meeting may be dispensed away with, BoA may further consider to make it mandatory to have a registered lease deed inorder to ensure legal sanctity of the documents. (iv) The existing agreements based on 30 years norms may be considered for amendment of documentation of tenure clause. Alternatively, the same could be considered at the time of next renewal. (i 91.8 (iv) Irregularities and compliance issues in the port based SEZ developed by Cochin Port Trust in Puthuvypeen, Ernakulam, District, Kerala. The Puthuvypeen SEZ, developed by Cochin Port Trust was granted Loa on 18,04.2006 and subsequently notified on 02.11.2006 over an area of 285.8413 hectares. Later, three Co- Developers namely M/s Petronet LNG Limited, M/s Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. M/s Indian Oil Corporation Ltd.

bsequently notified on 02.11.2006 over an area of 285.8413 hectares. Later, three Co- Developers namely M/s Petronet LNG Limited, M/s Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd. M/s Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. were granted permission for infrastructural development in the SEZ. As informed by DC, CSEZ, M/s Gas Authority of India Ltd (Later on GAIL (India) Limited) is the only Unit in the Puthuvypeen SEZ issued with LoA dated 27.07.2010 with authorized operation as ‘Regasified LNG transmission and distribution’. The Unit started the operation on 25.08.2013 thereby making the SEZ operational. The validity of LoA was extended by Development Commissioner up to 31.03.2019 considering the fact that if the LoA were not renewed, the Zone would lose the ‘operational’ status. The study of their operational model indicates that there is no scope for achieving positive NFE. However, M/s. GAIL (India) Ltd. has so far not given any cogent. Page 35 of 48

DC, had further stated that the developer had approached their office to grant permission for a tourism project in the SEZ. To ascertain the exact nature of the project and the intended location, a team of officers from their office visited the Zone along with the representatives of the Developer, three Co-Developers and the Unit. The group toured the entire Zone area and the intended project site.

of officers from their office visited the Zone along with the representatives of the Developer, three Co-Developers and the Unit. The group toured the entire Zone area and the intended project site. It was seen that the proposed activity was in the processing area and it breached the contiguity of the Zone, The team also came across some serious lapses in the Puthuvypeen SEZ, which is given below: (0) The Zone is not secured by a compound wall, which is violation of Rule 1 1(2) of SEZ Rules, The main road inside the Zone is being used by the people residing on one side for their daily commuting. (2) The Zone had no contiguity, Two wide thoroughfares and a path cut across the Zone make it different parcels of land, This violates Rule 5(2) (0) (i) and Rule 7(2) of SEZ Rules which mandates Contiguity in the SEZ area, 8) The Co-developer, M/s 100, has not started any work in their area allotted to them, even though the Letter of Approval was issued on 17.06.2011. The authorised operation of M/s 100, is "providing infrastructure facilities such as (1) Development of storage facilities for liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), (ii) Laying inter-connecting pipeline, (ii) setting up an inland LPG container (Tanker) station". (4) Another Co-developer, M/s BPCL — Kochi Refinery, is operating like a Unit without any valid Letter of Approval as a Unit and without fulfilling the NFE obligations.

G container (Tanker) station". (4) Another Co-developer, M/s BPCL — Kochi Refinery, is operating like a Unit without any valid Letter of Approval as a Unit and without fulfilling the NFE obligations. As per the authorised operations approved by BoA, M/s BPCL is to develop infrastructure facilities inside the SEZ area, However, the Co-Developer is also involved in the pumping of crude oil from the Zone to their refinery located in the DTA, which is an activity of a Unit for which no approval is taken till date. (5) The only Unit in the Zone, M/s GAIL (India) Ltd, completed 5 years of operation on 24.08,2018 and during the processing of renewal application, it was noticed that the Unit has not achieved positive Net Foreign Exchange (NFE). M/s GAIL(India) Limited has requested for exit from the Zone, when the validity of their LoA expired on 31.03.2019. Considering the seriousness of the lapses, and the fact that all stake holders are public sector entities, the office of DC, CSEZ addressed a 0.0. letter to Chairman, Port Trust, the Developer. In their explanation, the developer expressed their inability to ensure contiguity and construct compound wall. It is their contention that since the products dealt with are petroleum products and their movement is through pipelines there is no scope for pilferage and loss of revenue. Already an investment of approximately 10000 crore have been made in the Zone with duty/tax concessions.

s and their movement is through pipelines there is no scope for pilferage and loss of revenue. Already an investment of approximately 10000 crore have been made in the Zone with duty/tax concessions. However, disruptions in the working of the Zone may have far reaching repercussions for the petroleum and natural gas sectors. The matter was placed before the Board of Approval in its 890 meeting held on 22.04.2019, The Board, noted that the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala in Writ Petition (C) No. 10799/2019 filed by M/s GAIL (India) Ltd. vide interim order dated 05.04.2019 directed that, “ ssuthere will be a direction to the respondents to maintain Status quo as on 31.03.2019 with respect to the SEZ status provided to the petitioner”, Page 36 of 48

