Minutes of the 8th SEEPZ-SEZ Authority Meeting held on 28th October 2010

; MINUTES OF THE 8°" MEETING OF THE SEEPZ ~SEZ AUTHORITY . | . “Present: a ae - . : ie eer i, Development commissioner, SEEPZ-SEZ__ . . Chairperson mt ar. | 7 ae 2. Joint Development Commissioner, : Member % ; ol i | | 9» |: 3. Shri H.D. Lokesh, _ 1.’ Representatives.” Lo . "3, .D¥IDGET hy . of the Zonal DGFT *}. i | / "4, Shri P.S. Raman, . : : Secretary oR : _. Dy. Development Commissioner al | - 5, Mrs. M.J. Kulkarni, . "fy Manager (Estate) '- , ty 6” Asstt. Development Commissioner. Jone * : a Shri Amar Kothari, ; : . Members 2 0s. 1 es . Managing Director,, st, a) + Me ‘M/s. Intergold India Ltd, an ; | 4] | Le. a +7, Shri Rajiv Sheth, | + Member *. . Lim Managing Director te as — i M/s. Tara Ultimo. WE 4 iam * | otf a 1, Balance Sheet of the Authority for the year 2009-10. | | «4 _ ~ The Authority was informed ‘that M/s. Kedia & Company, a ma . , Chartered Accountant have prepared the balance sheet of the. i] ae Authority in respect of the year 2009-10. The Authority noted that the | Se expenditurebalance sheetforshows the variousa surplusM & Rofworks,Rs.24,34,24,886.50electricity chargesas substantialand salary - © . na|| . oS Of Security. and other staff -dealing with the Authority’s works, were’. 7 7 incurred from the regular budgetallocation, only expenditure , | ' * amounting to Rs.64,17,114/- was incurred from the Authority’s Fund. - ot | _ _.The balance sheet has been prepared based on the assumption that 7 7 _ Income Tax is not applicable in respect of the Authority’s fund. roe : _ ' - As regards Income Tax, the “Authority was informed that it is — * | oe understood. from the Cochin SEZ Authority that they have made a © » €f *k _veference to the Ministry seeking Incorrie Tax exemption on the ground i a7 ‘that the Authority is not a commercial organization and that. the lied Pa . « collection of revenues and expenditure, hitherto made into the . 7 ~ Consolidated Fund of India and drawn from it under budgetary grants Pet under various heads are now deposited in a fund created by the same7 i.a ; Act of Parliament and utilized in a manner as before except that.the me || expenditure is not voted by Parliament. — . en 2 Med ow) | , F Decision: The Authority approved the balance sheet in respect. “el ; | . of 2009-10 and directed that regarding Income Tax exemption - . 4 i | (matter, the Authority should make a reference to the Ministry. -| . seeking exemption as has been sought by the Cochin SEZ. ae | “ad

. , - -It was also directed that list of lease rent/surcharge dues at —_ _ may be prepared indicating names of units which are defunct. Also list of units who have not yet executed Lease Agreement | may be prepared. , ce Bs , | _. TI. Repairs to SDF-I, II & V and G&J Complex No.III., , , The Dy. Engineer, MIDC-stated that the estimates in respect of . SDF-I & II have been prepared based on the inspection of the - «available.“buildings carried out by MIDC as SEEMA‘s representativewas not He further ‘stated the estimate does not include painting of - . the buildings. a 2! ai 4 The Chairperson, observed that the SDFs though old-will have to - be made an improved location for business for some more years; also. ~~ E that the MOC&I did not agree te brings down of G&J Complex-I, while * considering ASIDE funds for a new. Tower. Therefore, the MIDC was 7 : directed to consult the Associations and to revise the estimate to cover . . . comprehensive repairs to the buildings. . It was directed that MIDC should complete this exercise in a week’s time and submit the revised ; estimate. , - a 4g 1 As regards SDF-V and G&J Complex No.III, the Dy. Engineer stated that the estimate include comiprehenswe repairs to the buildings »- / and the estimates have been prepared based in consultation with the: . . os ‘Association and Units. . ; Decision: The Authority approved estimates in respect of SDF: yo, » V-and G&J Complex No.III. It was directed that the revised a: estimate in respect, of. SDF-I & IZ can be approved by the . ‘Chairperson and the details can be submittedto the next .