DGFT Committee Minutes

Directorate General of Foreign Trade (PRC-section) Minutes of the Policy Relaxation Committee Meeting अधिD of the Policy Relaxation Committee Meeting held under_the Chairmanship of DGFT Shri Alok Vardhan Chaturvedi, Ves सटासकल Alok Vardhan Chaturvedi, Director General _of Foreign Trade on 12.09.2077 42.09.2017 Meeting No. 17/AM18 held on 42.09.2017 at 10:00 AM The following members were present in the meeting: 1. ShriN. P. S. Monga Add!. DGFT 2. Shri K. C. Rout Addl. DGFT 3. Shri Darshan Singh Addi. DGFT 4. Shri J. ४. Pati! Addi. DGFT 5. ShriS. 8. 5. Reddy Addl. DGFT 6. Shri N.K.Srivastava Addl. DGFT 7. Shri Jay Karan Singh Jt. DGFT 8. Shri Akash Taneja Jt. DGFT 9. Shri S.P.Roy Jt. DGFT Following cases were discussed. The decision taken on the individual cases are as under:

Case No.1: M/s Medicamen Biotek Ltd., Delhi

F. No, 01/60/162/658/AM16/PRC PRC Meeting No. 17/AM18 dated 12.09.2017

Subject: Review request for grant the waiver/relaxation in the Policy Circular No. 9 and

18 condition imposed in Advance Authorization No.0510372970 dated 09.12.2014. Decision: Aggrieved by the committee’s decision dated 27.03.2017, the applicant sought personal nearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP, 2015-2020, which was afforded to them on 12.09.2017. The date of personal hearing was communicated to them through e-mail. However, 10 one turned up for PH nor they requested for postponement of date. The committee, however, IN the interest of natural justice decided to defer the case. The applicant may seek next date. (Action: Applicant)

Case No.2: Mis. Alcon Food Packaging, Kolkata

६. No. 04/60/162/933/AM17/PRC PRC Meeting No. 17/AM18 dated 12.09.2017

Subject: Request for regularization of export against Advance Authorization No.

0210204275 dated 30.06.2014. Agarieved by the committee’s decision dated 07& 09.03.2017 and 08.08.2017, the applicant sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP, 2015-2020, which was afforded to them on 42.09.2017. Shri Kunal Saraogi, Chief Executive from M/s Alcon ge 104

Food Packaging appeared before the i co i issi soe inter ale hat mmittee and made the following submissions

1. Ee pen eee 100% ० 0.18% export within initial obligation

; ulfille ex i i within 36 months i.e. upto 30.6.2017. 2 expo oSTgstien EMIS the FOR ew 2. Hence they have requested to allow ac i | counting of exports | from the date of issue of the Authorisation कि[ ° (४०० Decision: It was noted that the Authorisation in question was issued having initial export obligation period of 18 months. On request of the applicant, RA had ailow d 3 month 8 further extension. Despite of that they could not fulfill stipulated EO. owever, it has been stated that they have fulfilled 100% exports within 36 months. The committee therefore, decided the following: |. Export obligation period be extended by 12 months in continuity. ॥.. This will, however, be subject to payment of a composition fee @ 0.5% per month of unfulfilled FOB value of exports made after 24" month but upto 30" month and @1% per month of unfulfilled FOB value of exports made after 30” month but upto 36" month. il. Exports affected indicating EDI File No/Authorisation No on shipping bills shall only be taken into account. WV. Minimum 45% VA shall be maintained. (Action: ApplicanwdRA, Kolkata)

Case No.3: M/s Kineco Limited

F. No. 01/60/162/1211/AM17/PRC PRC Meeting No. 17IAM18 dated 42.09.2017

Subject: Request to count export of 29 Shipping Bills against Advance Authorization

No. 4710003514 dated 30.09.2010. Decision: Aggrieved by the committee's decision dated 23.05.2017, the applicant sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP, 2015-2020, which was afforded to them on 42.09.2017. Shri Prashant Naik, Asst. VP. Finance from M/s Kineco Limited appeared before the committee and made the following submissions stating inter alia that: 4. The firm has submitted the exports under shipping Dill, which are not “Free shipping Bills” but are “Drawback Shipping Bills” prepared under Drawback Sr. No.9801 which means that they are going to apply for brand rate fixation and also EPCG Scheme. They imported some of the components by paying Custom Duty and were going to apply brand rate fixation for the said shipping bill. But, since the export under the Advance licence were short, they did not claim drawback and would like to opt for claiming the exports made against the advance Authorization. At the time of export the said goods good were examined py the 010 Central Excise which were cleared under the ARE-1Drawback Scheme and under EPCG Scheme. The firm has submitted copies of shipping foe 204 (go