The Board, after deliberations, deferred the matter, being sub-judice. The Board, directed that the case may be strongly contested in the interest of the Union of India before the Hon'ble Court. The Writ Petition has been disposed of by the Hon’ble Court vide judgment dated 31.05.2019, with the following directions: '....2.. However, inspite of taking up various contentions against the illegal action taken by the respondents, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that, the petitioner would be satisfied, if a direction is issued to the 5" respondent (Board of Approval) to consider Ext, P12 and P15 applications before the 5" respondent seeking permission to exit from SEZ. 3.

ioner would be satisfied, if a direction is issued to the 5" respondent (Board of Approval) to consider Ext, P12 and P15 applications before the 5" respondent seeking permission to exit from SEZ. 3. Having hears learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, learned ASGI for the 17 respondent (Union of India) and the learned Counsel for the 3" respondent (Cochin Port Trust), there will be a direction to the 5" respondent to finalize the Exts. P12 & PIS in accordance with lav, at the earliest and at any rate, within two months from the receipt of a copy of this judgment, after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as all other interested persons. 4. When this writ petition was admitted to the files of this Court an interim order was passed on 05.04.2019. The said interim order will continue to be in force till a decision is taken. L also make it clear that, if any adverse orders are passed against the petitioner, the same shall be kept in abeyance for a period of two weeks, enabling the petitioners to work out appropriate remedies. If in any case, Ext, P12 is not forwarded by the 2" respondent to the 5" respondent, the same shall be done at the earliest possible time, enabling the 5" respondent to comply with directions contained above. This writ petition is disposed of, accordingly.” Now, DC, CSEZ has informed that Exts. P-12 is an exit application submitted by the unit, M/s GAIL (India) 110 and Exts.

th directions contained above. This writ petition is disposed of, accordingly.” Now, DC, CSEZ has informed that Exts. P-12 is an exit application submitted by the unit, M/s GAIL (India) 110 and Exts. P15 is a representation submitted M/s GAIL (India) to the Development Commissioner requesting that the agenda earlier circulated regarding Exit application (Agendaof 89"Boa) filed by GA 1 Lmay be pursued wit the BoA and sanction may be accorded for granting exit fiom Puthuvypeen SEZ, and de-notification of the land so that-their 'Unit (dispatch terminal) can operate as a DTA. DC has further informed that they had sought legal opinion from the 0/o ASGI High Court of Kerala regarding implementation of the direction of the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala. The ASGI has opined the following: ‘After examining the records provisions of SEZ Act, the instructions provided by you and afier a detailed discussion with the Law Officer deputed by you to briefme, 1 ‘have noticed that the 5*Respondent is competent to consider only the request for de-notification and the request for exit is to be considered independently by the 2! respondent (Development Commissioner)” DC has further stated that the Court has only issued a direction to consider the Exit Application and a representation that is said to be pending before the authorities concemed. The authority concemed is free to take its own decision in the matter in accordance with law and there is no Legal impediment in Page 37 of 48

is said to be pending before the authorities concemed. The authority concemed is free to take its own decision in the matter in accordance with law and there is no Legal impediment in Page 37 of 48

rejecting the representation if the same is not within the powers of the said authority, The same may however be after hearing the Petitioner and parties concemed. Recommendations of DC: DC, CSEZ has requested that the matter may be placed in the next BoA meeting to consider the following: a) BoA may direct the DC, CSEZ to consider and issue orders on the Exit application (Ext- P-12) filed by M/s GAIL (India) Ltd. in accordance with Rule 74 of SEZ Rules 2006. b) The Ext.P-15 being a request for de-notification of the area may be rejected by the BoA. as the same is not in conformity with Rule 8 of SEZ. Rules, 2006 which stipulates that application of the Developer is required for De-notification or decrease in area of SEZ. ©) Asper Rule 6(2) (a), the SEZ becomes operational from the date of commencement of production of at least one Unit. In the instant case the exit application of the only Unit in Puthuvypeen SEZ is under process, If the unit exits, the SEZ.

perational from the date of commencement of production of at least one Unit. In the instant case the exit application of the only Unit in Puthuvypeen SEZ is under process, If the unit exits, the SEZ. is left with no Units, By inference, itis to be construed that if no Unit is present in an SEZ at any point of time, the SEZ shall lose the Operational status during that point of time, In such a scenario, no SEZ benefit shall be available to the Developer/CoDevelopers till the SEZ regains its operational Status as required under Rule 6(2), BoA may endorse the above recommendation as Rule 6(2) of SEZ Rule is silent on the issue. 0) ‘The BoA may give opportunity of Hearing to the petitioner M/s GAIL (India) Ltd and also to the Developer and the Co-Developers as per the direction of the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala, ©) As directed by the Hon'ble High Cour, in case of any adverse orders passed by BoA against the petitioner, the same shall be kept in abeyance for a period of 2 Weeks. ‘The case is submitted for consideration of the Board of Approval. 91.8(v) Request of M/s Shreekunj Hospitality Pvt. Ltd, for permission to take up authorization operations as a Co-developer in Dahej SEZ. M/s Dahej SEZ Limited, a multi product SEZ at Bharuch, Gujarat, promoted jointly by GIDC and ONGC was notified on 20.12.2006 over an area of 1718.9387 Ha. M/s Dahej Hospitality Private Limited (now known as M/s Cambay SEZ Hotels Pvt.

