Government of India

Ministry of Commerce and Industry

Department of Commerce

Directorate General of Foreign Trade

(EPCG-Section)

MINUTES OF 4th

MEETING OF AM-22 OF THE EPCG COMMITTEE HELD UNDER THE

CHAIRMANSHIP OF SHRI S.B.S. REDDY, ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF

FOREIGN TRADE AT 3.00 PM ON 15.09.2021

The fourth meeting for AM-22 of the EPCG Committee was held at 3.00 pm on 15.09.2021 under the chairmanship of Shri S.B.S. Reddy, Additional Director General of Foreign Trade through Video Conferencing mode on Cisco webex cyber meeting app due to Covid-19 restrictions (Meeting Number: 2518 360 3690). Following officers attended the meeting :

i. Shri Chandan Kumar, OSD, Department of Revenue ii. Shri Randheep Thakur, Joint Director General of Foreign Trade, DGFT iii. Shri Shobhit Gupta, Deputy Director General of Foreign Trade, DGFT iv. Shri Satish Ozha, Foreign Trade Development Officer, DGFT

2. The Committee deliberated upon all the cases and following decisions were taken:

Sl

.

N

o.

Firm’s Name and file

Numbers EPCG

Authorisation

no.

Subject, Brief history and decision of the Committee

1. Santosh Hospital Pvt. Ltd., Chennai 01/60/162/256/AM21/P

RC/EPCG

i.0430013182 dated 20.12.2013 ii.

0430013516 dated 20.03.2014

Request for extension of EOP The firm has requested for extension of EOP in

respect of the subject EPCG Authorizations. The firm has stated that it availed loan from the IOB for upgradation of infrastructure facilities which were taken over by Muthoot Fincorp Ltd. in 2016. Muthoot Fincorp Ltd. also took physical possession of the Hospital in 2018. Subsequently, it preferred an application before the NCLT, Chennai

which appointed an interim Resolution Professional on 04.04.2019. Hon’ble NCLT, Chennai vide its order dated 04.12.2019 (pronounced on 17.12.2019) directed for liquidation of the Hospital. Thereafter, the Appellate Tribunal stayed the sale of the properties with the direction to Liquidator to make the Corporate debtor as a going concern and further directed Muthoot Fincorp Ltd. to handover the

physical possession of the Hospital to the Liquidator. Now, the matter is pending before Hon’ble NCLT Chennai and New Delhi. Hence, the operation of the Hospital could not commence and EO could not be completed. The Committee deliberated on the submissions of

the applicant and observed that no final resolution plan has been prepared/approved by NCLT so far.

Committee felt that it is premature to intervene at this stage. Hence, the Committee decided to reject the case.

2. Sesha Tools Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai HQRPRCAPPLY00091592AM21:PRC Committee

0730011540 dated 13.08.2012

Request for extension of EOP The party seeks extension for 12 months against the

subject EPCG authorisation on the grounds that their exports have been adversely affected by Covid-19 pandemic. After discussion, the Committee decided

to recommend to DG for relaxation under Para

2.58 of FTP 2015-20 that the Export Obligation period would be extended till 31.12.2021 without any composition fees. However this extension is subject to 5% additional export obligation in value terms (in free Foreign Exchange) on the balance Export Obligation on the date of expiry of the

original/ extended export obligation period. This has the approval of DG.

3. Vimlesh Industries Pvt

Ltd, Delhi HQRPRCAPPLY00094945AM21:PRC

Committee

0530161645 dated 03.10.2013

Under 0%

EPCG

Scheme

Request for exemption /waiver in shortfall of

AEO The firm has stated that they could not maintain AEO due to drastic reduction in export business because of localization of export product by one of their major overseas customer. Keeping in view of it's past record, the firm has requested for exemption/waiver for the shortfall in AEO in order to apply for EODC. The Committee deliberated upon the submissions of

the applicant and decided to reject the case as there is no merit in the request.

4. Rukshmani Syntex Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai HQREPCGPRAPP00111593AM22:PRC

Committee

i.0330022437 dated 12.02.2009 ii. 0330026697

dated 27.07.2010 iii. 0330029062 dated 23.03.2011 iv.

0330029451 dated 12.05.2011 v. 0330030091 dated

Request for acceptance of installation certificate

issued by Chartered Engineer instead of Central

Excise in respect of EPCG License: The applicant has stated that they were unaware of

getting Installation Certificate issued from Central Excise and obtained the same from Chartered Engineer. The applicant has requested for acceptance of Installation Certificate issued by Chartered Engineer. The Committee observed that there is no provision in

FTP 2009-14 for submission of Installation Certificate from Chartered Engineer. Hence, the Committee decided to reject the case as there is no merit in the request.

