IN FORCE Policy Relaxation Committee Advance Authorisation 2019-02-26

DGFT Committee Minutes

Document text

[Date of Uploading 14.3. 2019| Directorate General of Foreign Trade of Foreign Trade (PRC Section} Minutes of the Policy Relaxation Committee Meeting held under Relaxation Committee Meeting held under theChairmanship of Shri Alok Vardhan Chaturveal, Shri Alok Vardhan Chaturvedi Director General of Foreign Trade on 26.02.2019 Foreign Trade on 26.02.2019 Meeting No.32/AM19 held on 26.02.2019 The following members were present in the meeting:

Shri. P. Goyal Addl. DGFT

Shri Vijay Kumar Addl. DGFT 3. Shri Satyan Sharda Addl. DGFT 4. Shri Anil Aggarwal Addl. DGFT 5. Shri S.P. Roy Jt. DGFT 6. Dr. Praveen Kumar Dy. DGFT Following cases were discussed. The decision taken on the individual cases are as under:- a No Name of the हि` Case No. 1G M/s Oswal Smelters Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore 4 2: M/s Ceat Limited, Mumbai 2104 3. | M/s Prabhat Elastomers Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai 5 4.__| M/s Sreepriya Exports Private Limited, Kolkata 6 5 M/s Lactose (India) Limited, Vadodara | a 6. Mis Western India Cashew Company Pvt. Ltd., 8 Pollachi, Tamil Nadu _ 5 M/s Phoenix Foils Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai 9 8. | M/s Sandoz Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai 10 to 16 g. | M/s K.T. Exports (India) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai 17 ae M/s Tata Motors Limited, Mumbai 18 41. | M/s Lohia Corp Limited, Kanpur 19 12. | M/s India Yamaha Motor Pvt. Ltd, Chennai 20 43. | M/s Proline seeds Company India Pvt. Ltd., Del 21 to 22 14. | Mis AIA Engineering Ltd., Anmedabad SIE ie ints M/s Bangera (Seaworld) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai 24 16. | M/s MRF Limited, Chennai 25 : है M/s H R Fab., Gujarat_ “| 26 to 28° ae M/s Parksons Cartamundi Pvt. Ltd., t. Ltd., Mumbai 29° 19. | M/s Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Anmedabad 30 20. | M/s Arfin India Ltd., Anmedabad 31 21, | M/s Supriya Lifescience Ltd., Mumbai है 32 | 22. | M/s 5.7. Exim’s, Hosur, Tamil Nadu_ | 33 to 36 | 23, | M/s Vaish Vik Foods Pvt. Ltd. Pune _ —|—— | | 24, | M/s Larsen & Toubro Ltd. 38 |

Subject: Revalidation of MEIS 0719011602 dated 10.05.2046.

The applicant had sought personal hearing in terms of Para 2.59 of FTP, 2015-2020, which was afforded on 26.02.2019. Shri Rohit Shah, Chartered Accountant appeared before the committee on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions: They have submitted that in order to avail the benefit they submitted the said license at Vizag Sea Port for registration which was refused on the ground that third party exports under para 3.06(iv) “SEZ/EQU/EHTP/BPT/FTWZ products exported through DTA units” are not eligible for MEIS benefit. By the time, they obtained clarification from DGFT, New Delhi dated 26.07.2018, their duly scrip was already expired in their custody. tence, the scrip could not be utilized. Decision: The Committee went through the statement made by the applicant and observed that genuine hardship is there in this case and therefore decided to allow revalidation of MEIS No 0719011602 dated 10.05.2016 for a period of 3 months from the date of endorsement with the condition that the firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting. {Action: Applicant/RA) PH Case No.02: M/s Ceat Limited, Mumbai 5. No. 01/60/162/810/AM19/PRC Subject: Revalidation and enhancement in import quantity in Advance Authorization No.0310806323 dated 15.07.2016. which was afforded on 26.02.2019. Shri Rupesh R, Vice President — Procurement and Shri P.N, Raja, Senior Manager — Materials appeared before the committee on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions: They have stated that due to technical error in integration of their 2 subsequent advance authorizations, issued in October 2016, in the customs EDI system, they were forced to export in excess by using duty paid import of Natural Rubber under this authorization till December 2016. Accordingly, the Revalidation request is for import of Natural Rubber on excess exports. Decision: The Committee having examined the case on the basis of justification furnished by the firm decided to allow enhancement in import quantity to the extent of excess exports and revalidation of DFIA No. 0310806323 dated 15.07.2046 for further six months from the date of endorsement. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting. 2 (0.५...

(Action: Applicant/RA) PH Case No.03: M/s Ceat Limited, Mumbai ६. ५०. 01/60/162/811/AM19/PRC

Subject: Revalidation and enhancement in import quantity in Advance

Authorization No.0310811652 dated 07.03.2017. which was afforded on 26.02.2019. Shri Rupesh R, Vice President — Procurement and Shri P.N. Raja, Senior Manager — Materials appeared before the committee on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions: Revalidation request of above advance authorisation has been made after exports have been made. The Natural Rubber imported prior to export had to be re-exported due to technical/ quality issues. They had requested to Customs and RA Mumbai to re-credit/reinstate the re-exported quantity in the license but the same was not considered with the reason that ‘there is no provision in policy and computer system to add new import item in Authorisation”. Hence, they seek incorporation of re- exported quantity of 181.440 MT as a new line item in the license of import item list with revalidation. Decision: The Committee having examined the case on the basis of justification furnished by the firm decided to allow re-credit of quantity of 181.44 MT (which was imported against the Authorization but had 0 be exported back due to qualitytechnical issues) in the form of an amendment in the DFIA and revalidation of DEIA No. 0310811652 dated 07.03.2017 for further six months from the date of endorsement. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting. PH Case No.04: M/s Ceat Limited, Mumbai F. No. 01/60/162/809/AM19/PRC