duct SEZ at Bharuch, Gujarat, promoted jointly by GIDC and ONGC was notified on 20.12.2006 over an area of 1718.9387 Ha. M/s Dahej Hospitality Private Limited (now known as M/s Cambay SEZ Hotels Pvt. Ltd.) was granted a co-developer status in the said SEZ for establishing a hospitality project and services over 8 hectares of land by the Board of Approval (BoA) in its 35" meeting held on 11.08.2009. ‘The co-developer (M/s Cambay SEZ Hotels Pvt. Ltd.) had taken a loan of Rs.13.32 crores from SIDBI, Ahmedabad and failed/defaulted in loan repayment. Subsequently, the premise of the co-developer was sealed and a Sale Notice of borrower's immovable property together with movable assets at Dahej SEZ under the provision of the SARFAESI Act, 2002 and Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 was issued by SIDBI. M/s Shreekunj Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. took possession of the aforesaid plot from SIDBI under the SARFAESI Act by issuing a self declaration in favour of promoters and directors of proposed purchaser and entering a co-developer agreement with the developer on 23.03.2018. ‘The request of M/s Shreekunj Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. for co-developer status in M/s Dahej SEZ Ltd. was considered in the 82" meeting of the BoA held on 04.04.2018. The Board, approved the proposal subject to submission of formal amendment of the sale certificate issued Page 38 of 48

ahej SEZ Ltd. was considered in the 82" meeting of the BoA held on 04.04.2018. The Board, approved the proposal subject to submission of formal amendment of the sale certificate issued Page 38 of 48

by the SIDBI and cancellation of the co-developer agreement with the former co-developer. Subsequently, DC, DAHE) furnished an amendment of sale certificate dated 24.05.2018 issued by SIDBI in favour of the proposed co-developer and confirmed that the co-developer agreement with the former co-developer has become redundant/superseded and a revised co- developer agreement had been executed with the proposed co-developer. Meanwhile, a Special Civil Application No. 10376/2018 was filed by M/s Cambay SEZ Hotels Pvt. Ltd. before the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad with the prayer to quash and set aside the decision of the BoA dated 04.04.2018. This Department had requested DC, DAHEJ to defend/look after the interest of this Department in the matter. ‘The matter was re-considered by the BoA in its 84% meeting held on 12.09.2018. The Board took note of the disputed nature of the matter and pendency of SCA and in view of the legal issues, decided to seek a detailed report from DC, Dahej specifying the details of the dispute, DC, Dahej informed that SIDBI was granted approval to take symbolic possession of the Plot No. Z/4/1 in non-processing area of Dahej SEZ from Collector Office, Bharuch under section 5(3) of the SARFAESI Act, 2005.

rmed that SIDBI was granted approval to take symbolic possession of the Plot No. Z/4/1 in non-processing area of Dahej SEZ from Collector Office, Bharuch under section 5(3) of the SARFAESI Act, 2005. Accordingly, SIDBI e-auctioned the property under the said Act, Further, the entire issue was placed before the BoA in its 86" meeting held on 22.11.2018 and the Board directed that the case may be contested on behalf of Union of India and an early hearing may be sought. The matter was listed for hearing on 16.07.2019. The reply affidavit on behalf of Union of India has been filed before the Hon'ble Court on the same day. The case is now listed for hearing on 30.07.2019. The request of M/s Shreekunj Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. is placed before the BoA for consideration, 91.8(vi) Request of M/s ZF Wind Power Coimbatore Pvt. Ltd. for review of decision of the Board of Approval in connection to their proposal for undertaking repair/re- engineering ete. of gear box units manufactured by DTA Units. M/s. ZF Wind Power Coimbatore Pvt. Ltd. (formerly M/s, Hansen Drives Limited), a unit in M/S, Aspen Park Infra Coimbatore Private Ltd.

e- engineering ete. of gear box units manufactured by DTA Units. M/s. ZF Wind Power Coimbatore Pvt. Ltd. (formerly M/s, Hansen Drives Limited), a unit in M/S, Aspen Park Infra Coimbatore Private Ltd. (formerly M/s, Suzlon Infrastructure Limited SEZ), Coimbatore was issued LOA dated 24.09.2007 for manufacture of "Gear Units for Wind Turbines". An appeal of the unit against the adverse order of the DC, MEPZ SEZ in relation to request for amendment in LoA to include repairs/re-engineering/re-making of defective gear box units was considered by the BoA in its 32" meeting held on 23.02.2009, The Board decided to include repair and re-engineering activities only in respect of items manufactured either by the unit or by its parent company and not by any other third party-Indian or overseas. The Board further observed that while repair/re- engineering/re-making of gear boxes imported directly and exported back will not be difficult proposal to consider, in respect of gear boxes coming in from the DTA area, customs and DC will have to ensure that all necessary regulations are adhered to. Subject to this, the Board decided to grant approval to the proposal. Page 39 of 48,

es coming in from the DTA area, customs and DC will have to ensure that all necessary regulations are adhered to. Subject to this, the Board decided to grant approval to the proposal. Page 39 of 48,

