IN FORCE Policy Relaxation Committee Advance Authorisation 2018-07-31

DGFT Committee Minutes

Document text

Directorate General of Foreign Trade { PRC-section) Minutes of आज nea lice Relaxation Committee Meeting held Policy Relaxation Committee Meetin held Caimnlet SA than Cited Dt ce ae the . . . . . 7 : Chairmanship of Shri Alok Vardhan Chaturvedi, Director General of Foreign Trade The following members were Present in the meeting: 1. ShriN.p.s. Monga Addl. DGFT 2. Shri. c, Rout Addl. DGFT 3. ShriJ. ५. Patil Addl. DGFT 4. ShriS.B.s. Reddy Addl. DGFT 5. Shri N.K.Srivastava Addl. DGFT 6. Shri Jay Karan Singh Jt. DGFT 7. Shri Akash Taneja Jt. DGFT 8. Shri Rajbir Sharma Jt. DGFT 9. Shri Lokesh H.D Jt. DGFT Following cases were discussed. The decision taken on the individual Cases are as under:- PH Case No.01:M/s. Welspun Corp Limited, Vadodara F, No. 01/60/162/242/am19/prc PRC Meeting No, 09/AM19 dated 31.07.2018

Subject:Revalidation of Advance Authorization No.3410042808 dated 03.01.2017,

4, The applicant had sought personal hearing, which was afforded on 31.07.2018. Shri Suresh Darak, President Exim & Indirect Taxes appeared before the committee on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions: 3. They have already obtained the 6 months extension from RA and the Advance Authorization was valid up to 02.07.2018,

They could not complete balance import as import shipment was delayed by three days at loading port of import 1.6. Advance Authorization was valid till 21 July 2018 and the cargo was shipped on 5" July 2018. Decision: The Committee noted the issues raised by the firm and decided to provide revalidation for a period of 15 days from the date of endorsement by the RA on account hardships stated by the firm which had resulted in not enabling them to complete the balance imports. (Action: Applicant/RA) PH Case No.02: M/s Tube Investments of India Limited, Chennai F. No. 01/60/162/140/AM19/PRC PRC Meeting No. 09/AM19 dated 31.07.2018

Subject: Request for transfer of 2 Star Export House Certificate held in IEC No.0488020182

(PAN AAACT1249H) to 1६0 04107514794 (PAN AADCT 4398N) consequent of De- merger. 4. The applicant had sought personal hearing, which was afforded on 31.07.2018. Shri Ramanujam R, AVP & Head- Taxation appeared before the committee on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions: 2. The above firm is part of renowned Murugappa Group and was in both manufacturing business and financial business. 3. With a view to make both the business separate for business viability, the company underwent a process of demerger. The demerger scheme was duly approved by the National Company Law Tribunal, Chennai (NCLT) vide its order reference CP/56857/CAA/2017 dated 17.07.2017. The demerger was effective 01/08/2017 being the date when they filed the NCLT order approving the demerger with Registrar of Companies. 4, in this process, the manufacturing business, in a manner prescribed under the Income Tax Act, was demerged from Tube Investments of india (Demerged company) to the resulting company, called 11 Financial Holding Limited (PAN AADCT1398N & IEC No.04107514794}, a company under the same Murugappa Group, by transferring the assets and liabilities, as a ongoing concern, including the debtors & creditors and all statutory benefits and obligations, which were pertaining to the manufacturing activities as per the same approved scheme of the demerger. 5.

ngoing concern, including the debtors & creditors and all statutory benefits and obligations, which were pertaining to the manufacturing activities as per the same approved scheme of the demerger. 5. The name of the resulting company was then changed as Tube investments of India Limited, so as to undertake the same manufacturing activities including exports &

imports, since the name of which is popularly known to Customers and Vendors for its manufacturing and supply of engineering and bi-cycle products, across the globe. Similarly, the name of the demerged company was changed to TI Financial Holdings Limited. The change in name of the both companies was duly approved by Registrar of Companies and Income Tax Department. They obtained necessary amendments to Registration Certificate and PAN Card respectively. In fine, the resultant company Tube Investments of India Ltd. After name change consequent to demerger continued its manufacturing business under PANAADCT1398N, IECO417514794 and appropriate state-wise GSTIN. The demerged company held 2 star Export House Certificate and various export incentive scheme/licences and obligation thereof under 1६९ 0488020182. The other resultant company names as 11 Financial Holding limited, Involved in the process of demerger had only financial activities.

tive scheme/licences and obligation thereof under 1६९ 0488020182. The other resultant company names as 11 Financial Holding limited, Involved in the process of demerger had only financial activities. The financial business does not have any manufacturing of exports/imports. Therefore, the renamed resultant company Tube Investments of India Limited which continues to have manufacturing business post the demerger deserves to be allowed to approach the DGFT for necessary waiver or relaxation under para 2.58 of FTP 2015-20 and accordingly they request the PRC to consider their case positively as below:- Transfer of 2-Star Export House certificate as such to IEC 0417514794 (Pan AADCT1398N), from IEC 0488020182 (PAN AAACT1249 H) under Para 3.20 and 3,2 of FTP 2015-20, since the activities and business of the company, named as Tube Investments of India Limited is one and the same before and after demerger and name change in respect of its domestic and Overseas business, commitment and obligation etc. under various chapter of the FTP 2015-20 Transfer of export performance held in 1६0 0488020182 (PAN AAACT1249H) to IEC 0417514794 (PAN AADCT1398N), under Para 3.23 of FTP 2015-20, as the Company named as Tube Investments of India Limited only, as cited above, have had export performance all along with and continues with same performance and have Statutory obligation to fulfill various conditions under Chapter of FTP2015-20.

a Limited only, as cited above, have had export performance all along with and continues with same performance and have Statutory obligation to fulfill various conditions under Chapter of FTP2015-20. It was only consequential that the IEC and PAN got changed in the process of demerger in the above manner despite restoration of name of the company and it accordingly continues to operate the existing manufacturing business (including imports & exports) and fulfill all obligation under new 1:06 0417514794 (PANAADCT1398N) L-

The firm made a plea with RA Chennai vide their letter dated 19.01.2018 to consider their and transfer the 2-Star Export House Certificate with वी export performance to IEC 0417514794 (PANAADCT 1398 Nj). RA Chennai vide his letter F.No,04/Misc/EPCG/AM18, dated 16.02.2018 advised them to approach the Policy Relaxation Committee, New Delhi for speedy disposal of their request placed as above.
It is submitted that in the above circumstances transfer of the existing 2 Star Export Trade House certificate No.

ation Committee, New Delhi for speedy disposal of their request placed as above. 12. It is submitted that in the above circumstances transfer of the existing 2 Star Export Trade House certificate No. B/1781 which is valid till 03.09.2020 with all its past export performance by relaxing the relevant provisions of FTP of procedures thereunder, are genuinely necessary for the company to continue with same export performance and meet obligations under the FTP 2015-20 under IEC 0417514794 (PAN AADCT1398N), so that their company will not have any hardship and adverse import on their business. Decision: The Committee noted the statements made by the firm that the manufacturing and trading business of the initial firm has been transferred to the resultant company Tube Investments of India Ltd and after name change consequent to demerger the resultant company continues to operate the existing manufacturing business (including imports & exports) and fulfill all obligation as per various chapter of the FTP 2015-20 under new IEC 0417514794. The other resultant company named as TI Financial Holding limited is involved in the process of demerger and has only financial activities, that the financial business does not have any manufacturing of exports/imports.

company named as TI Financial Holding limited is involved in the process of demerger and has only financial activities, that the financial business does not have any manufacturing of exports/imports. Hence the Committee decided to consider their request and transfer the 2—Star Export House Certificate to the resulting manufacturing entity as the Export House Certificate was issued on the basis of the export performance of the manufacturing business of the initial entity. (Action: RA/Applicant } PH Case No.03: M/s Arvind Pipes & Fittings Industries Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai F, No. 01/60/162/445/AM18/PRC

Subject: Clubbing of two Advance authorizations No. (i) 0310732788 dated 29.04.2013 and

(ii) 0310762752 dated 20.12.2013.