Subject: Revalidation and enhancement in import quantity is Advance

Authorization No.0310811651 dated 07.03.2017. The applicant had sought personal hearing In terms of Para 2.59 of FTP, 2015-2020, which was afforded on 26.02.2019. Shri Rupesh R, Vice President — Procurement and Shri P.N. Raja, Senior Manager — Materials appeared before the committee on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions: Revalidation request of above advance authorisation has been made after exports. The Natural Rubber imported prior to export had to be re-exported due to quality issues. They requested to Customs and RA Mumbai to re-credit/reinstate the re- exported quantity in the license but the same was not considered with the reason 3 Qo ae

that ‘there is no provision in policy and computer system to add new import item in Authorisation. Hence, they seek incorporation of re-exported quantity of 302.400 MT as a new line item in the license of import item list with revalidation. Decision: The Committee having examined the case on the basis of justification furnished by the firm decided to allow re-credit of quantity of 302.4 MT (which was imported against the Authorization but had to be exported back due to quality/technical issues) in the form of an amendment and revalidation of DFIA No. 0310811651 dated 07.03.2017 for further six months from the date of endorsement. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting. PH Case No.05: M/s Prabhat Elastomers Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai F.No. 01/60/162/1309 to 1311/AM17/PRC

Subject: Revalidation of three DFIA Nos.0310795229 dated 10.04.2015,

0310795228 dated 10.04.2015 and 0310795227 dated 10.04.2015. which was afforded on 26.02.2019. Shri Hasmukh Sheth, Export Assistant appeared before the committee on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions: They have stated that they have done partial import and could not fulfill export obligation due to license validity expiry. They have requested for revalidation or allow EQDC to enable them to use the same for cancellation of Bond at Customs Authority in terms of para 2.5 of FTP. The firm had received letter from Customs department for closure of Bond for the above three licenses. They will not be able to clear the upcoming import consignment until the pending decision gets resolved. The Commissioner of Customs has issued final notice to closure subjected files within the period 18.10.2018 to 16.11.2018 to enable to remove the ALERT from system for the above three licenses. Now they have requested to issue EODC for above 3 licenses or issue a recommendation letter addressed to the Assistant Commissioner of Customs (EPSMC)/JNCH for removing ALERT from the system, so that they release the import consignment without any delay otherwise they have to bearing demurrage/detention charge due to delay of clearance. Decision: The Committee heard the submission made by the representative of the firm and after discussing the matter at length decided to accede to the request of the firm and allowed revalidation of three DFIA No.0310795229 dated 10.04.2015, 0310795228 dated 10.04.2015 and 0310795227 dated 10.04.2015 for a period of six months from the date of endorsement. The DFIAs in question may be treated, as if issued, as per the previous policy, prevalent before 31.3.2015. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting. PH Case No.06 M/s Sreepriya Exports Private Limited, Kolkata 4 (0.0.

F. No. 01/60/162/812/AM19/PRC Subject: Extension in EO of Advance Authorization No.0210206220 dated 09.10.2015. which was afforded on 26.02.2019. Shri Jay Prakash Thakur, Export Executive appeared before the committee on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions: Export Obligation could not be fulfilled within stipulated period since whenever their clearing Agent tried to load their Invoice under this License online to get S/Bill, few errors raised and S/Bill used to get cancelled. This was due to error in Customs Registration which has not been rectified. As a result, all their S/Bs could not have authorization number and in fact are free shipping bills, because they could not stop their exports. Both RA and customs at Kolkata could not resolve their issue. So their request is to either accept free S/bills or to allow additional time to fulfil EO. Decision: The Committee examined the case in detail and in view of justification provided by the firm decided to accede to the request and allowed EOP extension for a period of 6 months from the date of endorsement subject to payment of composition Fee @0.5% of the unfulfilled FOB Value. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uptoading of the minutes of meeting. PH Case No.07: M/s Lactose (india) Limited, Vadodara F. No, 01/60/162/420/AM19/PRC Subject: Extension n E.O. period against Advance Authorization No.0310799561 dated 20.10.2015. which was afforded on 26.02.2019. Shri Narayana Pillai, Logik Consultants appeared before the committee on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions: The export item i.e. Lactose is an altogether new item to be manufactured in India. They are the first Lactose manufacturing project in the whole of India and like any other Pioneer project; they also faced lot of hick-ups as they have to compete with manufacturing giants from Europe and in maintaining consistent final specification of the product. As the product is very sensitive to geographical temperature, it took them considerable time to overcome the above obstacles. As a result importing of raw material as well as export of final product was delayed. Since they were new in the Lactose production, foreign buyers also wanted credit. They were not prepared to take the risk of exporting the product on credit basis for many reasons. This compelled them to forgo many export orders, which they got initially. Now they are exporting only against advance payment/LC. Now they have decided to compromise to some extent in the price, hence, the order will get finalized very soon. 5 (0. ७०. >+5