Subsequently, DC, MEPZ SEZ issued an LoA amendment letter on 11.03.2009. to the unit as per the decision of the UAC in its meeting held on 27.02.2009 considering the decision of the BoA. As per the amended LoA, the unit was permitted to undertake the following: Items of Manufacture i) Gear Units for Wind Turbines ii) | Undertake repair/re-engineering and Reconditioning of Gear Box units covered under warranty. iii) Undertake repair/re-engineering and reconditioning of Gear Box Units imported from overseas customers or from the DTA for export. iv) Undertake repair/re-engineering activities in respect of Gear Box Units from DTA manufactured either by the Unit or its Parent company in Belgium which are beyond warranty. vy) Undertake manufacture of parts of Gear Box Units. Service activities : Trading in spare parts of Gear Box units for Wind Turbines. ‘The request of the unit for grant of approval for undertaking repait/reconditioning etc. of defective gear box units manufactured by third party (Indian and overseas) manufacturers was considered by the BoA in its 46" meeting held on 31.05.2011. The Board after deliberations approved the request of the Unit for undertaking third party repair/ ineering activities of gear boxes.

was considered by the BoA in its 46" meeting held on 31.05.2011. The Board after deliberations approved the request of the Unit for undertaking third party repair/ ineering activities of gear boxes. BoA clarified that such repairs, engineering activities would be carried out only on gear boxes imported from outside India and subject to the condition that the repaired gear boxes including waste, scrap etc. should be re-exported as per Rule 18(4)(d) of the SEZ Rules, No repair/re-engineering activities were permitted for gear boxes etc. from DTA. The request of the unit was again placed before the Board of Approval in its 78th meeting held on 03.07.2017, wherein the Board observed that the proposal amounted to providing engineering, repairing services relating to third party Gear boxes for the DTA. entities. It amounted to having a full-fledged engineering, repairing services unit. It was observed that if the unit wants to have a full-fledged service unit, they may apply for a separate unit for engineering, repairing services so that accounts are not mixed and NFE criteria is separately complied with by the new services unit. The Unit vide their letter dated 26.03.2019 requested DoC for review of the decision taken by BoA in its 78" meeting on the following grounds: (i) Repair, re-making and re-engineering etc. are covered under the definition of manufacture under Section 2(r) of the SEZ Act; (ii) Since they are not permitted to undertake repair activities for non ZF entities, their customers in India are forced to export the gear boxes for repairs etc.

under Section 2(r) of the SEZ Act; (ii) Since they are not permitted to undertake repair activities for non ZF entities, their customers in India are forced to export the gear boxes for repairs etc. which is a loss of business to the unit and the country. (iii) They are already permitted to undertake repairs of gear boxes imported from non-ZF entities abroad and therefore they should be permitted to carry out such repairs ete. for their DTA customers also. As informed by DC, MEPZ vide their letter dated 08.05.2019, the Specified Officer had recommended the case for consideration in terms of Section 2(r) of the SEZ Act, 2005. Page 40 of 48

that, It may be noted that Section 26) of the SEZ Act, 2005 stipulates that, (0 “manufacture” means to make, procedure, fabricate, assemble, process or bring into existence, by hand or by machine, a new product having a distinctive name, character or use and shall include processes such as refrigeration, cutting, polishing, blending, repair, remaking, re-engineering and includes agriculture, aquaculture, animal husbandry, floriculture, horticulture, pisciculture, poultry, sericulture, viticulture and mining; Now, vide the status report, the DC, MEPZ has informed that the unit has informed (i) The waste/scrap generated out of the proposed activity would be sent back to DTA customers upon payment of applicable duties and taxes including IGST. (ii) In case of authorization by the customer, they will sell the waste and serap to an authorized re-seller in the DTA upon payment of applicable duties and taxes including IGST. (iii)

uding IGST. (ii) In case of authorization by the customer, they will sell the waste and serap to an authorized re-seller in the DTA upon payment of applicable duties and taxes including IGST. (iii) All the waste and scrap referred to above are recyclable and would be sold to scrap dealers who in turn, would sell it foundries which use the same as raw material in their manufacturing process As per the report of the Specified Officer dated 19.07.2019 (.. 3, the repair and re-engineering activities activity proposed to be undertaken by the Unit are covered under the definition of "Manufacture" under Section 2(r) of the SEZ Act, 2005 and the process. involIves substantial value addition. He has further opined that the mode of disposal of waste and scrap that would be generated out of the repair/re-engineering activities proposed to be undertaken by the Unit on gear boxes supplied by DTA entities envisaged by the Unit on payment of applicable duties is inorder and that the request of the Unit for undertaking repair, re-engineering and technology upgradation work for third party gear boxes can be considered for approval. Now, DC, MEPZ has referred the matter for consideration of this department on the following points: (a) Though repair, remaking, re-engineering are covered under the definition of Manufacture’ in terms of Section 2(r) of the SEZ Act, 2005, BOA in its 78% meeting held on 03.07.17 has viewed the proposed activity of the Unit as a 'Service' activity and has observed that if the unit wants to have a full-fledged service unit, they may