21.07.2011 vi. 0330031894 dated

15.02.2011 vii. 0330033394 dated 08.08.2012 viii. 0330034690 dated 01.01.2013 ix. 0330034689 dated 01.01.2013 x. 0330035365 dated

19.03.2013 5. Vintech Industries Pvt.

Ltd, Thane 01/36/218/328/AM-20/EPCG

0830004419

dated 02.08.2011 The party has two requests as under: In respect of first request i.e. block-wise extension

in EOP and second extension in EOP for two

years. The party has stated that it could not fulfill 50% EO in the first block ending September, 2015 due to extremely poor export market condition prevailing in

Europe and US. It fulfilled 43% in Rs. term and 29% in US$ term EO within the original validity of 6 years and the balance 57% in Rs term and 71% US$ term EO was fulfilled within 2 years and 34 days. In respect of second request acceptance of shipping bills under Reward Scheme (MEIS) without

mentioning the EPCG license no. and date in respect of EPCG authorisation No. 0830004419 dated 02.08.2011. The Committee deliberated upon the case and decided to remand the case to RA. The RA may

examine the request on the basis of relevant policy provisions.

6. Joneja Bright Steel Pvt. Ltd., Haryana 01/36/218/194/AM-21/EPCG

0530157880 dated 12.03.2012

Request for extension of EOP : The firm has stated that they were doing Deemed export and could not fulfill EO due to reducing export orders between 2013 and 2018. They have

fulfilled EO to the tune of Rs. 2,98,13,841/- only in this period and the EO Rs. 3,40,86,705.00 is left unfulfilled. They could not apply for first extension of EOP i.e. from 12.03.2018 to 11.03.2020 due to lack of policy knowledge. They have requested for

extension of EOP by 4 years from expiry of original period i.e. from 12.03.2018 to 11.03.2022, without payment of composition fee. The Committee deliberated upon the submissions of the applicant and decided to reject the case as there is no merit in the request.

7. JVH Met-Cut (P) Ltd., Chennai 01/36/218/40/AM-

22/EPCG

04500221 dated 18.3.1997

W.P. No.15515 of 2008 in the Hon’ble High Court

of Madras: The Committee heard the submissions of the

applicant during personal hearing. The representative of the applicant sought one week to submit the written submissions which was accepted by the Committee. The Committee decided to defer the case for conside

ration in the next EPCG committee meeting. A report from RA should also be obtained.

8. Swarnamukhi Hotels Pvt Ltd, Bengaluru 01/37/218/18/AM-19/EPCG-II

i.0730007183 dated 15.7.2008 ii. 0730007931 dated 30.3.2009

Request for review of decision taken in the EPCG

Committee Meeting dated 12.07.2018 The firm requested for extension in block-wise EO and extension of EOP by excluding period of 5 years

as there was delay in installation of capital goods due to delay in providing clearances by State Government like electricity, lift, installation of escalators etc. resulting in the hotel project failing to take off. The firm requested that the period of 5 years from March, 2009 to April, 2013 be excluded for calculating first block period by treating it as "no

obligation period" and Second block period be extended from April, 2019 to April, 2021. The EPCG Committee in its meeting held on 12.07.2018 decided to reject the case as there is no provision in the policy to grant extension in EOP on these ground. Now the firm has requested to reconsider the decision taken by EPCG Committee and allow the

following: 1. To consider the period from March 2009 to April 2014 as no export obligation period.

2. To revise the first block period to April 2014 to March 2020.

3. To revise the Second block period to April 2020 to March 2022.

4. Consequently extend the export obligation upto "March 2022. The firm has also filed Writ Petition No. 11155/2021 against above decision in the Hon'ble High Court of

Karnataka at Bangalore. The firm has sought personal hearing to explain the case. As the matter is pending before Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka, the committee decided not to intervene at this stage.

9. Tata Steel Limited Kolkata 01/36/218/213/AM-21-EPCG

14 EPCG licenses:

i. 230005257 dt. 12.05.20

10 ii. 2300075

44 dt. 13.01.2012

iii. 2300075

45 dt. 13.01.2012

iv. 230008139 dt.

23.07.2012

v. 230008236 dt. 28.08.2012

vi. 230008362 dt. 12.10.2012

vii. 2300083

63 dt. 12.10.2012

viii. 230008501 dt.