Decision: The Committee examined the case in detail and in view of justification provided by the firm decided to accede to the request and allowed EOP extension up fo 20.10.2018 only for regularization purpose subject to the payment of composition Fee as follows; 1) From 24 month to 30 months- @0.5% per month on the unfulfilled FOB Value, if exports are fulfilled more than 50% within initial /extended EOP or @ 1% per month where exports have been made less than 50% within initial/extended EOP. ii) From 30 month onwards, composition fee @ 1% per month on unfulfilled FOB value. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting. PH Case No.08 M/s Western India Cashew Company Pvt. Ltd., Pollachi, Tamil Nadu 7. No. 01/60/162/805/AM19/PRC Subject: Exemption from Non-compliance of stipulated procedure against 3 Advance Authorization Nos.3210065197 dated 24.07.2013, 3210066253 dated 20.08.2013 and 3210068302 dated 09.10.2013. which was afforded on 26.02.2019. Shri Hari Krishnan R. Nair, President appeared before the committee on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions: They have stated that in their above 3 Advance Authorizations, NC-VI has decided vide its Meeting No.14/85-ALC3/2018 dated 29.11.18 to reject the norms fixation with direction to RLA to cancel these licenses. They took their first advance license in 2009 under Para 4.07, as Customs Duty on Cashew was 30%. Adhoc Norms were approved by NC in all their previous cases. They wish to place it on record that all these licenses are taken on Net to net basis without any wastage & export & import already stands completed. Redemption application has been filed with RLA. Cancelation order of these licenses at this stage by NC- VI will be a great financial loss to the company, while it will also work as a demoralizer for them. The Company cannot afford the financial burden. Decision: The Committee heard the submission made by the firm and discussed the matter at length and decided to defer the case and call for a detailed report (case wise) from concerned RA ( RA has to provide the report immediately , maximum within a period of 15 days) and thereafter issue would be examined in consultation with NC VI. (Action: PRC/ NC-6/RA) PH Case No.09: M/s Phoenix Foils Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai F.No. 01/60/162/565/AM19/PRC Won

Subject: Regularization of exports already. affected under 6 Advance

Authorization Nos.(1)0310817030 dated 14.11.2017, (2) 0310818605 dated 48.01.2018, (3) 0310818954 dated 07.02.2018, (4) 0310819434 dated 27.02.2018, (5) 0310820004 dated 22.03.2018 and (6) 0310820781 dated 04.05.2018 proportionately which was made before imports by removing the pre-import condition. which was afforded on 26.02.2019. Shri Kapil Bhandari, Director appeared before the committee on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions: They have taken around 80 to 90 Advance Authorization till date and have redeemed and got EODC for around 50 to 80 Advance Authorization till date in which they have regularly exported first and imported the raw material later under replenishment scheme as allowed under Advance Authorization scheme. In the above mentioned Six Advance Authorizations also they have exported first and accordingly they had placed orders for Raw Materials with their suppliers for Import of goods proportionately to the Export done. They subsequently came to knew that all the above six Advance Authorizations were issued with Pre-Import conditions as per public notice 30/2015-2020 dated 18.10.2017 and import of flat rolled products of stainless stee! covered by ITC(HS) 7219 or 7220 against Advance Authorizations was subject to pre-import condition, i.e. the policy mandated that imports have to be made before exports could be effected. The Public notice imposed 8 further condition that the Export obligation had to be completed within 6 months from the date of Import. They humbly state that this Policy amendment inadvertently missed their attention as it was not printed on the face of the above mentioned 6 Advance Authorizations and they have effected exports py filing Shipping Bill under Advance Authorizations, prior to undertaking imports against the above 6 Advance Authorizations as they use to do in regular course of business. As it is a chain process they utilize imported Raw Material in their Six Advance Authorizations and Exported goods. Decision: The Committee examined the case in detail and in view of justification provided by the firm and also the fact that a decision is expected very shortly to remove these products from App 4 J, decided to accede to the request of the firm by regularizing exports already made before imports against six Advance Authorization Nos.{1)0310817030 dated 14.11.2017, (2) 0310818605 dated 18.01.2018, (3) 0310818954 dated 07.02.2018, (4) 0310819434 dated 27.02.2018, (5) 0310820004 dated 22.03.2018 and (6) 0310820781 dated 04.05.2018. Imports against these 6 AAs would be allowed proportionate to the exports already made in these AAs.

Case No.10: M/s Sandoz Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

F. No. 01/60/162/845/AM19/PRC

Subject: To allow Chapter-3 incentive FPS/FMS against RA File No.27/21/087/80004/AM18 for the export made by ६00 unit. They have applied for FMS/FPS licenses under Chapter-3 incentives scheme to the O/o the D.C. SEEPZ, Mumbai for the export made during AM15 period. Their applications were returned stating that their office is processing only MEIS/SEIS under Chapter-3 of ETP_2015-20 and no other Incentive Scheme under Chapter-3 for the Year AM15. DC SEEPZ expressed its inability to process their application under Chapter-3 incentives for the Year 2014-15. The SEEPZ office has informed them that their office have been granted an access on DGFT Site restricted to issue on MEIS and SEIS Scrip and they do not have authorization to access Chapter-3 incentive for the Year 2014-15. Prior to this they were submitting their application to RA Mumbai. The delay in filing this application of AM15 in 2017 was due to various technical issues they had with EDI Cell with respect to VFFM Tick/e-BRC not getting attached to the application. During their personal visit to ED! Cell, Delhi they have resolved these issues with support from EDI Cell & could submit these application successfully. Decision: The committee went through the statement made by the firm in its application and noted that the facts of the case have not been clearly specified by the firm and hence decided to call the firm for Personal Hearing. (Action: Applicant/PRC) Case ४0.11: M/s Sandoz Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai F. No. 01/60/162/846/AM19/PRC Subject: To allow Chapter-3 incentive FPS/FMS against RA File No.27/21/087/80002/AM18 for the export made by EOU unit. They have applied for FMS/FPS licenses under Chapter-3 incentives scheme to the Olo the D.C, SEEPZ, Mumbai for the export made during AM15 period. Their applications were returned stating that their office is processing only MEIS/SEIS under Chapter-3 of ETP 2015-20 and no other Incentive Scheme under Chapter-3 for the Year AM15. DC SEEPZ expressed its inability to process their application under Chapter-3 incentives for the Year 2014-15. The SEEPZ office has informed them that their office have been granted an access on DGFT Site restricted to issue on MEIS and SEIS Scrip and they do not have authorization to access Chapter-3 incentive for the Year 2014-15. Prior to this they were submitting their application to RA Mumbai. The delay in filing this application of AM15 in 2017 was due to various technical issues they had with EDI Cell with respect to VFFM Tick/e-BRC not getting attached to the application. During their personal visit to EDI Cell, Delhi they have resolved these issues with support from EDI Cell & could submit these application successfully. : Decision: ःk Lawn ५