005, BOA in its 78% meeting held on 03.07.17 has viewed the proposed activity of the Unit as a 'Service' activity and has observed that if the unit wants to have a full-fledged service unit, they may apply for a separate unit for engineering, repairing services so that accounts are not mixed and NFE criteria is separately complied with by the new services unit. (b) Even if the proposed activity is viewed as a 'Service' activity, it should be possible for the Unit to undertake both Manufacture and Service activity under the same LOA without having to set up a separate Unit for the purpose, as SEZ Units are being permitted to carry out both Manufacture and Trading (service activity) under the same LOA with the condition that separate accounts are to be maintained for Trading activity and that the Services rendered would be against payment received in foreign exchange. Moreover, setting up a separate Unit for 'Services' would involve additional investment for the Unit. Page 41 of 48

that the Services rendered would be against payment received in foreign exchange. Moreover, setting up a separate Unit for 'Services' would involve additional investment for the Unit. Page 41 of 48

(c) The Unit has stated that its customers expect them to provide repair/re- engineering/technology upgradation activities in respect of ZF gear boxes as well as gear boxes of other entities and all the gear boxes are sent in the same fleet. Since the Unit is unable to take up repair activity of non-ZF gear boxes, the orders are being diverted from the unit to other foreign companies who would repair the complete fleet of gear boxes, resulting in outgo of forex. (d) Catering to repairing works from DTA entities will not result in any revenue loss to the Government, as applicable duties will be paid by the Unit at the time of clearance of the goods in DTA after the repairs. The request of the unit involves review of the earlier decision of the Board of Approval. Submitted for consideration of the BoA, 91.8 (vii) Request for revocation/de-notification of SEZ status given to M/s, Ansal IT City & Parks Ltd. (developer) and M/s. Earth Iconic Infrastructure Pyt. Ltd.

itted for consideration of the BoA, 91.8 (vii) Request for revocation/de-notification of SEZ status given to M/s, Ansal IT City & Parks Ltd. (developer) and M/s. Earth Iconic Infrastructure Pyt. Ltd. (co-developer) and illegal sale of land at Tech Zone-06, Greater Noida, ‘The case was deliberated by the BoA in its 85" meeting held on 02.11.2018, wherein the Board, after deliberation directed DC, NSEZ to issue Show Cause Notice to the Developer and the Co-developer, under section 10 of the SEZ Act, 2005 for the irregularities on the part of the Co-developer with a copy to the Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority, Accordingly, a Show Cause Notice dt.19.02,2019 was issued to the developer M/s. Ansal IT City &Parks Ltd. (developer) and M/s. Earth Iconic Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. (co- developer) to Show Cause within 3 months of receipt of the notice as to why action should not be taken against them under the provisions of section 10 of the SEZ. Act, 2005 for the irregularities on the part of both the developer and the co-developer. The developer vide their letter dt.19.05.2019 has given its reply to the SCN as under: i) That the BoA accorded approval for setting up IT/ITES SEZ. at Tech Zone-06, Greater Noida and subsequent co-developer status to M/s EIIPL. GNIDA has given its consent ‘on appointment of sublessee as Co-Developer. Subsequently, a Tripartite Sub-Lease Deed was signed between GNIDA, Developer and the Co-developer.

oper status to M/s EIIPL. GNIDA has given its consent ‘on appointment of sublessee as Co-Developer. Subsequently, a Tripartite Sub-Lease Deed was signed between GNIDA, Developer and the Co-developer. Herein, हा, being a sub-lessee is granted permission as per the provisions of SEZ Act and Rules and is given all rights at par with the Developer, who himself shall be responsible for his acts and omissions. ii)As per the Memorandum of Understanding between AITPL and EIIPL, EIIPL was required to develop 50,000 sq. mtrs. built up area in processing area besides developing non-processing area comprising of commercial and residential space; iii) That छाए, was selected by GNIDA as per the provisions provided under Chpt.-2, rule 3; rule 3(a) and rule 4 of the SEZ Rules. Hence, legally as per the provisions of Sec.194 of Indian Contract Act, 1872 EIIPL enjoys the same rights & authority as to that enjoyed by AITCPL. Moreover, vide Clause No. 2 of "Tripartite Sub-Lease Deed” Page 42 of 48

the provisions of Sec.194 of Indian Contract Act, 1872 EIIPL enjoys the same rights & authority as to that enjoyed by AITCPL. Moreover, vide Clause No. 2 of "Tripartite Sub-Lease Deed” Page 42 of 48

EIIPL (Co- Agent) was granted complete autonomy & authority by GNIDA (Principal) to directly approach them and other government bodies for any issue related to the said sub- leased area. Hence, 135113.866 sq. mtr. land were sub leased to EIIPL as per terms and conditions mentioned therein. However no construction of built up area or residential area have been done by EIIPL since the Tripartite Lease Deed except some excavation and setting up of its site office; iv) AITCPL came to know that EIIPL started receiving money/ deposits from General Public which is against the SEZ Act/Rules and without constructing any IT/ITES built up or residential area as was obligatory for sub-leased area. However being a responsible developer, AITCPL has been watchful and vigilant from the very beginning and has been highlighting and bringing the same violations into the notice of your good office about such issues/irregularities, which, resulted in violation of SEZ rules from time to time. The developer had mentioned that they have been continuously informing all these illegalities and irregularities on part of EIIPL and has requested from time to time to the SEZ Authority, GNIDA & DC of Noida Special Economic Zone to initiate and take all corrective and coercive measures against EPL to rectify all illegal acts including termination of Tripartite Lease Deed.