The applicant had sought personal hearing, which was afforded on 31.07.2018. Shri Ashok Maniar, Representative appeared before the committee on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions:

di, They had applied for clubbing in RA, Mumbai but they have not considered their request and suggested to approach PRC. The deficiency letter from RA contends that since one of the AA no.0310732788dt.29.04.2013 has already been redeemed prior to the clubbing request, the clubbing request cannot be considered. They agree that there is lapse committed on their part for late clubbing proposal. It may note that both the licenses are having the same import item and are issued under same custom notification from the same RA, If, they may point out there is no FTP provision explicitly denying the clubbing of the redeemed license and further they have balance surplus imports in one of the licenses to be clubbed against the one which has no imports. It is important that license no.0310732788 dt.29.04.2013 which has surplus exports was proposed at RA, Mumbai for EODC because it has import balance, but was issued as redemption letter wrongly. The information about the same may be sought and verified from the RA file. It was a typographical mistake at RA office when written as “Redemption letter” as it was proposed as ६00८, apparently because they had their import balance of 66.30% and excess exports to that extent in licence i.e.

hical mistake at RA office when written as “Redemption letter” as it was proposed as ६00८, apparently because they had their import balance of 66.30% and excess exports to that extent in licence i.e. Licence No.0310732788 dated 29.04,2013 (the earlier licence). Secondly it is also evident from Jast Para of their letter dated 21.08.2015 issued by RA, Mumbai wherein they have also referred as EO Discharge Certificate. RA Mumbai has also issued ६006 / Bond Waiver letter dated 21.08.2015, The Committee is well aware that the EODC is issued in cases where imports are balance in the licences at the time of applying the closure and this is exactly the case of the clubbing application. That licenses pertain to pervious FTP 2015-20 the one time clubbing is not applicable at RA, Mumbai, as per PN 32 and 34 dated 18 and 24 /10/2017, since their case is above EODC and not Redeemed one. They clarity that under license no, 0310762752 dated 20.12.2013 the import description in the License is ‘Alloy / Non alloy steel”, the word Alloy”is equivalent to

above EODC and not Redeemed one. They clarity that under license no, 0310762752 dated 20.12.2013 the import description in the License is ‘Alloy / Non alloy steel”, the word Alloy”is equivalent to

Stainless steel as evidently imported and shown in the import description in respective Bill of Entry. Therefore the import item under both the licenses are same Decision: The Committee went through the statements made by the firm and noted that the case of the firm is not a case of bond waiver, but a case of redemption. Further there is no concept of partial bond waiver prescribed in the FTP/HBP. One of the authorizations has already been redeemed by the RA. The firm was not able to show any grounds of genuine hardships. Therefore, the Committee decided to reject the request of the firm for clubbing. (Action: Applicant/RA} PH Case No.04: M/s. Fertichem Cotspin Ltd., Chandigarh F. No, 01/36/218/17/AM-19/EPCG-I

Subject: Condonation of shortfall of EO in terms of Para 5.12 of HBP 2009-14

The applicant had sought personal hearing and review in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP, 2015-2020, which was afforded on 31.07.2018. Shri Sanjay Singhal and ShriParveenAgarwal, Representatives appeared before the committee on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions: M/s. Fertichem Cotspin Ltd, vide letter dated 12.04.2018 have requested for condonation of shortfall of EO in terms of Para 5.12 of HBP (RE:2008)/2009-214 in respect of EPCG authorization No. 2230000900 dated 16.04.2008 issued to them. The party has stated that they are manufacturer exporter of cotton yarn since 1999- 2000 and had imported various textile machineries under EPCG Scheme and fulfilled export obligation under EPCG Scheme before the specific time period. They have been issued more than fifty EPCG authorization since inception of the company and Export obligation of USD.2.82 cr. Approx.{ie. about Rs.131.00 crore) have been fulfilled well in time except against EPCG Authorization no. 2230000900 dt. 16.04.2008. The party has submitted that they could not fulfill EO in the subject EPCG authorisation due to various incentives provided by State Governments of Rajasthan, Maharashtra, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh etc. which has resulted in setting up of new units in these States with advanced machineries with better quality, efficiencies and lower power cost and global economic slowdown. The party has requested for condonation of Shortfall in terms of Para 5.12 of HBP 2008 of USD.3.00 lakhs (Approx).

with better quality, efficiencies and lower power cost and global economic slowdown. The party has requested for condonation of Shortfall in terms of Para 5.12 of HBP 2008 of USD.3.00 lakhs (Approx). The party undertake that they have not used the shipping bills for fulfillment of any export obligation (Specific as well as average) and

also undertake that they will not use these shipping bifls for fulfillment of export obligations in future also. 6. Earlier, the party had requested for condonation of procedural lapse of mentioning wrong EPCG authorization nos. in shipping bilis and condonation of shortfall of EO in terms of Para 5.12 of HBP (RE:2008)/2009-14. 7. The for condonation of procedural lapse of mentioning wrong EPCG authorization nos. in shipping bills was accepted by the EPCG Committee in its meeting held on 12.02.2018 while the request for condonation of shortfalluptoS%inexportobligation in terms of Para 5.12 of HBP (RE:2008)/2009-14 was rejected as the provision has since been deleted. Decision: The Committee went through the statements made by the firm during the personal hearing which had stated that the unit was not running for a certain period and has been an NPA and even though they had sought the extension in EOP, they could not fulfill the stipulated EO. Therefore and decided to accept the request of the firm for condonation of shortfall in EO to the tune of 3.5% in view of the hardships stated above. (Action: Applicant/RA) PH Case No.05: M/s Arkray Healthcare Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai F.No. 01/60/162/631AM/18/PRC

Subject:Re-credit of 4% SAD — issuance of consolidated certificate (credit note) — regarding

The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP, 2015-2020, which was afforded on 31.07.2018. Shri Ketan Panchal, Manager-Purchase appeared before the committee on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions: 2. The firm has stated that in the meeting they have been repeatedly asked to corroborate the submission of original consolidated certificates to the RA, DGFT. 3. The fact of the matter is that the original consolidated certificate goes to RA DGFT directly from the O/o Customs (Import) which has been looked by the members of PRC. The letter addressed to DGFT, Mumbai by the O/o Customs (Import), Mumbai is a clear evidence for the same. ) -

1.1. 12. 13, In this particular case of theirs the correspondence was between, the O/o the Customs (Import) Refund Section Mumbai office and the Jt. DGFT Mumbai office. They were only a part of the proceedings as a beneficiary and they get only intimation under Order-in-Original about the dispatch to RA DGFT. Accordingly on the 13" of September, 2011, the O/o the Commissioner of Customs (import) sent Original consolidated certificate amounting to Rs.8,44,283/- to the RA Mumbai. The evidence can be corroborated from how the communication was addressed. Similarly on the 30" of April, 2012, The O/o Customs {Import}, Mumbai sent Original consolidated certificate amounting to Rs.2063689/- to the RA Mumbai. These communications clearly and categoricafly confirm that the Original

2, The O/o Customs {Import}, Mumbai sent Original consolidated certificate amounting to Rs.2063689/- to the RA Mumbai. These communications clearly and categoricafly confirm that the Original consolidated certificate was sent to DGFT Mumbai office directly by the O/o Customs (import) Mumbai. On the 14" of September, 2011, They applied to DGFT Mumbai for re-credit of 4% amount in their DEPB licence quoting the Policy Circular No.22/2009-2014 dated 03.02.2010. With all humifiation, they would like to point out that due to the misinterpretation of the notification and the inept handling of the situation, their request was denied by the office of DGFT Mumbai vide their letter No.03/84/051/01993/AMO09 dated 15.09.2011. Also they regret to mention that the PRC Members erred in understanding properly the procedure being adopted for re-credit of the SAD4% as per the FTP. So with the above clarification, they deny both, observation of the PRC that the submission of original documents to RA Mumbai was not corroborated with evidence (ii) the case pertains to the year 2012 and the documents should have been submitted by 2013. They have in their possession all the DEPB licences used for the credit of 4% duty for the import of materials. But the re-credit of the amount as per the policy promulgated by the Govt. is not followed in their case — whether it is due to the various notifications issued by the Govt. or various interpretation of the matter by the departments concerned.

licy promulgated by the Govt. is not followed in their case — whether it is due to the various notifications issued by the Govt. or various interpretation of the matter by the departments concerned.

Decision: The Committee went through the statements made by the firm during the personal hearing and noted that the firm has not brought any new grounds of hardship which warrant review of the PRC’s earlier decision and hence decided to maintain its earlier rejection. (Action: Applicant/RA) PH Case No.06: M/s. Raj Petro Specialities Pvt. Ltd., Chennai F. No. 01/60/162/130/AM16/EFGC(PRC)

Subject:Request for revalidation of Advance Authorization No. 0410141866 dated

18.12.2012. Decision: No one appeared on behalf of the firm. The Committee, in the interest of natural justice, decided to defer the case and provide the firm another opportunity of personal hearing. (Action: Applicant) PH Case No.07: M/s Indoco Remedies Limited, Mumbai F. No, 01/60/162/550/AM18/PRC

Subject:Request for counting of export of four Shipping bills 1149521 dated 12.06.2015,

1124624 dated 11.06.2015, 1821000 dated 16.07.2015 & 3818554 dated 29.10.2015 under Advance Authorization No. 0310792676 dated 08.01.2015 issued under PC-9 conditions and waiver the destruction of 0.381 gms under PC-18 Condition. 1. The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP, 2015-2020, which was afforded on 31.07.2018. Shri NavnitChauhan, Deputy Manager and Shri Nitin Garg, Assistant General Manager appeared before the committee on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions: 2. They have obtained three Advance Authorization no. 0310782942 dated 26.05.2014, 0310785225 dated 12.06.2014 and 0310792676 dated 08.01.2015 for import of Latanoprost and export of Latanoprost Opthalmic Solution. 3. All the three Licenses were issued for the same import and export item and under IL same custom Notification.