Case No.12: M/s Sandoz Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

F. No. 041/60/162/841/AM19/PRG Subject: To allow Chapter-3 incentive FPS/FMS against RA File No.27/21/087/80007/AM17 for the export made by EOU unit. They have applied for FMS/FPS licenses under Chapter-3 incentives scheme to the O/o the D.C. SEEPZ, Mumbai for the export made during AM15 period. Their applications were returned stating that their office is processing only MEIS/SEIS under Chapter-3 of FTP 2015-20 and no other Incentive Scheme under Chapter-3 for the Year AM15. DC SEEPZ expressed its inability to process their application under Chapter-3 incentives for the Year 2014-15. The SEEPZ office has informed them that their office have been granted an access on DGFT Site restricted to issue on MEIS and SEIS Scrip and they do not have authorization to access Chapter-3 incentive for the Year 2014-15. Prior to this they were submitting their application to RA Mumbai. The delay in filing this application of AM15 in 2017 was due to various technical issues they had with 501 Cell with respect to VFFM Tick/e-BRC not getting aitached to the application. During their personal visit to EDI Cell, Delhi they have resolved these issues with support from EDI Cell & could submit these application successfully. : Decision:

Case No.13: M/s Sandoz Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

F, No. 01/60/162/840/AM19/PRC Subject: To allow Chapter-3 incentive FPS/FMS against RA File No.27/21/087/80006/AM17 for the export made by EOU unit. They have applied for FMS/FPS licenses under Chapter-3 incentives scheme to the Oo the D.C. SEEPZ, Mumbai for the export made during AM15 period. Their applications were returned stating that their office is processing only MEIS/SEIS under Chapter-3 of ETP_2015-20 and no other Incentive Scheme under Chapter-3 for the Year AM15. DC 55577 expressed its inability to process their application under Chapter-3 incentives for the Year 2014-15. The SEEPZ office has informed them that their office have been granted an access on DGFT Site restricted to issue on MEIS and 5815 Scrip and they do not have authorization to access Chapter-3 incentive for the Year 2014-15. Prior to this they were submitting their application to RA Mumbai, The delay in filing this application of AM15 in 2017 was due to various technical issues they had with ED! Cell with respect to VFEM Tick/e-BRC not getting attached to the application. During their personal visit to ED! Cell, Delhi they have

resolved these issues with support from EDI Cell & could submit these application successfully. Decision: E

Case No.14: M/s Sandoz Pvt. Lid., Mumbai

F, No. 01/60/162/842/AM19/PRC Subject: To atlow Chapter-3 incentive FPS/FMS against RA _ File No.27/21/087/80008/AM17 for the export made by EOU unit. They have applied for FMS/FPS licenses under Chapter-3 incentives scheme to the Olo the D.C. SEEPZ, Mumbai for the export made during AM15 period. Their applications were returned stating that their office is processing only MEIS/SEIS under Chapter-3 of FTP 2015-20 and no other Incentive Scheme under Chapter-3 for the Year AM15. DC SEEPZ expressed its inability to process their application under Chapter-3 incentives for the Year 2014-15. The SEEPZ office has informed them that their office have been granted an access on DGFT Site restricted to issue on MEIS and SEIS Scrip and they do not have authorization to access Chapter-3 incentive for the Year 2014-15. Prior to this they were submitting their application to RA Mumbai. The delay in filing this application of AM15 in 2017 was due to various technical issues they had with EDI Cell with respect to VFEM Tick/e-BRC not getting attached to the application. During their personal visit to EDI Cell, Delhi they have resolved these issues with support from EDI Cell & could submit these application successfully. Decision:

Case No.15: M/s Sandoz Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

F. No. 01/60/162/844/AM19/PRC Subject: To allow Chapter-3 incentive FPS/FMS against RA _ File No.27/21/087/80003/AM18 for the export made by EOU unit. They have applied for FMS/FPS licenses under Chapter-3 incentives scheme to the Olo the D.C. SEEPZ, Mumbai for the export made during AM15 period. Their applications were returned stating that their office is processing only MEIS/SEIS under Chapter-3 of FTP 2015-20 and no other Incentive Scheme under Chapter-3 for the Year AM15. DG SEEPZ expressed its inability to process their application 10 (0.0...

under Chapter-3 incentives for the Year 2014-15. The SEEPZ office has informed them that their office have been granted an access on DGFT Site restricted to issue on MEIS and SEIS Scrip and they do not have authorization to access Chapter-3 incentive for the Year 2014-15. Prior to this they were submitting their application to RA Mumbai. The delay in filing this application of AM15 in 2017 was due to various technical issues they had with ED! Cell with respect to VFFM Tick/e-BRC not getting attached to the application. During their personal visit to EDI Cell, Delhi they have resolved these issues with support frorn EDI Cell & could submit these application successfully. Decision:

Case No.16: M/s Sandoz Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

F.No. 01/60/162/843/AM19/PRC Subject: To allow Chapter-3 incentive FPS/FMS against RA _ File No.27/21/087/80001/AM18 for the export made by EOU unit. They have applied for FMS/FPS licenses under Chapter-3 incentives scheme to the Ofo the D.C. SEEPZ, Mumbai for the export made during AM15 period. Their applications were returned stating that their office is processing only MEIS/SEIS under Chapter-3 of FTP 2015-20 and no other Incentive Scheme under Chapter-3 for the Year AM15. DC SEEPZ expressed its inability to process their application under Chapter-3 incentives for the Year 2014-15. The SEEPZ office has informed them that their office have been granted an access on DGFT Site restricted to issue on MEIS and 5215 Scrip and they do not have authorization to access Chapter-3 incentive for the Year 2014-15. Prior fo this they were submitting their application to RA Mumbai. The delay in filing this application of AM15 in 2017 was due to various technical issues they had with EDI Cell with respect to VFFM Tick/e-BRC not getting attached to the application. During their persona! visit to EDI Cell, Deihi they have resolved these issues with support from EDI Cell & could submit these application successfully. Decision: (Action: Applicant/PRC})

Case No.17: M/s K.T. Exports (India) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

F. No, 01/60/162/847/AM19/PRC

Subject: To allow MEIS benefit against 92 Shipping Bills.