Authority, GNIDA & DC of Noida Special Economic Zone to initiate and take all corrective and coercive measures against EPL to rectify all illegal acts including termination of Tripartite Lease Deed. The developer has requested for withdrawal of the SCN dt.19.02.2019 stating that the subject SCN has been issued to them for the irregularities committed by the Earth Iconic Infrastructure (P) Ltd. Besides, the Developer also requests to be heard before the Board of Approval. DC, NSEZ has referred the matter to this Department for consideration on the following issues: a) As per the conditions of agreement executed between the developer and the do- developer: (i) ‘The Developer has been vested with lease hold rights in respect of 75.14 acres bearing Plot No. TZ-06, Techzone, Gr. Noida. (ii) Both the parties had mutually decided and agreed to co-develop the plot and Second party agreed to become the Co-Developer as defined under the SEZ Act, 2005 and Rules thereof and promised to assume overall responsibility of construction, development, operation and maintenance of the identified land, b) Both parties entered into agreement in accordance with Section 3 (11) of the Act to enable the part hereto of the Second Part to make a proposal, before BoA for becoming co-developer in the respect of exclusively and limited to the identified land. ०) As per Tripartite Sub-lease deed The "Lessor (AICPL) has also given its consent / No- objection on appointment of Sub-leasee as Co-Developer vide their letter dt. 04.07.2012.

the identified land. ०) As per Tripartite Sub-lease deed The "Lessor (AICPL) has also given its consent / No- objection on appointment of Sub-leasee as Co-Developer vide their letter dt. 04.07.2012. Accordingly on 17.07.2012 proposal for Co-Developer for providing infrastructure facilities was granted. 4) In view of above Developer of the identified land is also responsible for construction, development, operation and maintenance. ९) Developer in their letter dt. 27.06.2016 on their as well as Co-developer's behalf, Page 43 of 48

appealed for extension of construction timelines. Accordingly review of Development work of SEZ was placed before UAC held on 02.09.2016 wherein Developer's representative did not raise any issue of irregularities allegedly being committed by Co-Developer and requested for extension of timelines for construction of minimum built up area required w/r 5(7) of SEZ Rules. Accordingly as per UAC held on 02.09.2016 proposal of Developer and Co- Developer was forwarded to DOC for consideration. f) In terms of Section 10 (c) of the SEZ Act, if at any time the Board is to the opinion that a developer had violated the terms & condition of the letter of Approval (LOA) then it can take action in terms of section 10 of SEZ Act. Such action can be taken by the Board of Approval only after providing opportunity of Personal Hearing. DC, NSEZ has further informed that a letter dt.21,06.2019 has been received from Sh. Harish Chander Manchanda, in which it has been mentioned that Sh.

ter providing opportunity of Personal Hearing. DC, NSEZ has further informed that a letter dt.21,06.2019 has been received from Sh. Harish Chander Manchanda, in which it has been mentioned that Sh. Manchanda has been appointed as the new Resolution Professional of M/s Earth Iconic Infrastructures (P) Limited having taken over the charge on 25.05.2019, In view of above circumstances filing of reply of SCN dt.19.02.2019 has been regretted and condonation has been requested by him. The RP has further stated that the promoters of M/s EIIPL have duped about 712 home buyers under an assured return scheme launched by the promoters in the year 2012. ‘The claims filed by the home buyers amounting to about Rs.170 cr have been admitted so far. The RP has requested DC, NSEZ to abstain from taking any action in this regard which results into dilution of the security of financial creditors, which is nothing other than land in question, in this case. The RP has emphasized that NSEZ Authorities and GNIDA Authority have by their contributory negligence, failed to stop the implementation of the scandalous scheme of the promotes for three years from 2012-2015, which resulted in fraud of this gargantuan scale, Recommendation by DC: ‘The scheme of the Co-developer for selling the residence flats to the home buyers seems 10 be a clear violation of proviso to Rule 11 (10) of the SEZ Rules, this proviso specifically states "Provided that the developer or Co-developer may lease the completed infrastructure along with the vacant land appurtant thereto for the purpose.

of the SEZ Rules, this proviso specifically states "Provided that the developer or Co-developer may lease the completed infrastructure along with the vacant land appurtant thereto for the purpose. " Hence, the developer or co-developer can give the completed infrastructure only on lease and cannot sell it. Till the completion of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Proceedings, DC, NSEZ office has been requested to abstain from initiating any action in the matter by the Resolution Professional. Further, they have been asked to order investigation into the matter to ascertain any collusion of staff with the promoters or extreme negligence and that the accountability must be fixed. DC, NSEZ has recommend that the case may again be placed with complete facts before BoA for taking view for appropriate action under section 10 of the SEZ Act and the request of the developer for hearing in person before the Board of Approval to explain their case may also be considered. Submitted for consideration of the BoA. Page 44 of 48

f the SEZ Act and the request of the developer for hearing in person before the Board of Approval to explain their case may also be considered. Submitted for consideration of the BoA. Page 44 of 48