21.12.2012

ix. 230007394 dt. 05.12.2011

x. 230008840 dt. 15.05.2013

xi. 2300089

18 dt. 28.06.2013

xii. 2300091

Request for condonation of delay in installation of

spares and extension of time or alternatively

waiver for consumption of spares: The applicant has stated that EOP of 1st block in all licenses has been extended for 2 years. It obtained

spares under 14 EPCG licenses during 2010-2016. Most of the spares have been consumed beyond 3 years but within the EOP. Some spares were to be installed in the event of breakdown/wear & tear of existing spares, but could not be consumed till date as the existing spars performed better than expected. These spares can be consumed in near

future. The EOP has already been fulfilled against all the licenses within the specified time. DoR vide O.M. dated 14th July, 2021 has stated that the prescribed time period of 3 years is sufficient for EPCG authorisation holder to anticipate and manage the requirement of spares to be imported and installed under the scheme. The exporter has not

installed some of the spares imported under different authorisations even after 7 to 11 years from the date of authorisation. Further, any policy related relaxation to extend the time of installation of spares is likely to create a precedent, which may lead to misuse. DoR is of the view that the request of Tata Steel Limited for condonation of delay in

consumption of spares imported under EPCG Scheme beyond 3 years and for the spares lying in stock to be treated as installed does not merit consideration. Accordingly, the exemption availed by the authorisation holder on these items is not admissible. However, other members felt that, it is not possible to determine in advance when spares are going to be needed. Spares are needed when original part breaks down. Idea of allowing import of spares is to keep the capital goods in good running condition and then only EO can be fulfilled. The Committee deliberated upon the case at length. After discussion, the Committee decided to decided to recommend to DG

for relaxation under Para 2.58 of FTP 2015-

20, despite DoR's reservation, to allow the consumption of spares upto the export

54 dt. 12.11.2013

xiii. 2300093

68 dt. 03.03.2014

xiv. 230009590 dt.

23.06.2014

obligation period. This has the approval of DG.

10.

IND Synergy Ltd., Raigarh, Chattisgarh 01/36/218/122/AM-21/EPCG

i.0330017266 dated 28.8.2007 ii.0330021966 dated 05.12.2008 iii.5030000054 dated 10.06.2010 iv.5030000015 dated 11.09.2009

Request for extension of EOP. The applicant obtained the subject EPCG authorizations during 2007 to 2009 for import of ‘Pig Iron Casting Machine’ to manufacture and export ‘Billets and Blooms of plain Carbon /non-alloy/ alloy steel’. The applicant has stated that it installed the capital goods at the plant site (Blast Furnace unit) but

could not commence production due to adverse economic conditions, ban on mining activity by Hon’ble Supreme Court and imposition of curbs on issue of visa to Chinese Engineering Experts/ Technicians. Further, they could not repay loan to Bank and their account was declared NPA. The bankers issued notice under SARFARESI Act in

March, 2011 and initiated DRT proceedings against the company for recovery of dues. Edelweiss Assets Reconstruction Company Ltd. (EARC) during 2014-15 acquired their assets from bank and finally EARC restructured the loan on 11th April, 2018 and the unit could be re-started from August 2018 only. The manufacturing plant was in closed condition from

2011 to 2018. Hence, it could not fulfill EO on time. The applicant has requested for extension of two years to complete the EO. DoR vide letter dated 05.08.2021 has stated that the period for fulfilment of EO is 8+2 years under the FTP which appears to be sufficiently long for completion of export fulfilment. In three out of four

cases, NIL export obligation has been fulfilled by the applicant in the extended period of 10 years. One case has already been adjudicated against the applicant by Customs. Accordingly, DoR has not supported the proposal. The Committee deliberated upon the case and

decided to reject the same. 1

1. Venkateshwara Laser

Tech Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

0730010208

dated 30.05.2011 Request for extension of EOP for two years: The applicant has stated that they could fulfill EO of Rs. 1,02,92,628.00/- within extended period due to

HQRPRCAPPLY00034997AM22

Covid-19 pandemic. However, they are again getting export orders and would be able to complete the EO. Hence, they have requested for extension of EOP for two years. They are ready to pay the composition fee. After discussion, the Committee decided

to recommend to DG

for relaxation under Para 2.58 of FTP 2015-

20 that the Export Obligation period would be extended till 31.12.2021 without any composition fees. However this extension is subject to 5% additional export obligation in value terms (in free

Foreign Exchange ) on the balance Export Obligation on the date of expiry of the original/extended export obligation period.

This has the approval of DG.

12.

Tata Cummins Pvt. Ltd., Jamshedpur

HQREPCGPRAPP00048759AM22

3130010553 dated 30.11.2018

Request for condonation of delay in installation of

Capital Goods: The applicant has stated that they imported the Capital Goods by May, 2019. The ajority of CGs were installed within stipulated time of 18 months, some CGs could be installed 3 months beyond the stipulated time period due to due to change in equipment design, outbreak of Covid-19 and related lockdown/travel restrictions. The applicant has

requested condonation of delay in installation of Capital Goods beyond stipulated time period. The Committee deliberated upon the case and it was decided to defer it with the direction to call a report from RA.

13.