(Bye 11

They have stated that they are unable to attach third party e-BRC and as a result, neither they i.e. (KT Exports) nor supporting manufacturer Karam Exports are able to file MEIS as they are getting error NO THIRD PARTY DETAILS AVAILABLE. All their exports for AM-16-17 are yet to be claimed and soon they will get time barred. Since this is a technical issue, RA or Customs is not in position to resolve the issue. Decision: The Committee went through the statements made by the applicant and observed that it is not a case of policy relaxation. Since, it is a case of technical issue, hence decided to refer the case to EDIUNIC to sort out the matter. (Action: Applicant/EDI/NIC)

Case No.18: M/s Tata Motors Limited, Mumbai

F. No. 01/60/162/243/AM19/PRC

Subject: To allow manually amended 24 Shipping Bilis by Customs, for benefit

of MEIS Scrip for technical reasons of EDI System showing “No” in shipping bil! in reward column whereas the check list was approved and filed with “Yes” supported with an amendment letter from Customs. They have stated that they were fully aware with provisions for claim of MEIS for exports made after 30.09.2015 that shipment effected selecting “N” is not transmitted to DGFT Server by (CEGATE. Therefore issuance of duty credit scrip online under MEIS is not possible against ED! Shipping bills. In all the 24 shipping bills after print out, due to reasons not known to them, reward scheme declaration got changed as “No” to “Yes”. Mumbai Customs accepted the issue and considered the correction for 24 shipping bills for reward scheme declaration from “No to Yes” manually vide letter dated 08.03.2018. However, system does not facilitate transmission of such correction electronically. As per Para 3.01 (g) of HBP for EDI Shipping, no manual feeding of shipping bill data is allowed/permitted. Since the Customs authority has corrected shipping bill and export product description and ITCHS code is eligible for MEIS benefit, the request is to consider SBs for MEIS. Decision: The Committee examined the case in detailed and in view of justification provided by the firm and report dated 30.1.2019 received from Customs Authority, it noted that the amendment has been made manually by the Customs which is not available on the ED! Portal. Hence, it decided to reject the request of the firm since no electronic transmission is possible in such manually amended cases. , (Action: Applicant)

Case No.19: M/s Lohia Corp Limited, Kanpur

F. No. 01/60/162/839/AM19/PRC

Subject: Condonation of delay to file the application to claim FPS/FMS benefit

against 8 files Nos(i) 06/21/087/80152/AM18, (ii) 06/21/087/80153/AM18, (ili) 06/21/087/80116/AM18, (iv) 06/21/087/80112/AM18, (v) 06/21/087/80117/AM18, 12 (0७०५

(vi) 06/21/087/80177/AM18, — (vii) 06/21/087/50004/AM19 and — (viii) 06/21/087/50002/AM19. a They have stated that they could not be file the application within prescribed time as the bunch of shipping bills got misplaced during shifting of their department from one location to other. Upon retrieval of shipping bills, the applications were duly filed online with applicable late filing fees as per Para 9.02 of Hand Book of Procedure. However, RA, Kanpur has refused to issue licenses for the said applications citing these to be time barred. Decision: The Committee after examining the case in detail decided to reject the case as the same was found to be without any merit. (Action: Applicant)

Case No.20: M/s India Yamaha Motor Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

F.No. 01/60/162/838/AM19/PRC

Subject: Acceptance of Seven Shipping Bills for the purpose of filing MEIS

benefit after the manual amendment by customs in the ITC Codes from 87112011 to 87112029. Their exports vide 7 Shipping Bills were made under wrong export ITCH no. 871412011 instead of correct ITCH which is 87112029, due to an oversight on their part. The Assistant Commissioner of Custom, Petrapole Land Custom Station amended the exports ITCH of above mentioned Shipping Bills manually to read as 87112029. The corrected ITCH 87112029 is eligible for MEIS benefits under serial no. 4563 of Appendix 3B MEIS schedule. However due to ED! generation of Shipping Bill with wrong ITCH, they are not able to file the MEIS application as the original mentioned ITCH 87112011 was not eligible for MEIS benefits at the time of exports. Decision: The Committee examined the case in detail and in view of justification provided by the firm, observed that the amendment has been made manually by the customs which is not available on the EDI Portal. Hence it decided to reject the request of the firm since no electronic transmission is possible in such manually amended cases. (Action: Applicant)

Case No.21: M/s Proline seeds Company india Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

F.No. 01/60/162/767/AM19/PRC Subject; Condonation of delay to file the Incremental Export incentive application vide F.No.05/06/092/80002/AM18. The firm stated that there was a discrepancy issued that the file was not submitted on time. They wish to clarify that they were trying to submit their file on 31/03/2017 13 \Qyom——

but the website started giving error and message that “Server has been closed for maintenance” and the same was corrected on 06.04.2017 and they could submit the file only then. However their application has been rejected as time barred. So the request for condonation of delay. Decision: The Committee having discussed the case found no merit or hardship in arguments made by the firm and hence decided to reject the request of the firm. (Action: Applicant)

Case No.22: M/s Proline seeds Company India Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