91.9 Industrial License (one proposal) 91.90) Proposal of M/s. Deccan Fine Chemicals (India) Private Limited, unit in M/s. Decean Fine Chemicals (India) Private Limited SEZ for issue of Industrial License for manufacture of Phosgene. M/s Deccan Fine Chemicals (India) Private Limited propose to manufacture Phosgene in the unit located at M/s Deccan Fine Chemicals (India) Private Limited SEZ, Rajavaram & Kesavaram Villages, Visakhapatnam District. The product "Phosgene" which is proposed to be manufactured by them is listed under "Industries which requires Compulsory Licensing as per the Industrial Development and Regulation Act “1952". DC, VSEZ has informed that the Phosgene manufactured in the unit will be used for manufacture of value added Agrochemicals, Intermediates and Fine Chemicals. The unit also informed that Phosgene will not be stored or sold in the domestic or intemational marked and it is will be used exclusively for captive consumption. It is proposed to manufacture phosgene for a quantity of 5000 MT per annum and the investment proposed will be around Rs, 111 crores out of which import of equipments will be Rs.89.53 crores. M/s.

n. It is proposed to manufacture phosgene for a quantity of 5000 MT per annum and the investment proposed will be around Rs, 111 crores out of which import of equipments will be Rs.89.53 crores. M/s. Deccan Fine Chemicals (India) Private Limited has informed that at present they are importing Triphosgene powder from China and the cost is around 3.40 USD and the price is Likely to increase and the phosgene is 1.133 USD and if the same is manufactured by them the price will be around 0.36 USD and this will be very cost affective and save lot of Forex. Phosgene is widely used in US, Europe and China at present the same is to be imported only, The comments on the proposal of the unit were received from various departments which are as below: [S.No. | Department | SSS Comments SSS DC, VSEZ VSEZ on 29.03.2019 had furnished the details of the capacity utilization and the NFE calculation for the 12 products including two new products namely Amicarbazone & Pyridate of capacity 8500MT/Y ear. Further, that the unit has projected that they will achieve NFE at 68% and with the manufacture of Phosgene there will be a saving of approximate Rs 28 crores on outflow of forex. VSEZ has informed DOC on 14.05.2019 that no permission has been given to the unit to manufacture Amicarbazone & Pyridate.

sgene there will be a saving of approximate Rs 28 crores on outflow of forex. VSEZ has informed DOC on 14.05.2019 that no permission has been given to the unit to manufacture Amicarbazone & Pyridate. The unit will apply for inclusion of these two items i.e, Amicarbazone & Pyridate in the LOA and manufacture the same after getting Licence from DOC to manufacture Phosgene because manufacture of these two items will not be viable if Phosgene manufacture facility is not created in the unit. Thus NFE calculation has been made for 12 products including Amicarbazone & Pyridate. 2. Department of Chemical | Vide OM dated 17.12.2018, D/o Chemicals & and Petrochemicals Petrochemicals has recommended the proposal of the Page 45 of 48

unit for issuance of Industrial licence subject to the following conditions: a)Phosgene gas will not be stored in the manufacturing premises and will be consumed online in the manufacturing of other derivatives. b) The party will obtain necessary clearances from M/o EF&CC and CPCB under the relevant provisions of Environment (Protection) Act, 1986. ©) The party shall abide by the provisions of Manufacture, Storage and import of Hazardous Chemicals Rules, 1989. 3. IS - I Division (Security Desk), MHA. Vide OM dated 18.06.2019, MHA has conveyed Security Clearance in r/o the unit and its directors namely, Mr. Gokaraju Satyanarayana, Mr. Kanumuri Venkata Lakshmipathi Raju, Mr. Eisuke Sasaki, Mr. Robert Durand and Mr. Vivek Vasant Save. The above security clearance is subject to the conditions/compliances mentioned in para 3 of this, Ministry OM No.

a Lakshmipathi Raju, Mr. Eisuke Sasaki, Mr. Robert Durand and Mr. Vivek Vasant Save. The above security clearance is subject to the conditions/compliances mentioned in para 3 of this, Ministry OM No. 11/20034//166/2010-IS-II_ dated 23/24.01.2014 and further that in areas which are notified/declared sensitive by MHA, the relevant guidelines shall be made applicable. Further, Security Clearance is subject to the condition that the PESO/District administration will ensure that security and safety arrangements at the plant are duly put in place/strengthened to strictly conform to the extant rules/guidelines, IS - 1 Division/Arms Section, MHA. Vide OM dated 04.12.2018, Arms Section, MHA offered no comments as the item Phosgene does not fall under the category of arms & ammunition. a State Government Vide letter dated 10.03.2019 the Commissioner of Industries, Andhra Pradesh, has recommended the proposal of the unit subject to the condition that clearance to be obtained from A.P Pollution Control Board (APPCB) and adherence to other relevant norms before commencing the activities. Relevant provision: As per clause (e) of sub-section 2 of Section 9 of the SEZ Act, 2005, the Board has powers and functions of granting, notwithstanding anything contained in the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951, a license to an industrial undertaking, referred to in clause (0) of section 3 of that Act, if such undertaking is established, as a whole or part thereof, or proposed to be established, in a Special Economic Zone.