At the time of shipment of goods vide Shipping bill no. 1149521 dated 12.06.2015 and 1124624 dated 11.06.2015, they have mentioned AA no. 0310782942 dated 26.05.2014 instead of AA no.0310792676 dated 08.01.2015. 5. Similarly, at the time of shipment of goodsvide Shipping bill No.1821000 dated 16.07.2015 & 3818554 dated 29.10.2015, they have mentioned AA no. 0310785225 dated 12.06.2014 instead of AA no.0310792676 dated 08.01.2015. 6.

of shipment of goodsvide Shipping bill No.1821000 dated 16.07.2015 & 3818554 dated 29.10.2015, they have mentioned AA no. 0310785225 dated 12.06.2014 instead of AA no.0310792676 dated 08.01.2015. 6. They have confirmed and declared that they have /shall not utilize the above four s/bills towards fulfillment of export obligation in any other advance authorization. Decision: The Committee went through the submissions/statements made by the firm and decided to allow only two shipping bills No.1821000 dated 16.07.2015 & 3818554 dated 29.10.2015 to be counted for EO fulfillment of the subsequent Advance Authorisation No. 0310732676 dated 08.01.2015 duly accounting for the proportionate import of material made vide bill of entry dated 08.06.2015 and declined to account the shipping bills 1149521 dated 12.06.2015 and 1124624 dated 11.06.2015 for EO fulfiliment of the Advance Authorisation No, 0310732676 dated 08.01.2015. The Committee did not accept the request for waiver of PC-18 condition for the balance imports in the bill of entry made on 08.06.2015 (other than those accounted in the shipping bill Nos.1821000 dated 16.07.2015 & 3818554 dated 29.10.2015) and also imports made vide bill of entry dated 26.10.2015. (Action: Applicant)

Case No.08: M/s. Indo Rama, Nagpur

F. No. 01/60/162/86/AM19/PRC

Subject:Allow discharging of EO in Clubbing of 06 nos. Advance Authorizations RA, Nagpur

in one Advance Authorization export done beyond 48 Months. 1, The firm has submitted that fresh Advance Authorization was taken to explore the possibility to include their other products so that they can complete export obligation in proportion to raw material imported against First Advance Authorization, where export orders they could not arrange for required final product for completion of export obligation even cost at par of export product i.e. they have included six Advance Authorization just to include other final products for completion of Initial 4 Advance Authorization; in fifth Advance Authorization NIL & in 6" Advance Authorization just to batance Import. The firm has requested that clubbing considered grounding on EOP of first Advance Authorization & composition fees may be applicable on export completed beyond 36 months.

They are manufacturing five final products (poy, PSF, DTY, FDY and PET Chips) and Advance Authorization taken for each final product separately. Raw materials for all final products are common (PTA, MEG, 58203, TIO2& SFO). Market trend for export of their final products declined from 2011 and w.e.f. 05.06.2012 EOP of Advance Authorization reduced to 18 Months from 36 months. !t has caused very hardship to close outstanding Advance Authorization individually.

roducts declined from 2011 and w.e.f. 05.06.2012 EOP of Advance Authorization reduced to 18 Months from 36 months. !t has caused very hardship to close outstanding Advance Authorization individually. Actually, they have incurred huge loss because their five years long term contract for import could not sustain. Long terms contract input procurement is cheaper provided other terms & conditions of export are met. 3. In spite of all possible efforts including installed capacity to export; they could not cover up as planned for export based on FTP during 2010-11 versus changed on 05.06.2012. 4. Their products excluded from MEIS incentive and thus extra freight etc. from pocket, earlier it was shared by the govt. by way of FPS/FMS/SFMS. Decision: The Committee went through the statements made by the firm and noted that the firm was not able to show any grounds of genuine hardships which had resulted in completing the export beyond 36 months and does not fulfill the criteria for Clubbing and therefore decided not to accept the request of the firm for clubbing of the Advance authorisations. (Action: Applicant)

Case No.09: M/s. Mangalam Organics Limited Formerly Dujodwala Products Ltd.,

Mumbai F. No. 01/60/162/87/AM19/PRC PRC Meeting No, 09/AM19 dated 31.07.2018

Subject:Clubbing of two Advance Authorizations No. 0310788810 dated 05.09.2014 and

0310800865 dated 10.12.2015.

The firm has stated that they have exported excess quantity against authorization no. 0310788810 dated 05.09.2014, issued with EOP 18 months. They enhanced quantity & CIF value of import items on pro-rata basis on excess quantity exported. But, they could not import the enhanced quantities within the validity of this authorization.

As per FTP Para 4.38 (VII) (B), an Authorization can be clubbed which have been issued within 18 months from the date of issue of earliest license. The License no. 0310800865 dated 10.12.2015 is issued within 18 months from the date of issuance of license no. 0310788810 dated 05.09.2014; hence it is allowed to club the License no. 0310788810 dated 05.09.2014 and 0310800865 dated 10.12.2015 for redemption & Regularization.

Therefore, they have clubbed these two authorizations and submitted to DGFT for issuance of EODC,

88810 dated 05.09.2014 and 0310800865 dated 10.12.2015 for redemption & Regularization.

Therefore, they have clubbed these two authorizations and submitted to DGFT for issuance of EODC,

But RA, Mumbai rejected their application on the ground of PN 32 dated 18.10.2017, Advice to apply for individual redemption. Decision: The Committee went through the statements made by the firm and noted that there is no shortfall in fulfillment of EO in the first advance authorization and the validity period of authorizations do not run concurrently and the imports made in subsequent authorization does not fal! within the validity period of import of the first authorization Further, the firm was not able to show any grounds of genuine hardships and therefore decided not to accept the request of the firm for clubbing of the Advance authorizations. (Action: Applicant )

Case No.10: M/s JSL Lifestyle Limited, Gurgaon

F.No. 01/60/162/174/AM19/PRC

Subject:Relaxation to accept Manual BRCs for TED refund filed vide RA fileno.

05/040/83/0090/AM-17/Misc/CLA

The firm has stated that they have applied for TED refund in CLA, New Delhi vide file no.05/040/83/0090/AM-17/Misc/CLA for supply of material to BEML Ltd, Government undertaking organization against AROs issued in their favour.These AROs were issued against advance authorization no. 0710104231, 0710104233, 0710105280 and 0710105283 issued to BEML Ltd.

For these supplies they have received full payment from BEML Ltd. and their Bank (Punjab National Bank) has issued Manual BRCs as proof of payment but CLA, New Delhi is asking for e-BRCs.They have approached in their bank several times and also met to Senior officials of Bank to issue e-BRCs but bank has given their inability to issue e-BRCs in writing. 3. They have submitted a copy of letter dated 23.01.2017 (Page 16/Cor.) issued by Bank. Decision: The Committee went through the statements made by the firm and decided to accept the request of the firm for considering the manual bres in their application for refund of TED. (Action: Applicant} (४yo

Case No.11: M/s ArthTeknet Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon

४०. 01/60/162/177/AM/19/PRC

Subject:Relaxation/Waiver of paragraph 2.58(c) of FTP_2015-20 relating to eligibility of

SEIS benefit under Paragraph 3.08(f) “an active IEC at the time of rendering such services” of FTP. 1. The firm has stated that they had rendered services and earned Net Foreign exchange of Rs.6, 58, 83,797 in the financial year 2015-16 on which they are eligible to get the benefits of Rs. 19, 75,014. However, Paragraph no. 3.08 (f} of the ETP 2015-20 stipulates that in order to be eligible to get the SEIS benefits the service exporters should have an active IEC on the date of render of services. 2, They have taken the IEC on 18.04.2016.As a result they have already got benefits of SEIS for the period after date of IEC. There is no dispute on this aspect. But because of the embargo contained in paragraph 3.08 (f) of FTP 2015-20 They would not be allowed the said benefits by RA as they are not having the active IEC on the date of the render of services. It is well established legal position that the substantial benefits cannot be denied for minor procedural lapses. Not having IEC on the date of render of services certainly falls in the category of minor procedural japse as there cannot be any malafide intention for not obtaining the IEC. 3. Decision: The Committee went through the statements made by the firm and noted the Paragraph 3.08 (f} of the FTP 2015-20 stipulates that in order to be eligible to get the SEIS benefits the service exporters should have an active IEC on the date of render of services.