F. No. 01/60/162/362/AM19/PRC

Subject: Condonation of delay to file the Incremental Export Incentive

application vide F.No.05/06/092/80001/AM18. The firm stated that there was a discrepancy issued that the file was not submitted on time. They wish to clarify that they were trying to submit file on 31/03/2017 but the website started giving error and message that “Server has been closed for maintenance” and the same was corrected on 06.04.2017 and they could submit the file only then. Decision: The Committee having discussed the case found no merit or hardship in arguments made by the firm and hence decided to reject the request of the firm. (Action: Applicant)

Case No.23: M/s AIA Engineering Ltd., Ahmedabad

F.No. 01/60/162/815/AM19/PRC Subject: Permission for transmission of Shipping Bill No.4859494 dated 22.12.2015. The firm stated that due to EDI problem, original shipping bill could not be printed from Customs, hence customs has issued Shipment certificate in lieu of original EP copy. Due to this problem customs could not transmitted the shipping bill at DGFT server and hence their MEIS claim is pending. Decision: The Committee having examined the case on the basis of justification furnished by the firm observed that without transmission of shipping bill in ED! Portal from Customs Authority the MEIS benefit cannot be allowed and decided to reject the request of the firm. (Action: Applicant)

Case No.24: M/s Bangera Seaworld Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

F. No. 01/60/162/798/AM19/PRC en (0.७.

Subject: To relax Para 3.01(g) of HBP 2015-20 and allow manual feeding of two

EDI Shipping Bills No.3497646 dated 17.01.2017 and 3894502 dated 04.02.2017 to claim MEIS benefit. They have stated that the Commissioner of Customs, JNPT have amended the HS code from 03069100 fo 03061100 manually in above two S/bills, by issuing amendment certificates. The system does not facilities transmission of such correction electronically. The online system is not accepting the changes & they are unable to get their claim. Decision: The Committee examined the case in detail and in view of justification provided by the firm, observed that the amendment has been made manually by the customs which are not available on the EDI Portal. Accordingly, it decided to reject the request of the firm since no electronic transmission is possible in such manually amended cases. (Action; Applicant)

Case No.25: M/s MRF Limited, Chennai

F. No. 01/60/162/507/AM19/PRC

Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No.0410162520 dated

25.11.2016. They have submitted that there was some Data Transmission error in the License (Error Code mentioning - 02, 44, 45, 52) and because of this the validity of the License is not reflecting in the customs server. Hence they are unable to utilize the License. They approached NIC and based on its advice, they submitted the License to RA, Chennai for correcting the transmission error on 15.11.2017 and received the same on 28.11.2017. But the error still continued, Once again on 12.04.2018 they approach NIC and understood some Invalidation error in values which needs to be rectified. So they submitted the License on 43.04.2018 and received the same on 23.05.2018. Again the License validity got expired on 25.05.2018. They approached RA, Chennai for additional extension (6 months) and the same was approved. Now the validity of the License expires on 24.11.2018. Still now the errors have not been cleared while transmitting and they are receiving customs acknowledgement with errors. Decision: The Committee went through the contention of the firm and comments received from EDI/NIC and decided to allow revalidation of Advance Authorization No.0410162520 dated 25.11.2016 for further period of six months from the date of endorsement with the condition that the firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting. (Action: ApplicantRA)

Case No.26: M/s H R Fab., Gujarat

F. No. 01/60/162/837/AM19/PRC Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No.5210042066 dated 31.10.2016 for a period of 6 months from the date of endorsement. The firm stated that they have made export before import with the intent to import the eligible inputs after the exports as per application provisions at the time of exports. Pre-import condition was not applicable at the time of issuance of the Authorization and the exports of goods by them. But with implementation of GST wef. 01.07.2017, the benefit of exemption of IGST was not allowed so they did not import the eligible inputs. Subsequently, the exemption from IGST was allowed vide Notification No. 33/2015-2020 dated 13.10.2017, but the pre-import condition was imposed, so they could not import the eligible import items, within validity period for import. They could not import the import item due to change in provisions of FTP and Customs provisions upon implementation of GST. After issuance of Notification No,53/2015-20, pre-import condition has again been waived off. Decision: The Committee having examined the case on the basis of justification furnished by the firm decided to allow revalidation of Advance Authorization .no. 5210042066 dated 31.10.2016 for further six months from the date of endorsement. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

Case No.27:

M/s H R Fab., Gujarat F.No. 01/60/162/836/AM19/PRC Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No.5210042154 dated 27.01.2017 for a period of 6 months from the date of endorsement. The firm stated that they have made export before import with the intent to import the eligible inputs after the exports as per application provisions at the time of exports. Pre-import condition was not applicable at the time of issuance of the Authorization and the exports of goods by them. But with implementation of GST ४.९. 01.07.2017, the benefit of exemption of IGST was not allowed so they did not import the eligible inputs. Subsequently, the exemption from IGST was allowed vide Notification No. 33/2015-2020 dated 13.10.2017, but the pre-import condition was imposed, so they could not imported the eligible import items, within validity period for import. They could not import the import item due to change in provisions of FTP and Customs provisions upon implementation of GST. After issuance of Notification No.53/2015-20, pre-import condition has been waived off. Decision: The Committee having examined the case on the basis of justification furnished by the firm decided to allow revalidation of Advance Authorization No. 5210042154 dated 27.01.2017 for further six months from the date of endorsement. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting. 7 (0,००५