Tata Cummins Pvt. Ltd., Pune HQREPCGPRAPP00048749AM22

3130010727 dated 12.03.2019

Request for condonation of delay in installation of

Capital Goods: The applicant has stated that they imported the Capital Goods by March 2019. Majority of CGs

were installed within stipulated time of 18 months, some CGs could be installed 4 months beyond the stipulated time period due to due to change in equipment design, outbreak of Covid-19 and related lockdown/travel restrictions. The applicant has requested condonation of delay in installation of Capital Goods beyond stipulated time period. The Committee deliberated upon the case and it was decided to defer it with the direction to call a report from RA.

14.

General Motors India Pvt. Ltd. (GMIPL),

Pune

3130009582 dated 23.08.2016

Request for post facto regularization of shifting

and installation of certain Capital goods at the

supporting manufacturer’s premises:

HQREPCGPRAPP00102216AM22

The applicant has informed that they have fulfilled requisite EO and EODC has been issued by RA,

Pune on 23 March 2021. The firm has further stated that after issuance of EODC, they noticed that two Capital Goods ‘Dies’ imported under the EPCG authorisation were inadvertently shifted and installed at their supporting manufacturer viz. Posco India Pune Processing Centre Pvt. Ltd. premises. However, due to inter-functional miscommunication,

they could not inform the RA and seek prior permission for such shifting and installation. On noticing the said error by them, they came forth to disclose the same and requested for post-facto regularization of such shifting and installation. They have enclosed a copy of Posco India letter dated 25 May 2021 confirming that the Dyes were used for exclusive supply of parts to GM India. They have

enclosed a CE certificate also. Hence, the firm has requested for post facto regularization of shifting and installation of 2 Nos. of EPCG goods at the supporting manufacturer’s premises. The Committee deliberated upon the case and

decided to defer it with the direction to call for a report from RA.

15.

Shri Balaji Packaging, Ujjain

HQRPRCAPPLY00082411AM21

5630000219 dated 17.01.2013

Request to waive off the interest due to damage of

CGs in fire: The applicant has informed that the CGs was destroyed in a fire in the factory on 10.05.2016. Since no export was made against the said EPCG

License applied on 20.01.2019 to EPCG Committee for extension of EOP for 2 years and condonation of fulfilment of EO by Group companies. The case has been rejected two times by EPCG Committee in its meeting held on 29.03.2019 and 26.07.2019. Thereafter, the applicant paid the duty of Rs.2319395/- on the imported Capital Machinery

vide Challan No. 229 dated 19.07.2019 and has requested to waive off the interest portion due to hardship faced by it. The Committee deliberated upon the case and decided to reject it as there is no merit in the request.

16.

General Motors India Pvt. Ltd. (GMIPL), Pune HQREPCGPRAPP00102058AM22

3130009468 dated 13.06.2016

Request for post facto regularization of shifting

and installation of certain capital goods at the

supporting manufacturer’s premises: The applicant has informed that they have fulfilled requisite EO and EODC has been issued by RA,

Pune on 23 March 2021. The firm has further stated that after issuance of EODC, they noticed that two

Capital Goods ‘Dies’ imported under the EPCG authorisation were inadvertently shifted and installed at their supporting manufacturer viz. Posco India Pune Processing Centre Pvt. Ltd. premises.

However, due to inter-functional miscommunication, they could not inform the RA and seek prior permission for such shifting and installation. On noticing the said error by them, they came forth to disclose the same and requested for post-facto regularization of such shifting and installation. They have enclosed a copy of Posco India letter dated 25 May 2021 confirming that the Dyes were used for

exclusive supply of parts to GM India. They have enclosed a CE certificate also. Hence, the firm has requested for post facto regularization of shifting and installation of 2 Nos. of EPCG goods at the supporting manufacturer’s premises. The Committee deliberated upon the case and decided to defer it with the direction to call a report from RA.

17.

Shree Venkateswara Ginning & Pressing Mill, Hyderabad HQRPRCAPPLY00108474AM22

0930010480 dated 25.07.2014

Request for extension of EOP: The firm has stated that they obtained the subject EPCG Authorization on 25.07.2014 and took Block-

wise extension from RA Hyderabad. Due to non-availability of direct Export orders, they could not fulfill the EO. Now, they are getting Export orders through Third Party. Therefore, the firm has requested for extension of EOP upto 24.04.2022. After discussion, the Committee decided to recommend to DG

for relaxation under Para 2.58 of FTP 2015-

20 that the Export Obligation period would be extended till 31.12.2021 without any composition Fees. However this extension is subject to 5% additional export obligation in value terms (in free Foreign Exchange ) on the balance Export Obligation on the date of expiry of the original/extended export

obligation period.

This has the approval of DG. 18.

SHRI BALAJI PACKAGING HQRPRCAPPLY00082415AM21

5630000153 dated 12.10.2012

Request to waive off the interest due to damage of

CGs in fire: The applicant has informed that the CGs was destroyed in a fire in the factory on 10.05.2016.