- . Authority so that. the Tender procedures, etc. can be started ; and the work can be.taken up and completed before next yoto 8 “ * monsoon. With regard to providing and installing automotive . he Retractable Bollards at all the gates, the Authority decided to ~ .. defer the proposal, which can -be considered after - * implementation of the Electronic Surveillance System by MIDC. —. r a | III. Common Refinery. ax . M/s. Diamond India Ltd.(DIL) gave a presentation. It was noted oO ' that the company has diverse shareholders and is at present in the - ~ activity of trading of diamond. The Companyis about two years old. ; “The, CEO.of the company stated that DIL. already has association with - 4 . some of the SEEPZ units and is in a position to invest money required - - _: for setting up, of a-Refinery. The President of the SG&JMA observed * 3 rl —D _ that it needs to be seen as to- whether the interest of the company is . -* ig2 - to start a refinery initially but later on to concentrate on manufacturing : @ or -trading discontinuing the refinery activity if that becomes oy uneconomical. Mr. Amar Kothari stated that reputation of the - . company is good and since it has diverse investors i.e. 58 different — & "investors,* their track record. in the past has been good. Therefore, a .» ,; there is no harm in gettinga oroposal- from them and examine the | _-. same. Mr. Rajiv Sheth stated’ that. M/s. Hoover & Strong: have after , their visit to SEEPZ, discussion with the industry representatives and: .°, drawing ‘sample. of the septic tank waste, have shown interest in 1 re. : settingup’ the refinery. Considering the international standing of the . ~ . an company in the refining activity, it would be desirable to cohsider their ° ny proposal. a 7 al,

= 2 _ ‘The President of the Association observed that.whoever is setting. 7 _ up a refinery, the units would be willing to avail their services onlyif ot . é _ thetheirrecoveryown refinery.percentage is more| than what they presently get from , - a en | oS . ate Decision: The Authority directed that M/s. Hoover& Strong + g may Propose setting up of a unit as third party certification - — . - With reference to their technology is available on record. © _ Simultaneously, M/s. DIL: may also-be asked to submit their ~ pa - detailed Project report along with the proposal. within a’ - . month’s time so that the proposals can be assessed in the next a se Authority meeting. m3 3 . er | , i, .IV. Incubation space for New technologies - Tie up with TIT-B- ---° | nO . ” _ keen ThethatChairpersonthe SEZsstatedshould thatcreatethe Ministryincubationof Commercespace hasfor beennew: ‘ © ». oeff| and - technologies in association with institutions of repute. In this regard, - | a the Zone Administration had discussion: with the IIT-SINE, Mumbai and _: Deed , _ Officers. from the IIT-SINE- visited SEEPZ and also discussed the - - | By Proposal. They said that as the IIT would be investing money. in doing . . | . ~ the interior work, the recovery of the cost incurred may not-be — . : "possible in a span of two years and therefore felt that the allotment of ’ z | ‘built-up space may be considered for 5 years’ duration. As the . * ;, te “>. entrepreneur working on the :new. technology may not be in a position soa | ~) to commit positive NFE which a LOP: involves, the arrangement worked | "or *. out is to release a small area of 1500''sq.ft. of built-up space on. lease ean OF ' : leave and licence basis to the SINE+IIT, Mumbai for a period pre os | ~ "years. The SINE-IIT would provide premises in this to entrepreneurs re al . for: R&D facility, it’ was ‘ indicated. during discussion that ‘an ~ . . i _ entrepreneur normally needs; 400 to 500 sq.ft. built-up area initially. rE aos en f= entrepreneur would be using only.duty paid materials so that the = , Fad ED issue of availment of exemption does not arise. Apart from lease rent, - - | 4 the other outgoings. viz. service charges, property tax, etc. as . ce | applicable will be paid by the SINE-IIT,.Mumbai. There would be a | need ~ _ memorandum of understanding drawn between the SINE-IIT, Mumbai. 