and noted the Paragraph 3.08 (f} of the FTP 2015-20 stipulates that in order to be eligible to get the SEIS benefits the service exporters should have an active IEC on the date of render of services. The fact was available in the public domain since 01.04.2015.i.e the period from which the firm intends to consider the services rendered for the benefits under the SEIS Scheme. The firm has not shown any grounds of genuine hardships and therefore decided not to accept the request of the firm for granting the SEIS benefits for the services rendered during the period in which the firm did not have an active IEC. {Action: Applicant)

Case No.12: M/s GIC Insuflex Conductors Private Limited, Thane

5, No. 01/60/162/169/AM19/PRC प्र

Subject:EOP extension without the composition fees for regularization purpose against

Advance Authorization No.0310798554 dated 28.08.2015 des The firm has stated that they had orders in hand for which they applied for an advance authorization against the import of copper they have completed the exports but out of the EO Period up to 30 months from the date of issue of license as in the current period they were exporting against previous advance authorisations which they issued prior to the subject advance authorization for a higher quantity as they were expecting the export obligation to be for 36months as their eartier authorisations were issued for 36months EO Period but in between the policy is changed and license is issued for 18 months EO Period and were unable to complete the exports in time within initial EO Period so they could not export parallel to the advance authorizations and the export chain was disturbed. They immediately applied for 1° extension of EO Period for balance export but have received a deficiency latter from RA, Mumbai in which they have asked to pay the composite fees of 0.5% of FOB value of the balance £.0. which comes to Rs.1719227/- which is a very huge amount of money and is not viable to them, Their item is copper which is highly expensive than other items and they do not make such big profits to pay the cornposite fee amount of 0.5%of the balance EO.

nt of money and is not viable to them, Their item is copper which is highly expensive than other items and they do not make such big profits to pay the cornposite fee amount of 0.5%of the balance EO. Hence they could not manage the same and missed the opportunity in first extension which got expired but have made the exports under the subject advance authorization even out of initial EO Period. In the meantime they had approached the PRC for the condone of composition fees as after the first extension every month they need to pay 0.5% of balance export value which is impossible for them to pay but on the basis of the acknowledgement receipt of submission of application of EOP extension they have succeed to complete the EO within 30 months from the date of issue of license and parallel they were continuously corresponding with Head Quarters, to regularize the case by condonation of composition fees but they have not received positive response. In the last correspondence they have asked to submit ANF-2D atong with the fees which they had submitted. Now, in the month of October 2017 a P.N. No.34 dated 24.10.2017 issued for extension of EO Period of all advance authorization issued prior to 05.06.2012 where you have provided one time relaxation without payment of composition fees and grant extension of upto 36 months while their authorization is issued on 25.06.2013. They have completed their exports within 31 months from the date of

ation without payment of composition fees and grant extension of upto 36 months while their authorization is issued on 25.06.2013. They have completed their exports within 31 months from the date of

issue of authorisation and within the initial 18 months they had not completed any EO. 6. They have stated that they can export only under advance authorization scheme but due to non regularization of subject authorization their name is under defaulter list which affect timely delivery of export orders and fail to export commitments their import cargo is also held up in customs and hence the export is delayed due to irregular production. Decision: The Committee went through the statements made by the firm and noted that, the relaxation in composition fee for a particular firm is not possible by the PRC and the firm has not been able to show any grounds of genuine hardships and therefore decided not to accept the request of the firm. (Action: Applicant)

Case No.13; M/s GIC Insuflex Conductors Private Limited, Thane

5, No, 01/60/162/170/AM19/PRC

Subject: EOP extension without the composition fees for regularization purpose against

Advance Authorization No.0310788959 dated 10.09.2014 and to accept seven certificates of amendment obtained from customs for change of license number and file number. 1. The firm has stated that, when they applied for the advance authorization they were expecting the export obligation period of the advance authorization to be for 36 months as their earlier authorisations were issued for 36 months EO Period but in between the policy is changed and license is issued for 18 months EO Period. During this period they were completing the export obligation of earlier authorizations and when they started exporting against the subject advance authorization they came to know that the exports Obligation is 18 months and not for 36 months and they noticed that only 9% of export obligation is fulfilled within the initial EO Period as they were exporting under the advance authorization they issued earlier for a higher quantity with the same state of mind ,their complete chain of exports was disturbed as they could not export under the above authorization. 2. They immediately applied for 17 extension of EO Period for balance export but have received a deficiency latter from RA, Mumbai in which they have asked to pay the composite fees of 0.5% of FOB value of the balance ६.0. which comes to Rs.2309700/- which is a very huge amount of money and is not viable to them, Their item is copper which is highly expensive than other items and they do not make such Ba. he

nce ६.0. which comes to Rs.2309700/- which is a very huge amount of money and is not viable to them, Their item is copper which is highly expensive than other items and they do not make such Ba. he

big profits to pay the composite fee amount of 0.5% of the balance EO. Hence they could not manage the same and missed the opportunity in first extension which got expired but have made the exports under the subject advance authorization even out of initial EO Period. 3. They required EO Period extension as they have obtained a huge quantity authorization expecting 36 months export period as granted in earlier authorization but due to change in policy, Authorisation received with 18 months export period. This is noticed very late as they were completing export of other authorisations. Eighteen months period is very short period to fulfilling the huge applied quantity in the above authorization. 4. They have then fulfilled 100% export obligation in 337 months from the date of issue of authorization and now they want to regularize the case .They have stated that due to heavy composition fees they not obtained extension from RA, Mumbai. They are then continuously following up for the condone of composition fees and issue extension without any fees. 5, They also request to accept seven certificate of amendment obtained from customs for change of license number and file number as at the time of exports they have mentioned wrong file number on their shipping bills.

st to accept seven certificate of amendment obtained from customs for change of license number and file number as at the time of exports they have mentioned wrong file number on their shipping bills. There are total 7 certificates no.1411dated 10.12.2016 of 66 shipping bills, 1408 dated 10.12.2016 of 66 shipping bills, 1497 dated 13.12.2016 of 32 shipping bills, 1512 dated 14.12.2016 of 19 shipping bills,1498 dated 13.12.2016 of 32shipping bills,1159 dated 07.09.2017 of 13 shipping bills and 1160 dated 07.09.2017 of 5 shipping bills which issued by customs to read the advance authorization no.0310788959 dated 10.09.2014 and File No. 03/84/040/146/AM15 in the shipping bills as mentioned in above certificates. Decision: The Committee went through the statements made by the firm and noted that, the relaxation in composition fee for a particular firm is not possible by the PRC and the firm has not been able to show any grounds of genuine hardships and therefore decided not to accept the request of the firm. (Action: Applicant)

Case No.14: M/s GIC Insuflex Conductors Private Limited, Thane

F. No. 01/60/162/168/AM19/PRC

Subject:EOP extension without the composition fees for regularization purpose against

Advance Authorization No.03107738979 dated 25.06.2013 and to accept three certificates dated 30.07.2015, 10.12.2016 {two) of amendment obtained from customs for change of ficense number and file number. 1. The firm has stated that when they applied for the advance authorization they applied for a higher quantity as they were expecting the export obligation period of the advance authorization to be for 36months as their earlier authorisations were issued for 36 months EO Period but in between the policy is changed and license is issued for 18 months EO Period. During this period they were completing the export obligation of eartier authorizations and when they started exporting against the subject advance authorization they came to know that the exports Obligation is 18 months and not for 36 months and they noticed that only 30% ofexport obligation is fulfilled within the initial EO Period. 2. They immediately applied for 1°‘ extension of EO Period for balance export but have received a deficiency latter from RA, Mumbai in which they have asked to pay the composite fees of 0.5% of FOB value of the balance ६.0, which comes to Rs.5725788/- which is a very huge amount of money and is not viable to them. Their item is copper which is highly expensive than other items and they do not make such big profits to pay the composite fee amount of 0.5% of the balance EO.

nt of money and is not viable to them. Their item is copper which is highly expensive than other items and they do not make such big profits to pay the composite fee amount of 0.5% of the balance EO. Hence they could not manage the same and missed the opportunity in first extension which got expired but have made the exports under the subject advance authorization even out of initial EO Period. 3. They required EO Period extension as they have obtained a huge quantity authorization expecting 36 months export period as granted in earlier authorization but due to change in policy, Authorisation received with 18 months export period. This is noticed very late as they were completing export of other Authorisations. Eighteen months period is very short period to fulfilling the huge applied quantity in the above authorization. 4. They have then fulfilled 100% export obligation in 33 months from the date of issue of authorization and now they want to regularize the case .They have stated that due to heavy composition fees they not obtained extension from RA, Mumbai. They are then continuously following up for the condone of composition fees and issue extension without any fees. 5. They also request to accept three certificate dated 30.07.2015, 10.12.2016(two} of amendment obtained from customs for change of license number and file number as at the time of exports they have mentioned wrong file number on their shipping He. (2

30.07.2015, 10.12.2016(two} of amendment obtained from customs for change of license number and file number as at the time of exports they have mentioned wrong file number on their shipping He. (2

bills. There are total 3 certificate for no. of 11, 272 and 3 shipping bills which issued by customs to read the advance authorization no.0310738979 dated 25.06.2013 and File no.03/84/040/57/AM414 in the shipping bills as mentioned in above certificates. Decision: The Committee went through the statements made by the firm and decided to allow EOP extension upto 33 months for regularization purpose subject to payment of composition fee @1.0% of the unfulfilled EOP for each month of EOP extension. The Committee however noted that, the relaxation in composition fee for a particular firm is not possible by the PRC and the firm has not been able to show any grounds of genuine hardships and therefore decided not to accept the request of the firm. (Action: Applicant)

Case No.15: M/s. Addi Alloys {P) Ltd., Ludhiana

F. No. 01/60/162/160/AM19/PRC

Subject:Extension of € O against Advance Authorization No. 3010093254 dated

10.04.2013.