Since no export was made against the said EPCG License applied on 20.01.2019 to EPCG Committee for extension of EOP for 2 years and condonation of fulfilment of EO by Group companies. The case has been rejected two times by EPCG Committee in its meeting held on 29.03.2019 and

26.07.2019. Thereafter, the applicant paid the duty of Rs. 8748677/- on the imported Capital Machinery vide Challan No. 3352 dated 31.07.2019 and has requested to waive off the interest portion due to

hardship faced by it. The Committee deliberated upon the case and decided to reject it as there is no merit in the request.

19.

Milan Textiles, Surat HQRPRCAPPLY00092459AM21

5230004271 dated

10.10.2008

Request for extension of EOP: The firm has stated that they have already taken 2 Years Extension from RA, Surat from 10.10.2016 to 09.10.2018. They have also fulfilled EO vide Export Invoice dated 27.10.2018. However, due to Customs lengthy process of clearance, holidays like Saturday and Sunday on 27.10.2018/28.10.2018, Export

Shipments received dated was 03.11.2018 which is after the License expiry date i.e. 31.10.2018. The firm has requested to condone or give relaxation in view of the above situation which was beyond their control and allow them for EODC Clearance. The Committee noted that the applicant vide email

dated 7.9.2021 has informed that EODC for above referred licence has now been issued on 9/4/21. Hence, the Committee decided to allow withdrawal of the case.

2

0. Shriniwas

Polyfabrics&Packwell Pvt. Ltd., Dhar (M.P.) HQRPRCAPPLY00099918AM21

5630000740

dated 01.07.2015 Request for consideration of group company

exports towards EO fulfilment : The firm has stated that they could not fulfil the EO due to competition from China and requested to allow to fulfil the export obligation through group company exports. The Committee deliberated upon the case and noted that the provisions of group company had already been deleted on 18.04.2013 from the FTP i.e. prior to issue of EPCG authorisation on 01.07.2015. Hence, the Committee decided to reject it as there is no merit in the request.

21.

Vani Spinners Pvt. Ltd 01/37/218/128/AM-18/EPCG-II

3030006613 dated 28.04.2010

Civil Writ Petition No. 22023 of 2020:

The applicant has stated that EOP of the subject

EPCG authorization has been extended

vide amended Sheets on 28.09.2017, 04.05.2018,

30.05.2019, 20.03.2020, 17.06.2020, 04.09.2020. In

the month of August’ 2020, it attempted to make

third party export through M/s Rishav Exports vide

shipping bill No. 3225866 dated 16.06.2020 in

terms of section 50 of the Customs Act, 1962 and

uploaded the particulars of EPCG

authorization. However, their system reflected it as

expired.

Thereafter, the Petitioner wrote many emails on

24.07.2020, 28.07.2020, 30.07.2020, 04.08.2020,

13.08.Z020, 09.09.2020, 12.09.2020 & 15.09.2020

and requested them to update their system, however,

failed to upload the amended EPCG authorization

whereas portal maintained by DGFT reflected the

acceptance of the amended authorization by

Customs. Due to this technical fault, the Petitioner

could not export goods against the ECPG

authorization and goods were exported without

reflecting name and detail of the EPCG authorization

of the Petitioner in shipping bill. Further, the

extended EPCG authorization expired on 27.10.20

20 and it could not fulfill its export obligation within

time.

Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court vide order

dated 18.12.2020 noted that there was some genuine

technical problem faced by the applicant, the court

directed to to resolve the same and issue speaking

order.

RA Ludhiana vide letter dated 6.2.2021 and email

dated 31.8.2021 has intimated that EO was extended

upto 27.04.2020. This Amendment was not

transmitted to Custom Server. The firm brought to

notice on 19.03.2020 and 26.05.2020. The firm

applied for EO extension under Notification dated

07.04.2020 (corona time relaxation), and the office

extended EO period 27.04.2020 to 27.10.2020. This

amendment was not transmitted to the Custom. RA

informed vide email dated 06.07.20 that the license

was correctly transmitted to the custom and

screenshot where amendment sheet no 5 was shown

as transmitted. DGFT HQ NIC (Shri Raj Shekhar)

informed RA that same amendment cannot be

transmitted again to custom. The firm applied for

amendment of License, so fresh amendment can be

transmitted to the Custom. This office amended

license on 04.09.2020 with same details as EO period

is extended to 27.10.2020. Now the firm vide email

dated 19.12.2020 requested for consideration of third

party exports from M/s Rishav Exports with SB no

3225866 dated 16.06.2020, since EPCG was not

transmitted to the Custom and SB had not EPCG

number mentioned. They also requested for six

months’ extension. The request was rejected since

there is no such provision in policy vide email dated

23.12.2020. Thereafter, the firm approached the

court. Again the firm wants six months more

relaxation in EO extension from the date of

transmission. So RA has requested to advise on the

following issues:

i. Whether we should count third party export (M/s Risav Export SB no 32258866 dated 16.06.2020 or not.

ii. Whether we should extend EO again to six

months from date of transmission the Custom since the firm cannot do exports against EPCG.