Para 6.07 (c) of HBP provides that a proposal for setting up an EOU requiring industrial

licence may be granted approval by Development Commissioner after clearance of proposal Page 46 of 48

by Board of Approval (BOA) and DPIIT. However, during the meeting of the Licensing Committee held under the Chairmanship of Secretary, DPIIT on 25.02.2013, powers to grant industrial licence to units in SEZs and EOUs under industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951 had been transferred to DOC. Based on this delegation, this Department has been processing cases of grant of Industrial Licences in SEZs and EOUs with the approval of the Board of Approval. Since clearances have been received from all concerned departments, the proposal of the unit is placed before BOA for grant of Industrial Licence under IDR Act, 1951. DC, VSEZ has recommend the request for consideration of the BoA for issue of Industrial License to the unit for manufacture of Phosgene in the unit for captive consumption for manufacture of Amicarbazone and Pyridicate which will be subsequently included in the Letter of Approval once the industrial License is issued. 91.10 Appeal (one appeal) 91.10(i) Appeal dated 13.06.2019 filed by M/s. Jay Bholenath Waybridge against the decision of the UAC, KASEZ in its meeting held on 30.01.2019 for rejection of proposal for broad-banding of manufacturing activity and cancellation of their in-principle LoA dated 29.03.2016. Mis, Jay Bholenath Waybridge, KASEZ is a unit in KASEZ which was granted in- principle 1.08 for setting up of Weigh Bridge vide letter dated 29.03.2016.

on of their in-principle LoA dated 29.03.2016. Mis, Jay Bholenath Waybridge, KASEZ is a unit in KASEZ which was granted in- principle 1.08 for setting up of Weigh Bridge vide letter dated 29.03.2016. The In-principle LoA was further broad- banded for trading activity of melamine, plastic agglomerates, plastic floor sweepings and plastic grindings vide letter dated 07.07.2017. ‘The request of the unit for broad banding for inclusion of manufacturing activity in their in-principle approval was placed before the UAC in its meeting held on 30.01.2019 wherein Shri S. Motanwala, authorized representative of the firm appeared before the Approval Committee and explained their proposal. Shri 5, Motanwala, authorised representative of the firm appeared before the Approval Committee and explained their proposal. He informed that they could not start their original activity as they were not allotted with any premises in KASEZ and they also could not apply for renewal of in-principle Loa in time as they were indulged in other work. The unit intended to broad- band for manufacturing activity of plastic agglomerates\granules and powder. The Approval Committee noted that the in-principle LoA was granted to the unit on 29.03.2016 and that the unit has neither commenced any activity during the said 3 years period since the issuance of in-principle LoA nor made any request for extension of theit in-principle LoA.

on 29.03.2016 and that the unit has neither commenced any activity during the said 3 years period since the issuance of in-principle LoA nor made any request for extension of theit in-principle LoA. Therefore, the Approval Committee after due deliberation decided to reject their proposal for broad-banding for manufacturing activity and also further decided to cancel their in- principle LoA dated 29.03.2016 as the unit was without any activity in KASEZ for about 3 years and its LoA’s validity already lapsed in terms of Rule 19(4) of SEZ Rules, 2006, Page 47 of 48

Contentions of the appellant: ‘The appellant seeks permission to start manufacturing/trading activity of Plastic agglomerates/granules/and powder from OGL items on the ground that it is a revenue generating project. Further, that so far there has been no activity, as land has not been allotted by DC, KASEZ. Similarly, plot No. 425(P) earlier allotted was also cancelled by DC, KASEZ Which resulted in a loss of rent of Rs. 11,25,000/- approx. to Government. The appellant further states that due to lack of knowledge of procedures appeal could not be filed on time. Condonation of delay has been requested by the appellant. Rule position: Rule 56, Time within which appeal is to be preferred (1) Anappeal shall be preferred by the aggrieved person within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order of the Approval Committee under rule 18. (2).

h appeal is to be preferred (1) Anappeal shall be preferred by the aggrieved person within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of the order of the Approval Committee under rule 18. (2). When the appeal is preferred after the expiry of the period of thirty days specified in sub-rule (1), it shall be accompanied by an application supported by an affidavit setting forth the facts on which the appellant relies to satisfy the Board that he has sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal within the said period of thirty days: PROVIDED that if the Board is satisfied that the appellant had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal within the aforesaid period, it may for reasons to be recorded in writing, admit the appeal after the expiry of the aforesaid period but before the expiry of forty-five days from the date of communication 10 him of the order of the Approval Committee. The appeal is placed before the BoA for consideration, Prey Page 48 of 48

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

Analysis

No analysis generated for this document yet (analysis runs over brief docs + on-demand). Run build_analysis.py --ids 126 --apply.