They had obtained above Advance Authorization and fulfilled only 9.5% quantity wise export obligation within the E.0.Period.
Due to the global and domestic downfall of tron and steel industry their order got cancelled and they were not able to procure new orders because of the downfall of industry. There was sharp dectine in prices as well as demand for the commodity.
Due to the downfall in prices and demand of tron and steel ingots they faced cash crunch for a long period of time. Since electricity expenses are one the major cost of manufacturing ingots so on 07.04.2014, they surrendered their electricity connection to curtail fixed electricity expenses for a short period of time. 4, After four months of surrendering their electricity connection,they again got their electricity connection re-installed and started production and doing business in domestic market since then, from last six months iron and steel industry has been doing good domestically as well as globaliy,demand and prices have gone up for steel sector and they have been also getting queries for export of concerned product that is High speed steel Ingots. Raw materials are in stock.

s well as globaliy,demand and prices have gone up for steel sector and they have been also getting queries for export of concerned product that is High speed steel Ingots. Raw materials are in stock. They have successfully procured order for 100 MT and have to execute export order under advance authorization. Decision; The Committee went through the statements made by the firm and noted that, the firm has made exports of only 9.5% and the grounds cited by them does not indicate any grounds of genuine hardship and therefore decided not to accept the request of the firm.

{Action: Applicant) Case ४०.16; M/s. JPM Exports Pvt. Lid., Kolkata F.No, 04/60/162/175/AM19/PRC

Subject:Amendment of Export Obligation and EOP date extension in respect of Advance

Authorization no. 0210206423 dated 07.01.2016.

The above Advance Authorization was taken for a customer in Europe. However due to bad financial condition of that customer they reduced the order quantities. With great difficulty they have been able to find a customer for similar fabric but this has taken more than one year and by this time the first extension of the license had expired. Month from the date of

Now their request to further extend it for a period of 12 approval, so that they are able to fulfill their export obligation. Also as the item required by the new client is different, also amend the item and quantity in the license. 3. They had applied to Kolkata DGFT but they have advised them to contact DGFT Delhi as they have not been able to fulfill 50% of the export obligation by quantities. However, export obligation for the value has been completed to the import of 90 %. Decision: The Committee went through the statements made by the firm and noted that the firm is stated to have fulfilled EO to an extent of 90% in value terms. The Committee decided to grant relaxation in the condition for fulfillment of 50 % EO in quantity terms as prescribed in Para 4.42(f) of HBP 2015-20 subject to the condition that the firm has fulfilled the EO to an extent of 50% on average basis for all export items on quantity terms on pro rata import basis.

cribed in Para 4.42(f) of HBP 2015-20 subject to the condition that the firm has fulfilled the EO to an extent of 50% on average basis for all export items on quantity terms on pro rata import basis. The Committee also decided that the firm may approach the Regional Authority for any amendments, who shall examine the same as per existing provisions of FEP/HBP. (Action: Applicant)

Case No.17: Reference from ShriAsheesh Jain

5, No. 01/89/180/26/AM-11/PC-2(A)/ [E-2263] i

Subject:Request to allow resale of Rolls Royce Car

ShriAsheesh Jain vide e-mail dated 12.05.2018 (pg. 71-85/Cor.) had stated that he had imported an Antique / Vintage Rolls Royce 20/25 Owner Driven Sports Salon 1933 Car from USA in May, 2014 and also registered it in Rajasthan. While importing the said vehicle, Shri Jain had executed a bond stating that the vehicle is for his own actual use and not intended for sale. Shri Jain has paid the full duty of 220%. He wanted to sell that car and for that purpose he wanted to know the meaning of actual user and also the possibility of being able to sell the car. 2, In this regard, it is stated that import policy for import of ‘vintage’ cars, i.e. cars manufactured prior to 1° January, 1950, is ‘Free’ for actual users. However, such cars that would be plying on public roads will continue to be subject to Central Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and Rules, 1989. 3. ६ was observed that the import is subject to provision 2.49(b) (ii) of Handbook of Procedure, 2015-2020. Accordingly, he would need relaxation of provision of Para 2.58 of Foreign Trade Policy, 2015-2020. 4, tn view of above, ShriAsheesh was requested vide e-mail dated 13.06.2018 to submit the prescribed fee of Rs. 2,000 and then again applied for relaxation in PRC with all the relevant documents. Decision: The Committee went through the statements made by the firm and noted that the actual user conditions imposed on imported vintage cars cannot be waived and therefore decided not to accept the request of the firm. (Action: Applicant) PH Case No.18: M/s.

e firm and noted that the actual user conditions imposed on imported vintage cars cannot be waived and therefore decided not to accept the request of the firm. (Action: Applicant) PH Case No.18: M/s. Chiripal Poly Films Limited, Ahmedabad F.No. 01/60/162/201/AM19/PRC

Subject: Clubbing of three Advance Authorization no. (1). 0810136750 dated 18.12.2015,

(2). 0810137509 dated 28.03.2016 and (3) 0810137884 dated 10.05.2016. 1, The applicant had sought personal hearing, which was afforded on 31.07.2018. ShriPurvanTalati, Director General Manager appeared before the committee on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions: 2. The said clubbing cum redemption application they made on the basis of policy lying at that time after completion of Import / Export against all the Advance Authorization mentioned above.

They have received a letter dated 14.05.2018 from RA, Ahmadabad stating that your application is deficient as per Para 4.38 {viii) of clubbing shall be remitted only when there is a shortfall in fulfillment of EO occurred in the first authorization and excess export made in subsequent authorization. Decision: The Committee went through the submission/statements made by the firm during the personal hearing and in writing and noted that the condition of shortfall in fulfillment of export obligation occurred in first authorization and excess exports are made in subsequent Authorizations, may not be insisted when validity period (for import) of Authorizations runs concurrently and imports made in subsequent authorization falls within validity period (for import) of first. Therefore the Committee decided to accept the request of the firm for clubbing with the following conditions: i.

s made in subsequent authorization falls within validity period (for import) of first. Therefore the Committee decided to accept the request of the firm for clubbing with the following conditions: i. The firm shall pay the fee of Rs.5000/- per each Advance Authorisation, ii, Clubbing shall be allowed only for redemption / regularisation of such Authorisations and no further import or export shall be allowed. iii. In case, exports are made outside EO period of any Authorisation, EO extension may be allowed before clubbing of such authorisation, as per Para 4.42 of Handbook of procedures on payment of composition fee. iv. Only such Advance Authorisations shall be clubbed where exports under all Authorisations have been made within the initial/ extended EO period of the earliest issued Authorisation. Vv. Accounting of exports made outside expiry of initial or extended EO period of earliest issued authorisation shall not be taken into consideration for EO fulfilment after clubbing of such Authorisations. vie Inputs which are common in all Authorisations shat! only be clubbed and duty free inputs shal! be accounted for as per SION/Ad-Hoc Norms fixed by NC. vii, Minimum value addition as prescribed in FTP and Procedures for the export product will be required to be maintained on clubbing.

uts shal! be accounted for as per SION/Ad-Hoc Norms fixed by NC. vii, Minimum value addition as prescribed in FTP and Procedures for the export product will be required to be maintained on clubbing. Upon clubbing, if shortfalt in value or quantity is noticed, the same shall be regularized under the provisions of Para 4.49 of HBP 2015-20. viii, RA shall ensure the imports in the first authorisation are made within the initial validity period/extendable validity period of the first authorisation. ix, After clubbing, Authorisations shall for all purposes, be deemed to be one Authorisation. The value addition would be calculated on the basis of total CIF and total FOB arrived at after clubbing the Authorisations. Me No clubbing shall be permitted in respect of Authorisations where misrepresentation / fraud have come to the notice of RA. (Action: Applicant)