The matter was referred to the DoR on 24.05.2021.

The reminders have been sent on 20.7.2021, 17.8.2021, 1.9.2021. The representative of DoR informed that the matter is under examination and would forward the comments of DoR soon. Hence, the Committee decided to defer the case for

next meeting.

22.

Colour Creation Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi 01/36/218/242/AM-21/EPCG

i.0530167841

dated

14.06.2016

ii.0530168881

dated

28.10.2016.

Request for considering fulfillment of EO by

granting 25% concession as Capital Goods were

procured indigenously:

The firm has stated that they applied subject EPCG License for procurement of CGs indigenously with the condition to fulfill the Specific Export Obligation by 4.5 times of the duty saved i.e. 25% less in terms of para 5.04(c) of FTP 2015-2020. However, by

default the system issued the EPCG license to fulfil the specific EO of 6 times the duty saved on Capital Goods on FOB basis within a period of 6 year. Since the CGs were sourced indigenously, they submitted their request for issue of invalidation letter to CLA, New Delhi and who invalidated both the above licenses. However, CLA, in the amendment letter did

not reduce the Specific EO by 25% in terms of Para 5.04 of FTP 2015-20. After fulfilling 75% Specific EO in the first block itself, they submitted applications for redemption to CLA. However, CLA rejected the application stating that they have availed benefits under Para 5.04 & 5.09 of FTP 2015-20.

The firm’s contention is that since, CGs were

sourced indigenously, Specific EO should be 25%

less than what is imposed in direct import, as per provision in Para 5.04 of FTP 2015-20 . In case of indigenous sourcing of CGs , specific EO shall be 25% less than the stipulated in Para 5.01 of FTP i.e. 6

times. RA vide letter dated 24.7.2021 has informed that nil AEO was imposed. However, specific EO to the tune of 56.30% in r/o Authorisation No. 0530168881 and of 52.27% in r/o Authorisation No. 0530167841. The Committee deliberated upon the case and

decided to remand the case to RA with an advice to decide the application as per policy and pass necessary orders as they deem fit.

23.

Mittal Corp Ltd., Indore

01/36/218/27/AM-21/EPCG

1130002236

dated

29.08.2011

Request for review of decision taken in the EPCG

Committee Meeting dated 11.08.2020-reg.

The applicant obtained the subject zero duty EPCG authorisation on 29.8.2011 which expired on 28.8.2017. The extended EOP has also expired on 28.8.2019. The applicant sought further extension in EOP for two years to fulfil EO. The request was

reject by EPCG Committee in its meeting held on 11.8.2020. The applicant has stated that they have made more than 51% exports in the first block, but due to recession in international market and financial problems, they could not fulfill the remaining Export

Obligation. The Committee deliberated upon the case and decided to reject it as there is no merit in the request.

24.

Biltube Industries Ltd., Pune

01/36/218/03/AM-22/EPCG

i.3130003737 dated 09.01.2009

ii.3130004084 dated 18.06.2009

iii.3130004136 dated 30.07.2009

Request for extension of EOP:

The firm stated that they could not fulfil EO due to European financial crisis in 2009-10 and financial difficulties. The firm has filed for BIFR in July 2017. The bankers, in the meantime. Transferred the

assets to Asset Reconstruction company (ARC). The firm has stated that they have 3rd party exports and requested to allow actual export value as per shipping bills not the transaction value of the manufacturer. The Committee deliberated upon the case and

decided to reject it as there is no merit in the request.

25.

Tata Motors Ltd., Mumbai

01/36/218/153/AM-

i.0530172647 dated 19.07.2018

ii.0530167705 dated 27.05.201

Request for Re-fixation of Average Export

Obligation :

The applicant has stated due to an inadvertent error in computation, the AEO was wrongly fixed in both

21/EPCG 6. the above licenses.

CLA has stated that the firm had inadvertently computed Average Export Obligation by taking wrong export figures.

After due deliberation, the Committee decided to remand the case to RA with a request to re-examine the request of the firm and take a decision as

per policy provisions.

26.

Tata Motors Ltd., Mumbai

01/36/218/132/AM-21/EPCG

i.0530164579 dated 19.03.2015

ii.0530161876 dated 20.11.2013

Request for Re-fixation of Average Export

Obligation :

The applicant has stated that due to an inadvertent error in computation, the AEO was wrongly fixed in

both the above licenses.

CLA has stated that the firm had inadvertently

computed Average Export Obligation by taking wrong export figures.

After due deliberation, the Committee decided to remand the case to RA to re-examine the request of the firm and take a decision as per policy provisions.

27.