4 » in this regard. The visiting: team of -SINE-IIT-B saw both existing . | _ Space and newly constructed space line the BEC. In an old Powe AEF . construction, their investment in interiors will be substantial and this is . be ET . nota business proposition for SINE. Their requirement of space is also fe OY Me ~ small and 1500 - 2000 'sq.ft.; which is available in the BFC,3™ floor. of Considering IIT-B’s status as a teaching and R&D institution and the . . A “fact. that the BFC does not have any. worthwhile. proposal for its’: ° | - | utilization, it was decided that location of the incubation’ centre at BFC . . _ can be considered, if the Board of IIT-B approves it. in|] _ alyd ./ » .. + Decision: -The Authority approved the proposal. as gah? - °°. “V. Wellness Centre a enn hk a _. The Authority noted that considering the large’ number of |. ~ “hy . employees working in the Zone Complex, the present facility of a first - “y 7 °° aid box and visiting doctors, are grossly inadequate. Thereisneed for °~. ei | +" : -. @ Wellness Centre in the form of a comrnon facility to be set up by.’ el * SEEPZ-SEZ Authority: 7: . we me eg f

• ~ The Chairperson stated that the Zone Administration has written 2 to the ESIS Authorities aS to whether they would be in a position to construct a building for locating the Wellness Centre. Alternatively, - the MIDC was also asked to prepare estimate for construction of the er. building. The MIDC has submitted an estimate of Rs.82.26 Lakhs for 7 : construction of a building with 440 sq.mtrs. of built-up are for locating . - the dispensary, creche facility and fair price shop. She also.shared her. i experience of visit to the Infosys SEZ facility where a small but well run dispensary and clinic has deen provided by the Developer. . The : Chairperson also referred to her discussion with. the DGESIC where it : r . - was. agreed that a doctor engaged in the dispensary will be declared a — ; ESIC Medical Officer so that the workers can get ESIC referral facility. Leg a asked Mr.as toAmarwhetherKotharitheystatedare interestedthat the bigin fundingunits inthetheconstructionZone can beof iH "y , . thewelfarebuildingorientedsincematters.many of Hesuchfurtherunitsstatedmay thatbe providing‘normally fundsthe unitsfor | . ..— wouldthe timenotandbe expertiseinterestedforthein maintainingsame. the facility : as they do not have © \ . Decision: The Authority decided that the wellness centre can : Z ‘be started at an existing location of about 1500 -2000 sq.ft. so — that the project can be tried out before a fresh construction is ’ undertaken. Also the wtispensary should not become a ' catchment pool for hospitals/clinics around SEEPZ, as its oo |“= ‘g -. TheobjectiveAuthorityto providedirectedbasicthat checkcommunicationup and emergencymay be sentservices.to top ™ units in each sector and ty the SG&JMA/SEEMA as to whether " “i _. they would be interested ‘in running a clinical and dispensary , Ok facility on a no loss no protit basis in SEEPZ-SEZ. aaer 1 VI. Space norms . M* e .,. 1996, ThethereafterAuthorityrevised‘innoted that2007.space and isnormsproposedweretoinitiallybe revised:prescribed now. inIt an was also noted that as the space norms are neither part of the Foreign Trade Policy /SEZ Act nor the Sub-lease/Tenancy Agreement, these : "have remained as a guideline so far.’ It was also noted that the - Ministry has directed that space norms-should be prescribed for SEEPZ ' a Mr. Amar Kothari stated that due to change in the business pattern globally, these days, demand for silver jewellery/steel/copper ‘jewellery, etc. are more as compared to jewellery made out of. gold - ,'° /platinum, Therefore, though the business volume has increased, in © oo : terms of cost, the receipts become less as compared to transactions in . - : the gold jewellery. - ‘ 2 - . Decision: The Authority directed that the background of the space norm requirement and the space norms suggested by the | a : 7 Zone Administration may be communicated to the Associations aon _ so that they can give their views in the matter. i. . oo The Meeting ended with vote of thanks to the Chair. | _ je ' Chairpersof-cum= _ - "2 | Development Commissioner ll “ . SEEPZ-SEZ Authority. .