PH Case No.19: M/s. Chiripal Poly Films Limited, Ahmedabad 5, No, 01/60/162/202/AM19/PRC

Subject: Clubbing of Six Advance Authorization nos. (1) 0810138258 dated 08.07.2016, (2)

0810138817 dated 06.10.2016, (3) 0810139870 dated 10.03.2017, (4) 0810139561 dated 17.01.2017, (5) 0810139578 dated 23.01.2017 and (6) 0810139871 dated 10.03.2017. The applicant had sought personal hearing, which was afforded on 31.07.2018. ShriPurvantalati, Director General Manager appeared before the committee on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions: The said clubbing cum redemption application they made on the basis of policy lying at that time after completion of Import / Export against all the Advance Authorization mentioned above. They have received a letter dated 04.01.2018 from RA, Ahmadabad stating that your application is deficient as per Para 4.38 (viii) of clubbing shall be remitted only when there is a shortfall in fulfillment of EO occurred in the first authorization and excess export made in subsequent authorization. Decision: The Committee went through the submission/statements made by the firm during the personal hearing and in writing and noted that the condition of shortfall in fulfillment of export obligation occurred in first authorization and excess exports are made in subsequent Authorizations, may not be insisted when validity period (for import) of Authorizations runs concurrently and imports made in subsequent authorization falls within validity period (for import) of first.

horizations, may not be insisted when validity period (for import) of Authorizations runs concurrently and imports made in subsequent authorization falls within validity period (for import) of first. Therefore the Committee decided to accept the request of the firm for clubbing with the following conditions: The firm shail pay the fee of Rs.5000/- per each Advance Authorisation. Clubbing shatl be allowed only for redemption / regularisation of such Authorisations and no further import or export shall be allowed. in case, exports are made outside EO period of any Authorisation, EO extension may be allowed before clubbing of such authorisation, as per Para 4.42 of Handbook of procedures on payment of composition fee. Only such Advance Authorisations shall be clubbed where exports under ail Authorisations have been made within the initial/ extended EO period of the earliest issued Authorisation.

Vi. vii. viii. Accounting of exports made outside expiry of initial or extended ६0 period of earliest issued authorisation shall not be taken into consideration for EO fulfilment after clubbing of such Authorisations Inputs which are common in all Authorisations shalt only be clubbed and duty free inputs shall be accounted for as per SION/Ad-Hoc Norms fixed by NC Minimum value addition as prescribed in FTP and Procedures for the export product will be required to be maintained on clubbing.

ree inputs shall be accounted for as per SION/Ad-Hoc Norms fixed by NC Minimum value addition as prescribed in FTP and Procedures for the export product will be required to be maintained on clubbing. Upon clubbing, if shortfall in value or quantity is noticed, the same shall be regularized under the provisions of Para 4.49 of HBP 2015-20. RA shail ensure the imports in the first authorisation are made within the initial validity period/extendable validity period of the first authorisation. After clubbing, Authorisations shail for all purposes, be deemed to be one Authorisation. The value addition would be calculated on the basis of total CIF and total FOB arrived at after clubbing the Authorisations. No clubbing shalf be permitted in respect of Authorisations where misrepresentation / fraud have come to the notice of RA. (Action: Applicant) PH Case No, 20: M/s. Chiripal Poly Films Limited, Ahmedabad F.No, 01/60/162/203/AM19/PRC

Subject:Clubbing of two Advance Authorization no. 0810136919 dated 01.01 2016 and

0810137510 dated 28.03.2016 iii, The applicant had sought personal hearing which was afforded on 31.07.2018. ShriPurvanTalati, Director General Manager appeared before the committee on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions: The said clubbing cum redemption application they made on the basis of policy lying at that time after completion of tmport / Export against all the Advance Authorization mentioned above. They have received a letter from RA, Ahmadabad stating that your application is deficient as per Para 4.38 (viii) of clubbing shall be remitted only when there is a shortfall in fulfillment of EO occurred in the first authorization and excess export made in subsequent authorization. Decision: The Committee went through the submission/statements made by the firm during the personal hearing and in writing and noted that the condition of shortfall in fulfillment of

authorization. Decision: The Committee went through the submission/statements made by the firm during the personal hearing and in writing and noted that the condition of shortfall in fulfillment of

export obligation occurred in first authorization and excess exports are made in subsequent Authorizations, may not be insisted when validity period (for import) of Authorizations runs concurrently and imports made in subsequent authorization falls within validity period (for import) of first. Therefore the Committee decided to accept the request of the firm for clubbing with the following conditions: iii, Vi. vii. viii. The firm shall pay the fee of Rs.5000/- per each Advance Authorisation. Clubbing shall be allowed only for redemption / regularisation of such Authorisations and no further import or export shall be allowed. In case, exports are made outside EO period of any Authorisation, EO extension may be allowed before clubbing of such authorisation, as per Para 4.42 of Handbook of procedures on payment of composition fee. Only such Advance Authorisations shall be clubbed where exports under all Authorisations have been made within the initial/ extended EO period of the earliest issued Authorisation. Accounting of exports made outside expiry of initial or extended EO period of earliest issued authorisation shall not be taken into consideration for EO fulfilment after clubbing of such Authorisations. Inputs which are common in all Authorisations shall only be clubbed and duty free inputs shafl be accounted for as per SION/Ad-Hoc Norms fixed by NC.

fulfilment after clubbing of such Authorisations. Inputs which are common in all Authorisations shall only be clubbed and duty free inputs shafl be accounted for as per SION/Ad-Hoc Norms fixed by NC. Minimum value addition as prescribed in FTP and Procedures for the export product will be required to be maintained on clubbing. Upon clubbing, if shortfall in value or quantity is noticed, the same shall be regularized under the provisions of Para 4.49 of HBP 2015-20. RA shall ensure the imports in the first authorisation are made within the initial validity period/extendable validity period of the first authorisation. After clubbing, Authorisations shall for all purposes, be deemed to be one Authorisation. The vatue addition would be calculated on the basis of total CIF and total FOB arrived at after clubbing the Authorisations. No clubbing shall be permitted in respect of Authorisations where misrepresentation / fraud have come to the notice of RA. (Action: Applicant) PH Case No.21: M/s. Chiripal Poly Films Limited, Ahmedabad F. No. 01/60/162/204/AM19/PRC

Subject:Clubbing of four Advance Authorization nos. (1) 0810136918 dated 01.01.2016, (2)

0810137511 dated 28.03.2016, (3) 0810138020 dated 26.05.2016 and (4), 0810138429 dated 04.08.2016.

The applicant had sought persona! hearing, which was afforded on 31.07.2018. ShriPurvanTalati, Director General Manager appeared before the committee on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions: The said clubbing cum redemption application they made on the basis of policy lying at that time after completion of Import / Export against all the Advance Authorization mentioned above. They have received a letter dated 19.03.2018 from RA, Ahmadabad stating that your application is deficient as per Para 4.38 (viii) of clubbing shall be remitted only when there is a shortfall in fulfillment of EO occurred in the first authorization and excess export made in subsequent authorization. Decision: The Committee went through the submission/statements made by the firm during the personal hearing and in writing and noted that the condition of shortfall in fulfillment of export obligation occurred in first authorization and excess exports are made in subsequent Authorizations, may not be insisted when validity period (for import) of Authorizations runs concurrently and imports made in subsequent authorization falls within vatidity period (for import) of first.

horizations, may not be insisted when validity period (for import) of Authorizations runs concurrently and imports made in subsequent authorization falls within vatidity period (for import) of first. Therefore the Committee decided to accept the request of the firm for clubbing with the following conditions: Vi. vii. viti. The firm shall pay the fee of Rs.5000/- per each Advance Authorisation, Clubbing shall be allowed only for redemption / regularisation of such Authorisations and no further import or export shall be allowed. In case, exports are made outside EO period of any Authorisation, EO extension may be allowed before clubbing of such authorisation, as per Para 4.42 of Handbook of procedures on payment of composition fee. Only such Advance Authorisations shall be clubbed where exports under all Authorisations have been made within the initial/ extended EO period of the earliest issued Authorisation, Accounting of exports made outside expiry of initial or extended EO period of earliest issued authorisation shall not be taken into consideration for EO fulfilment after clubbing of such Authorisations, Inputs which are common in all Authorisations Shall only be clubbed and duty free inputs shall be accounted for as per SION/Ad-Hoc Norms fixed by NC. Minimum value addition as prescribed in FTP and Procedures for the export Product will be required to be maintained on clubbing.

ee inputs shall be accounted for as per SION/Ad-Hoc Norms fixed by NC. Minimum value addition as prescribed in FTP and Procedures for the export Product will be required to be maintained on clubbing. Upon clubbing, if shortfall in value or quantity is noticed, the same shall be regularized under the provisions of Para 4.49 of HBP 2015-20. RA shall ensure the imports in the first authorisation are made within the initial 1.2 validity period/extendable validity period of the first authorisation,

After clubbing, Authorisations shal! for all purposes, be deemed to be one Authorisation. The value addition would be catculated on the basis of total CIF and total FOB arrived at after clubbing the Authorisations. No clubbing shalt be permitted in respect of misrepresentation / fraud have come to the notice of RA. (Action: Applicant) Case No. 22 The following cases were discussed in the meeting. The Committee Authorisations where noted that communications have been received for the following firms without the prescribed application in ANF 2D and prescribed application fee as per Appendix 2K (fully/partly) and therefore are to be treated as incomplete applications. Therefore, the committee decided to reject such cases in terms of Para 2.05 of the HBP 2015-20: st] Name of the firm Subject of the firm Reasons for rejection No.

| M/s Namco} EOP extension — against AA | ANF2D incomplete Industries Pvt. Ltd., | No,0310746001 dated 20.08.2013 Raigarh Maharashtra |
| M/s Vishal Tool and | Extension in 5.0, period against AA | Proof of fee not Foreging Pvt.