Case No.28: M/s HR Fab., Gujarat

F. No. 0101/60/162/835/AM19/PRC Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No.5210042157 dated 30.01.2017 for a period of 6 months from the date of endorsement. The firm stated that they have made export before import with the intend to import the eligible inputs after the exports as per application provisions at the time of exports. Pre-import condition was not applicable at the time of issuance of the Authorization and the exports of goods by them. But with implementation of GST w.e.f. 04.07.2017, the benefit of exemption of IGST was not allowed so they did not import the eligible inputs. Subsequently, the exernption from IGST was allowed vide Notification No. 33/2015-2020 dated 13.10.2017, but the pre-import condition was imposed, so they could not imported the eligible import items, within validity period for import. They could not import the import item due to change in provisions of FTP and Customs provisions upon implementation of GST. After issuance of Notification No.53/2015-20, pre-import condition has been waived off. Decision: The Committee having examined the case on the basis of justification furnished by the firm decided to allow revalidation of Advance Authorization no. 5210042157 dated 30.01.2017 for further six months from the date of endorsement. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting. PH Case No.29: M/s Parksons Cartamundi Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai F. No. 01/60/162/483/AM19/PRC Subject: Issue of EODC/Redemption and revalidation of DFIA No.0310795092 dated 06.04.2015. which was afforded on 26.02.2019. Shri Vijay D. Parmar, Assistant General Manager appeared before the committee on behalf of the firm and made the following submissions: They have stated that they had submitted for DFIA application on 17.03.2015 and same was approved on 27.03.2015, but DFIA No.0310795092 was printed on 06.04.2015 by RA Mumbai office. With effect from 01.04.2015, new Exim policy was announced, As per 4.27 of ETP 2015-20 with effect from 01.04.2015 DFIA was to be issued only on post export basis for product for which SION were notified. From 04.04.2015 no pre-export DFIA was allowed to be issued. RA Mumbai issued letter - to the firm on 13.05.2016 requesting them to surrender DFIA stating that “there is no provision in the current policy to issue non-transferable DFIA i.e. pre-export DFIA (As 17 i(4... 0 ---+++८

they are not a regular exporter, they were not aware about the new FTP). Unfortunately they were unable fo surrender the DFIA as they had imported Raw material on 07.05.2015 under the said DFIA. After their response to RA Mumbai letter dated 13.05.2015 they have not received any further communication related to this matter and therefore they continued exporting under the said DFIA. The firm has applied to RA Mumbai to issue EODC on 05.07.2016. They have received 2 deficiency letters from RA Mumbai requesting them to regularise the case in terms of

para 4.49 and 4.50 of HBP. The firm has received a letter from Customs Authorities

informing them to submit EODC or else Customs will take action under Section 142 of Customs Act, 1962. Decision: The Committee heard the submission made by the representative of the firm and after discussing the matter at length decided to accede to the request of the firm and allowed revalidation of DFIA No.0310795092 dated 06.04.2015 for a period of six months from the date of endorsement. The DFIAs in question may be treated, as if issued, as per the previous policy, though printed on 6.4.2015- as recommended by RA Mumbai. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting. (Action: ApplicanRA)

Case No.30: M/s Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Ahmedabad

F, No. 01/60/162/759/AM16/PRC

Subject: Revalidation of DEPB License No.0810115060 dated 12.09.2012 which

was not utilized due to data error. The firm stated that they have been issued DEPB License No. 810115060 dated 42.09.2012. But somehow even after many attempts, they could not get the same registered as there was data error in one of the Shipping Bills and the license was not getting transmitted. Meanwhile the license got expired. They approached PRC and got the license validated upto 18.12.2018. They again tried to retransmit the license but did not succeed. They again approached customs to get the license registered manually. Customs has given their permission to register the license manually but the license got expired in the process. Decision: The Committee, having examined the case on the basis of justification furnished by the firm decided to allow last revalidation of DEPB License No. 0810115060 dated 12.09.2012 for further period of three months from the date of endorsement. The firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting. Committee also decided that it is the last and final revalidation of the DEPB and no further revalidation under any circumstances would be granted.

Case No.31: Mis Arfin India Ltd., Ahmedabad

F. No, 01/60/162/808/AM19/PRC 18 apa

Subject: Revalidation of Advance Authorization No.0810138989 dated

28.10.2016. The firm had stated that export obligation has already been fulfilled completely. However import obligation is pending due to non-availability of required quality of material, and in this duration license validity got expired. They have managed to find a source and are planning to procure material in short duration hence request for revalidation. Decision: The Committee, having discussed the case, found no merit or hardship in arguments made by the firm and hence decided to reject the request of the firm. (Action: Applicant)

Case No.32: Ms Supriya Lifescience Ltd., Mumbai

F.No, 01/60/162/817/AM1S/PRC

Subject: Re-credit and revalidation of Advance Authorization No.0310811033

dated 08.02.2017. The firm had stated that for import of Vitamin B12, the part quantity (12kg) was stolen/ misplaced at the airport. Before the clearance of consignment, this was noticed and brought to the notice of customs, airlines and all other stakeholders. The license was in the custody of customs, who issued the necessary certificate for re- credit in the month of December, 2018. By that time, license had expired and hence, they have applied for revalidation. Export Obligation was already fulfilled during the validity period of license. Decision: The Committee went through the contention of the firm and decided to allow revalidation of Advance Authorization No.0310811033 dated 08.02.2017 for a period of three months from the date of endorsement with the condition that the firm shall approach RA within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting.

Case No.33: M/s 5.7. Exim’s, Hosur, Tamil Nadu

F. No. 01/60/162/69/AM19/PRC PRC Meeting No. 32/AM19 dated 26.02:2019 Subject: Extension in 5.0. period and revalidation of Advance Authorization No. 0410162153 dated 01.08.2016. They have submitted that they have got the export order for the said Advance Licenses during the period of October 2016 in terms of advance payment at the time of license was granted. Due to demonetization of the Indian currency, their buyer has postponed the making of advance payment and after few days they have cancelled the orders which were placed on them at the time obtaining above said 1 ron,

advance authorization. Due to above reason they could not complete the export obligation within the time of EO period (9 months from the date of Import), as item of import is raw silk. Now they are getting export orders from some of their buyers and they hope that they can complete export obligation within 6 months without fail and also they can complete import for balance quantity available in the said license after revalidation of the advance authorization. Decision:

Case No.34: M/s 5.7. Exim’s, Hosur, Tamil! Nadu

F. No. 01/60/162/70/AM19/PRC

Subject: Extension in £.0. period and revalidation of Advance Authorization

No.0410161763 dated 31.03.2016. They have submitted that they have got the export order for the said Advance Licenses during the period of October 2016 in terms of advance payment at the time of license was granted. Due to demonetization of the Indian currency, their buyer has postponed the making of advance payment and after few days they have cancelled the orders which were placed on them at the time obtaining above said advance authorization. Due to above reason they could not complete the export obligation within the time of EO period (9 months from the date of Import), as item of import is raw silk. Now they are getting export orders from some of their buyers and they hope that they can complete export obligation within 6 months without fail and also they can complete import for balance quantity available in the said license after revalidation of the advance authorization. Decision: Case ४०.35: Mis S.P. Exim’s, Hosur, Tamil Nadu F.No. 01/60/162/68/AM19/PRC

Subject: Extension in 5.0. period and revalidation of Advance Authorization

No.0410161765 dated 01.04.2016. They have submitted that they have got the export order for the said Advance Licenses during the period of October 2016 in terms of advance payment at the time of license was granted. Due to demonetization of the Indian currency, their buyer has postponed the making of advance payment and after few days they have 20 Ryo

cancelled the orders which were placed on them at the time obtaining above said advance authorization. Due to above reason they could not compiete the export obligation within the time of EO period (9 months from the date of Import), as item of import is raw silk. Now they are getting export orders from some of their buyers and they hope that they can complete export obligation within 6 months without fail and also they can complete import for balance quantity available in the said license after revalidation of the advance authorization. Decision: The committee went through the statement made by the firm in its (Action: Applicant/PRC}

Case No.36: M/s 35.7. Exim’s, Hosur, Tamil Nadu

F No. 01/60/162/833/AM19/PRC

Subject: Extension in 5.0. period and revalidation of Advance Authorization

No.0410162154 dated 01.08,2016. They have submitted that they have got the export order for the said Advance Licenses during the period of October 2016 in terms of advance payment at the time of license was granted. Due to demonetization of the Indian currency, their buyer has postponed the making of advance payment and after few days they have cancelled the orders which were placed on them at the time obtaining above said advance authorization. Due to above reason they could not complete the export obligation within the time of EO period (9 months from the date of Import), as item of import is raw silk. Now they are getting export orders from some of their buyers and they hope that they can complete export obligation within 6 months without fail and also they can complete import for balance quantity available in the said license after revalidation of the advance authorization. Decision: The committee went through the statement made by the firm in its (Action: ApplicanUPRC)

Case No.37: M/s Vaish Vik Foods Pvt. Ltd., Pune

F. No. 01/60/162/832/AM19/PRC

Subject: Extension of export obligation period against Advance Authorization

No.3110067001 dated 44.03.2018. They have stated that their export cargo (spices) was ready to dispatch but their request for extension of EOP was not timely considered and hence they are not able 21 Quam

to fulfill the export obligation. Import item is under App 4 J with EOP is of 90 days. The majority of the export period had japsed in this department as the license was issued on 14.03.2018 and Norms were published in 4% week of August 2018 hence they were unable to reply the DL dated 07.07.18 and their letter dated 10.08.2018 was not answered for about 3 months. Decision; The Committee having examined the statement made by the firm found no case of genuine hardship in their case and accordingly decided to reject it. The applicant is directed to get the case regularized in terms of Para 4.49 of HBP, 2015- 2010 within 30 days from the date of uploading of the minutes of meeting. (Action: ApplicandRA)

Case No.38: M/s Larsen & Toubro Ltd.

F. No. 01/89/180/06/AM1 1/PC-2(A)

Subject: Revatidation of tmport Authorization No.0350003496 dated 11.10.2017

for restricted list of import items falling under ITC Code No.93059100 issued by RA, Mumbai. They have stated that they obtained the above authorization for the import of restricted items required in the manufacture/export of 100 nos of 155mm/52 Calibre Tracked (TR) Self propelled (SP) Guns for the Indian Armed Forces as per order received from Ministry of Defense. The import shipment has to be aligned as per the contractual detivery schedule of 30.04.2020. However, the import could not be completed within the 18 months period of the authorization i.e. up to 41.04.2019. Hence, requested for extension for the restricted list up to the contracted duration i.e. 30.04.2020. Decision: The Committee went through the statements made by the applicant and decided to accede to the request and allowed revalidation up to 30.04.2020 of import License No. 0350003490 dated 11.10.2017 for restricted fist of import items falling under ITC Code No.93059100. (Action: Applicant/PC-2A Division)

Case No.39: Shri Chamarajendra Zoological Gardens, Mysuru

F. No. 01/53/162/27/AM14/S-11/1C Subject: Extension of validity of Import License No.0750000723 dated 05.07.2013. They have stated that as per the animal exchange programme, all the species/individuals except a female Sloth Bear were sent by Mysuru Zoo to Singapore on 29.10.2013. Mysuru Zoo, in turn, received all species/individuals except a female Chimpanzee on 30.11.2014. However, Singapore Zoo refused to accept a female Sloth Bear offered to them in exchange programme citing breakage of canine teeth of offered female Sloth Bear and they requested to replace that one 22 (५७००५.

with intact teeth and did not give a female Chimpanzee. Since then, Shri Chamarajendra Zoological Garden, Mysuru was not having a female Sloth Bear which could meet the requirement of exchange with Singapore Zoo. Now, Shri Chamarajendra Zoological Garden, Mysuru have a female Sloth Bear which meets the requirement of exchange. The Central Zoo Authority, New Delhi has extended the validity of license up to 03.07.2019. Decision: The Committee examined the case in detail and in view of justification provided by the firm, decided to accede to the request and allowed revalidation up to 03.07.2019 of import License No. 0750000723 dated 05.07.2013. (Action: Applicant/PC-2A Division) Loom,

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.