Mittal Corp Ltd., Bhopal

01/36/218/379/AM-20/EPCG

1130002287 dated 24.10.2011

Request for review of decision taken in the EPCG

Committee Meeting dated 13.07.2020-reg.

The applicant obtained the subject zero duty EPCG authorisation on 24.10.2011 which expired on 23.10.2017. The extended EOP has also expired on 23.10.2019. The applicant sought further extension in EOP for two years to fulfil EO. The request was

reject by EPCG Committee in its meeting held on 13.7.2020. The applicant has stated that due to recession in international market and financial problems, they could not fulfill the remaining Export Obligation. The Committee deliberated upon the case and

decided to reject it as there is no merit in the request.

28.

Rini Machines, Coimbatore

01/36/218/152/AM-21/EPCG

3230006512 dated 24.03.2006

Request for extension of EOP:

The firm has stated that they could not fulfil EO within stipulated time due to the recession in business, custom issues etc. Now they have orders in hand hence requested to extend EOP. The Committee noted that the applicant has fulfilled ‘nil’ EO upto the extended EOP which expired on 24.3.2016. Demand-cum-Show cause notice was issued on 14.6.2016. There was no response from the

firm. Hence Order-in Original was issued on 9.5.2018 imposing penalty of Rs. 11,94,432 and the firm was placed in DEL. As the penalty was not paid, action under R.R. Act was initiated and Recovery

Order was issued on 27.9.2019.

The Committee deliberated upon the case and

decided to reject it as there is no merit in the request.

29.

Creative Stylo Packs Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

01/36/218/231/AM-20/EPCG

0330031784 dated 06.02.2012

Request for second extension of EOP:

The applicant has stated that they have fulfilled 44.99 % of EO within stipulated time of six years i.e. up to 06.2.2018 and during the extended period, they had

fulfilled 45.31% of EO and balance left was 9.69% of EO. They could not fulfill complete EO due to recession in international market hence requested for second extension in EOP for one year to fulfil remaining EO.

After discussion, the Committee decided to recommend to DG

for relaxation under Para 2.58 of FTP 2015-

20 that the Export Obligation period would be extended till 31.12.2021 without any composition Fees. However this extension is subject to 5% additional export obligation in value terms (in free Foreign Exchange ) on the balance Export Obligation on the date of expiry of the original/extended export obligation period.

This has the approval of DG.

30.

Pundrik Textile Mills Pvt. Ltd, Ludhiana 01/37/218/44/AM-17/EPCG-II

3030001750 dated 26.05.2006

Request for acceptance of exports made by

readymade garments or extension of EOP: The applicant obtained EPCG Authorisation No. 3030001750 dated 26.05.2006 under 5% EPCG duty scheme for import of yarn machinery. However, it could not fulfill export obligation by exporting yarn

due to lack of yarn export orders. It has a composite unit for manufacturing of cotton yarn, blended yarns and readymade garments. It fulfilled 100% EO by exporting the Readymade Garments. It requested to consider acceptance of export of readymade garments as export products. RA, Ludhiana vide letter dated 07.03.2019 stated that the

firm has made the export of readymade garments through 3rd party which was not considered towards fulfillment of EO because authorization was issued with EO connection of export of Cotton Yarn. The matter was discussed in the meeting held on 04.08.2021. The Committee decided to ask the RA to submit an inspection report, after visiting the Unit,

on the facilities/machines available in the factory premises of the applicant before deciding the matter.

Knitting of yarn to fabric is done on job basis from their sister concern. RA vide email dated 01.09.2021 furnished its report and stated that the applicant has two interlinked units for manufacturing of Yarn to Garments: (i) Garment Unit and (ii) Spinning Unit. At the time of inspection, certain spinning machines were available in running condition at spinning unit. Cutting, color-making, stitching, washing and dry-cleaning

machines were available at Garment unit. The Committee deliberated upon the case and decided to reject it as there is no merit in the request.

31.

Gillette Diversified Operations Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

01/36/218/186/AM-21/EPCG

0430013601 dated 04.04.2014

Request for condonation of procedural lapse of

not mentioning the name of the

supporting manufacturer in the shipping bills :

The Committee deliberated upon the case and noted that comments from DoR are awaited in the matter. The Committee advised the representative to submit comments of DoR. The representative of DoR stated that the matter is under examination and would

furnish their comments soon.

Hence, the Committee decided to defer the case for

consideration in the forthcoming EPCG Committee meeting.

3

2. Haploos Printing House.,

Delhi

01/36/218/131/AM-

20/EPCG

i.0530154516

dated 12.01.2011

ii.0530153832

dated 28.10.2010

Request for extension in EO period and request

for permission to adjust the excess export made in

other EPCG authorization fulfillment of export

obligation :

The Committee noted that the matter was referred to DoR for their comments vide letter dated 20.04.2021 followed by reminder dt. 23.06.2021. However, the same are still awaited. The representative of DoR stated that the matter is under examination and would furnish their comments soon.