AA | ANF2D incomplete Industries Pvt. Ltd., | No,0310746001 dated 20.08.2013 Raigarh Maharashtra | 2. | M/s Vishal Tool and | Extension in 5.0, period against AA | Proof of fee not Foreging Pvt. Ltd., | No.3010085085 dated 09.04.2012 submitted Jalandhar es छः 3, | M/s Pensla Export] Condonation of time barred} Proof of fee not Pvt.Ltd., Jalandhar submission of Chapter-3 FPS | submitted application — न: नि} लि ; 4. | M/s Aarti Drugs Ltd. | Revalidation of AA No.0310806829 | ANF2d not submitted Palghar Maharashtra | 03.08.2016 है a — 5. | M/s Saba | Relaxation for the intent of | Shortage in fee International, New| declaration of shipping _ bill Delhi no.1568589 dated 3.7.2015, 1955130 dated 22.7.2015, 1955148 te. dated 227.2015 | यू फफख#£ऋ 6. | M/s. Vinyroyat| Clubbing of three license no. | Proof of fee and ANF Plasticoates Limited, | 0310367548 dt. 17.02.2006, | 2D not submitted Mumbai 0310420335 dt. 21.02.2007, 0310420730 dt. 23.02.2007 (Return DD) 7. | M/s. Vinyroyal | Issue them duplicate license for | Proof of fee and ANF Plasticoates Limited, | extension of EOP & to regularise | 2D not submitted Mumbai their exports under PN no. 34/2015- 20 dt. 24.10.2017(Return DD) Adv.Auth No.0310365282 dated 31.1.2006 8. | M/s Shiva Stainless | Extension in EOP against AA | Proof of fee and ANF

Mumbai their exports under PN no. 34/2015- 20 dt. 24.10.2017(Return DD) Adv.Auth No.0310365282 dated 31.1.2006 8. | M/s Shiva Stainless | Extension in EOP against AA | Proof of fee and ANF

Steels Pvt. ud. Beh [e.0s

| M/s. Aarti Drugs Ltd., Palghar Maharashtra Moradabad Delhi Pvt. Ltd., Udaipur .| M/s. Mithila Drugs २५, Ltd., Udaipur » | M/s. M/s. IBM == — —— | Relaxationisbeing sought. | M/s ee 2TM Revalidation of Annual sane Proof of fee not Seamless Limited., | Authorisation No.0510399963 dated submitted M/s. Mithita Drugs ee dt. 13.08.2009, Mithila’ Drugs No.0510393139 dated 11.2.2015 | 2D notsubmilied 7] Revalidation of AA no. 0310806829 | ANF20 not submit not submitted dt. 03.08.2016(by mail} | Documents / Provisions for which | Pre for which | Proof of Relaxation is being sought and | submitted relevant Para of FTP / HBP for which fee not 03.201.2016 Request for waiver of waiver of interest on Customs duty to be paid towards excess import apaiiese | Advance authorization no. Proof of fee and ANF 2D not submitted Request for waiver of waiver of | interest on Customs duty to be paid | 2D not submitted towards excess import against Advance authorization 10-0310519646 dt.13.05.2009, Request for waiver of waiver of interest on Customs duty to be paid towards excess import against Advance authorization no. 0310555105 dt. 13.01.2010 2D not submitted 15.1 M/s.

6 dt.13.05.2009, Request for waiver of waiver of interest on Customs duty to be paid towards excess import against Advance authorization no. 0310555105 dt. 13.01.2010 2D not submitted 15.1 M/s. Vippy | Relaxation of let export date for Industries Ltd., | shipping bills with inadvertent mark | 2D not : | Madhya Pradesh ‘NY ee |_ 16, | M/s Premier | Revalidation of AA xo IEE Shortage of fee Polyfilm Limited, | dated 07.06.2016 | New Delhi sara 17, | M/s Nadi Airtechnics Revalidation of AA No.0410160637 Pvt. Ltd., Chennai | Shortage of fee dated 05.06.2015 M/s. Sree Padmini Silk World, Bangalore _| M/s. Maharashtra Seamless Ltd. M/s. Nadi airtechnics Pvt. a Chennai ! M/s. Tata Consulting Engineers ltd., Mumbai nl | Proof of fee and ANF 2D not submitted Regularization of quantity shortfal Annual Advance Authorization | 0710012123 dt. 17.01.2002 ae रे Second Revalidation of AA no, fa of fee and ANF 0510399963 dt. 03.10.2016. (By | 2D not submitted Mail) जज Application for relaxation हा Procedural condition in terms of

Para 2.58 of the FTP

anually Enterprises LLP, 2D not submitted Mumbai _ हि 29. | M/s RR Kabel amar कि Issuance of EIS License 6 | Proof of fee and ANF Mumbai . Rs.55,65,229.59 2D not submitted | 30. | M/s. Maxop | Waiver of interest for in respect of | Proof of fee and ANF Engineering Co. es excess impost | 2D not submitted Ltd., Haryana a. 0510364144 dt. 02.09.2013 b. 0510390819 dt. 28.08.2014 _ (ANF 2D and fee not given) 31, | M/s. Isinox Limited., | Request for Extension in EOP and / | Shortage of fees Mumbai or amendment in description of export product with SION 1. 0310804274 dt. 29.04.2016 | 2. 0310804552 dt. 09.05.2016 | 3. 0310804553 dt. 09.05.2016 4. 0310804547 dt. 09.05.2016 है 5. 0310804548 dt. 09.05.2016. | 32.) M/s. oe Ltd., | Redemption of AA no. 0310627429 | Proof of fee and - Mumbai dt. 20.04.2011 vide file no. | 2D not submitted 03/94/040/00008/AM12. (ANF 2D == Ee fee proof not given} sical H 33, | M/s. Granules India, | Request for grant of import License | Proof of fee and ANF Hyderabad | per Para 2.5 of HBP. for import of Acetic Anhydride as 2D not submitted

roof not given} sical H 33, | M/s. Granules India, | Request for grant of import License | Proof of fee and ANF Hyderabad | per Para 2.5 of HBP. for import of Acetic Anhydride as 2D not submitted

(import cell} 34. M/s. Texmaco Rail & Engg. Ltd., Kolkata 0210196856 at. 26.11.2013. 2D not submitted 35: M/s. Maxop engineering co. Pvt. Ltd., Haryana Extension of EOP for Advance Authorization me कु 0510320088 dt. 14.03.2012 2D not submitted 36. | M/s. Prime Lenses | Advance License no. 1710001746 dt. ; Pvt. Ltd.,Goa 28.08.2007. 2D not submitted 37. | M/s Maan | Relaxation of LED for S/B with | Proof of fee and ANF Alluminium Ltd., | inadvertent marking N | 2D not submitted Delhi 38, | M/s. Thermax | Relaxation of Policy ~ Advance | Proof of fee and ANF Limited., Pune License no. 311002596 dated | 2D not submitted 24.11.2000 issued by JDGFT, a (Total 17 Adv.Lic} Proof of fee and ANE 39, | M/s Umedica | EOP extension of AA No.0310810487 Laboratories Pvt. | dated 12.1.2017 1 2D not submitted Ltd., Mumbai 40.} M/s. Pon Pure | Grant of sen Tg of Import License | Proof of fee and ANF Chemical india Pvt. | no. 0450001130 dated 30.12.2016. 2D not submitted Ltd., Chennai | 41, | M/s. Vem | Request for grant of perio Tar Boot of for | Proof of fee and ANF Technologies Pvt. | clubbing of their three Advance | 2D not submitted Ltd., Hyderabad Authorization redemption and regularization purpose. 0910056490 dt. 28.06.2013, 0910058249 dt. 19.11.2013, 0910061610 dt. , 12.02.2015. 42. | M/s.