bill, invoices and ARE-! duly certified by the Central Excise and Customs officers. they further clarify that the Brand Rate for claiming the Duty Draw Back against the export under the shipping bill was not availed by the company and accordingly the application for claiming the drawback was not processed. 2. Exports were made under EPCG cum Drawback scheme under Si No 9801 for which no all industry rates are available. They have to file application for brand rate fixation. However, since there was shortfall under the Advance Authorisation, they will not file application for brand rate. 3. Hence, they have requested to relax the condition for not mentioning the file no./Advance license no. on 29 s/bills (as per annexure-A) and count the export against AA 1710003514 dated 30.09.2010 towards discharge of EO. Decision: The committee heard the applicant patiently. The applicant had no answer to the query of the committee, as to why they exported finished goods under drawback where raw materials were imported without payment of duties under the Authorisation in question? The FTP make i exporter can either avail Duty Exemption Schemec | ) or Drawback < n respect of an input. It was noted that the Authorisation in question was issued to allow duty free imports of inputs under duty exemption scheme of FTP, 2009-2014. The Authorisation was issued with 24 month’s validity to import and 36 month's period to exports. The applicant has imported 100% without making any exports. In terms of Para 4.12 of FTP, consumptions of duty free inputs are required to be indicated in shipping bills. Further, in terms of Para 4.27 of HBP, 2015-2020, exports made indicating File No/Authorisation No on shipping bills can only be accounted for discharge of export obligation. Consumption of duty free inputs are not declared in the Drawback shipping bill, as drawback is allowed on duty paid inputs used in the resultant product. The applicant had option of getting the shipping bills converted into Duty Exemption Scheme (DES) from DBK under the Customs Act, as per CEBC Circular No 36 of 2010, The committee, therefore, did not accede to the request. The applicant is hereby directed to get the case regularised, in terms of Para 4.49 of HBP, 2015-2020, within a month from the date of uploading of these minutes on the Directorate website, failing which RA shail initiate action under the provisions of FT(DR)Act, 1992, as amended. (Action: Appticant/RA,Goa)

Case No.4: M/s Ognibene India Pvt. Ltd., Pune

F. No. 01/60/162/989/AM17/PRC PRC Meeting No. 17/AM18 dated 12.09.2017

Subject: Request for relaxation of requirement of export documents in Advance

Authorization No. 3110052275 dated 30.09.2010. Decision: Aggrieved by the committee's decision dated 07.03.2017 &09.03 2017 , the applicant sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP, 2015-2020, which was afforded to them on 12.09.2017. The date of personal hearing was communicated to them through e-mail. However, no one turned up for PH nor they requested for 3 of 4 Gy

postponement of date. The committee, however, in the interest of natural justice decided to defer the case. The applicant may seek next date. (Action: Applicant)

Case No.5: M/s Ognibene India Pvt. Ltd., Pune

F, No. 014/60/162/990/AM17/PRC PRC Meeting No. 17/AM18 dated 12.09.2017

Subject: Request for relaxation of requirement of export document in Advance

Authorization No. 3110062548 dated 14.02.2014. Decision: Aggrieved by the committee’s decision dated 07.03.2017 &09.03.2017 , the applicant sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP, 2015-2020, which was afforded to them on 12.09.2017. The date of personal hearing was communicated to them through e-mail. However, no one turned up for PH nor they requested for postponement of date. The committee, however, in the interest of natural justice decided to defer the case. The applicant may seek next date. (Action: Applicant)

Case No.6: M/s Ognibene India Pvt. Ltd., Pune

F. No. 01/60/162/955/AM17/PRC PRC Meeting No. 17/AM18 dated 12.09.2017

Subject: Request for relaxation of requirement export document in Advance

Authorization No. 3110045249 dated 27.10.2010. Decision: Aggrieved by the committee’s decision dated 07.03.2017 &09.03.2017 , the applicant sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP, 2015-2020, which was afforded to them on 12.09.2017. The date of personal hearing was communicated to them through e-mail. However, no one turned up for PH nor they requested for postponement of date. The committee, however, in the interest of natural justice decided to defer the case. The applicant may seek next date. (Action: Applicant) Rest of agenda items were deferred. The meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair. ae i \ eS “> 40f4