e Advance | 2D not submitted Ltd., Hyderabad Authorization redemption and regularization purpose. 0910056490 dt. 28.06.2013, 0910058249 dt. 19.11.2013, 0910061610 dt. , 12.02.2015. 42. | M/s. Vem Request for grant of ica for | Proof of fee and ANF Technologies Pvt. | clubbing of their three Advance | 2D not submitted Ltd., Hyderabad Authorization redemption and regularization purpose. 0910055891 dt. 01.05.2013, 0910061616 dt. हे 13.02.2015. 43. | M/s. Omega Icehill | Advance Mena Sa no. | Proof of fee and ANF Pvt Ltd., New Dethi 0510364908 dt. 06.09.2013, | 2D not submitted permission to consider export done to kandla SEZ 44. M/s. Tanishka international., UP 3 Extension in EOP and issuing necessary Directions to norms committee in the office of DGFT {HQ} for wire rod and 20 % Zinc ingots against Adv. Authorization no. 0310759186 dated 26.11.2013 issuing by Add. DGFT Mumbai in terms of Para 4.4.2 of HB 2009-14 reg. ea of fee not submitted He

{HQ} for wire rod and 20 % Zinc ingots against Adv. Authorization no. 0310759186 dated 26.11.2013 issuing by Add. DGFT Mumbai in terms of Para 4.4.2 of HB 2009-14 reg. ea of fee not submitted He

| M/s. जि Be, hie Request for available for re- Development repository of the SB for BRC; 2Dnot submitted Engineers itd., | attachment, MEIS Partially Claimed Faridabad and Scrip Received, BRC received in full.

0310803128 dt. 08.03.2016
0310800977 dt, 14.12.2015

0310808020 dt. 23.09.2016 ; 4. 0310810458 dt. 11.01.2017 52.| M/s.

from normal account from | 2D not submitted Ltd., Mumbai SEZ Unit.

0310803128 dt. 08.03.2016
0310800977 dt, 14.12.2015

0310808020 dt. 23.09.2016 ; 4. 0310810458 dt. 11.01.2017 52.| M/s. Malsons | Request for waiver of submission of | Proof of fee and ANF Polymers Pvt. Ltd., | Bills of Export in case of supply of | 2D not submitted Kolkata goods SEZ unit by a DTA unit है operating against Advance License. 53.| M/s. Esspal | Revalidation of DEPB no. 131004356 | Proof of fee and ANF International Pvt. | dt. 24.05.2013. 2D not submitted Ltd., Jaipur ; 54. | M/s. Indoco | Waiver of EO against import of AA | Proof of fee and ANF Remedies Ltd., | no. 0310809668 dt. 07.12.2016. 2D not submitted Mumbai 55, | M/s. Indoco | Part £O completed of AA no. | Proof of fee and ANF Remedies Ltd., | 0310799388 dt. 13.10.2015 2D not submitted Mumbai 56.| M/s. Indoco | Waiver of EO against import of AA | Proof of fee and ANF Remedies Ltd., | no. 0310806741 dt. 01.08.2016. 2D not submitted Mumbai है है 57, | M/s. Glamindia Knit | Incremental a incentivisation | Proof of fee and ANF Designs, Tamil] 1४१७७ | Scheme _| 2D not submitted 58. | M/s. KKalpana | Application for 2TM revalidation of | Proof of fee and ANF Industries India Ltd., | 0310806367 dt. 18.07.2016. {total | 2D not submitted Kolkata _ | 13 Adv.Lic) 59, | M/s. JSW Steel Ltd., | Application for allowing amendment | Proof of fee and ANF he

d ANF Industries India Ltd., | 0310806367 dt. 18.07.2016. {total | 2D not submitted Kolkata _ | 13 Adv.Lic) 59, | M/s. JSW Steel Ltd., | Application for allowing amendment | Proof of fee and ANF he

Mumbai of SION based of AA no. in respect of '| 20 not sub not —_ ॥ eee in system based amendment. i M/s. Kumar Wears | Review of PRC decision, request for | Proof of fee and ANE Pvt. Ltd., Faridabad EOP / grant of approval for | 2D not submitted acceptance of exports made after EOP for regularization of case against AA no. al dt. ; 06.01.2012. 61, | M/s. — Pvt. | Request for alowing EOU to do job | _ of fee and ANF Ltd., Mumbai work for domestic supplies reg. {28 not submitted 62. | M/s Umedica | Extension in 8.0. period against AA| Proof of fee not Laboratories Pvt. | No.0310810487 dated 12.01.2017 submitted. Ltd., Mumbai ! 83. | M/s Buch Plastics | Revalidation and extension of ६.0. | Proof of fee not &Packaging Pvt. Ltd., | period against AA No.3410042779 | submitted Bharuch Gujarat dated 20.12.2016 64, | M/s. Cannon | Debit of duty form duty credit script | Proof of fee and industries Ltd., ANF2D not submitted Ludhiana _ 65, | M/s. Vikas Ecotech | Revalidation of AA no. a ANF2D not submitted Ltd., New Delhi dt. 21.04.2016.0510397589 dt. | and shortage of fee 12.02.2016, 0510400651 dt. 07.12.2036., 0510398007 dt. 22.03.2016. 0510400650 dt. 07.12.2016, 0510399530 — dt. 23.08.2016. 66.; M/s. Monash | Extension of Time for fulfilling | ANF2D incomplete Apparels Pvt.

dt. 07.12.2036., 0510398007 dt. 22.03.2016. 0510400650 dt. 07.12.2016, 0510399530 — dt. 23.08.2016. 66.; M/s. Monash | Extension of Time for fulfilling | ANF2D incomplete Apparels Pvt. Ltd.,| export obligation against advance | and proof of fee not New Delhi authorization no. 0510388219 dt. | submitted 04.06.2014. ; 67. | M/s Vishal Tools & | Extension of EOP for Advance | Proof of fee not Forgings Pvt.Ltd., | Authorisation No.3010085085 dated | submitted Jalandhar 09.04.2012

है 68. | M/s. Kalisma Steel | Request for Extension of Export | Proof of fee and Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai period (ANF 2 D not given} ANEF2D not submitted 89. | M/s. IBC Limited, | Request for consider as for non| Proof of fee and Chennai utilisation of advance authorization | ANF2D not submitted no 0410098612 dt. 16.09.2008. 70.| M/s. Wires And j Revalidation of Annual Advance | Proof of fee and Fabriks (S, A) Ltd., | Authorization no. 0210206755 dt. | ANF2D not submitted Kolkata 14.06.2016 and 0210206651 dated 28.04.2016 for six months. 71, | M/s. Hyderabad | EOP extension and Revalidation no. | ANF2D not submitted Pigments Pvt. Ltd., | 0910063699 dt27.05.2016 and shortage of fee Secunderabad i 72. | M/s. ThiruArooran| EOP extension of AA no. | ANF2D not submitted Sugars Ltd., Chennai 0410163331 dt. 17.07. (2

Pvt. Ltd., | 0910063699 dt27.05.2016 and shortage of fee Secunderabad i 72. | M/s. ThiruArooran| EOP extension of AA no. | ANF2D not submitted Sugars Ltd., Chennai 0410163331 dt. 17.07. (2

09.08.2016 & 0810138938 dt. 24.10.2016. 73. | M/s Shree Ambika | EOP extension of Advance | ANF2D not submitted Sugars Ltd., Chennai | Authorisation No.0410163336 dated 18.07.2017 74.1 M/s Amendment of ITC HS Code in the | ANF2D not submitted BangeraSeaworld shipping bills from 03069100 to | and shortage of fee Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai 03061100 and _— shipping bills availability in the repository. 75.4 M/s Refund of TED ANF2D not submitted ShriMungsajiMahara and shortage of fee jSahakari SootGirni Ltd., Nagpur ae 76.1 M/s Re-apply for MEIS application Proof of fee and BalPharmaLimited., ANF2D not submitted Bengaluru 77.| M/s K.K. Nag Pvt. | Condonation of non-filing of bill of | Proof of fee and Ltd., Bangalore exports for the supply made under | ANF2D not submitted AA No.0710106618 and 0710106613 oo dated 03.09.2014 78.1 M/s. Archidply | Application for revalidation of Lic. | ANF2D not submitted Industries Ltd., | No. 0510400827 dated 16.12.2016. and shortage of fee Uttarakhand _ 79.| M/s. Revalidation of Advance | Proof of fee and KusumaPharma, Authorization no. 0310806263 | ANF2D not submitted Mumbai dated 14.07.2016 _ 80.| M/s. Revalidation of Advance | Proof of fee and KusumaPharma, Authorization no. 0310807243 dated | ANF2D not submitted | Mumbai 22.08.2016. 81.| M/s.

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 has been generated for this document yet.