Hence, the Committee decided to defer the case for

consideration in the forthcoming EPCG committee meeting.

33.

Dazzler Confectionery Company Pvt. Ltd., Goa

01/36/218/205/AM-

19/EPCG-I

0330027844 dated 19.11.2010

under 3% concessional duty

Request for 1 year extension of EOP:

The Committee deliberated upon the case and it was observed that the EPCG authorisation was issued with

8 year EO period. This company was promoted by a foreign national. Company was in operation till July 2016 and exported to the tune of USD 510423/- Due to dispute with land lord of the premises, and resulting court case, Thereafter, they shifted to new place and

production started only in the year December 2019. Due to COVID pandemic their exports were also affected in the year 2020. They have requested for EO extension. Representative of DoR requested for more

time to study the matter and requested to send details of the case through office Memorandum.

After discussion, the Committee decided to recommend to DG

for relaxation under Para 2.58 of FTP 2015-20 that the Export Obligation period would be extended till 31.12.2021 without any composition Fees. However this extension is subject to 5% additional export obligation in value terms (in free Foreign Exchange) on

the balance Export Obligation on the date of expiry of the original/extended export obligation period.

This has the approval of DG. 34.

Hyundai Motor India Limited

01/36/218/197/AM-14/EPCG-I

106 EPCG Authorizations issued during the period from 19.08.2011 to 11.09.2011

Recognition of vendors and sub-

vendors as supporting manufacturers for

regularization of the 106 licenses.

The Committee noted that the matter was referred to DoR for their comments vide letter dated 10.07.2020 followed by reminder dt. 27.08.2021. However, the same are still awaited. The representative of DoR stated that the matter is under examination and would furnish their comments soon.

Hence, the Committee decided to defer the case for consideration in the next EPCG committee meeting.

35.

JSW Steel Ltd., New Delhi

18/34/AM-17/P-5

0330047019 dated 26.04.2017

Request for issue of EPCG License for import of

capital goods i.e. various electrical equipment’s

for integrated Steel Plant: The firm has requested for issue of EPCG Authorization for imported IGCT Power unit, capacitor, Transformer, Power Stack Adapter etc. The applicant has stated that earlier also, they have been allowed identical items by EPCG

Committee in its meeting on 29.03.2017 on the basis of recommendations from M/o Steel. MoS vide their mail dated 27.07.2021 has stated that the electrical equipments are specifically meant for exclusive use in Hot Strip Mill of integrated steel

plant of JSW steel Ltd. Dolvi steel plant. JSW has also given them undertaking to assure that above mentioned electrical items will be used as part of the HSM only and not for Power Transmission. MoS has certified the applicability/ essentiality of import of capital goods. The Committee decided to defer the case for

consideration in the next EPCG committee meeting.

36.

M/s. Tholasi printers

01/36/218/41/AM-22/EPCG

0730005451 dated 28.03.2007

WP No. 12967/2021 before Hon’ble High Court of

Karnataka at Bangalore:

The Committee decided to defer the case for consideration in the next EPCG committee meeting.

37.

Excel Printers Pvt Ltd., New Delhi

HQRPRCAPPLY00049850AM22

0530156384 dated 01.09.2011

Request for extension of EOP: The Committee observed that the case was first placed

in its meeting held on 24.01.2019. The Committee noted that the party has not made any exports even after expiry of EOP and did not approach RA in stipulated time for extension in EOP. The Committee deliberated upon the case and decided to reject as there is no valid reason given by the party to consider their request. Again, the firm had requested for review of EPCG Committee decision held on 24.01.2019. The

request was examined by the EPCG Committee in its meeting held on 29.03.2019. The Committee observed that the case was first placed in its meeting held on 24.01.2019 and was rejected as the party has not made any exports even after expiry of EOP and did not approach RA in stipulated time for extension in EOP. The Committee heard the submission made by

the representative of the party who came for PH. The Committee observed that the applicant did not make any concerted efforts to fulfill the export obligation within the original and extended export obligation period. Therefore committee found no merit in the request of the applicant. Accordingly, the Committee decided to maintain the rejection.

[DGFT= Directorate General of Foreign Trade, DG = Director General, FTP = Foreign Trade Policy, HBPv1 = Handbook of Procedure Vol. I, EO = Export Obligation, EODC = Export Obligation Discharge Certificate, EOP = Export Obligation Period, B.O.E.=Bill of Entry,EPCG = Export Promotion Capital Goods, RA = Regional Authority, BG = Bank Guarantee, FFE = Free Foreign

Exchange, IEC = Importer-Exporter Code, DoR = Department of Revenue, IEM = Industrial Entrepreneurs Memorandum, RCMC = Registration-cum-Membership-Certificate.]

The meeting ended with a vote of thanks to the Chair.

[Issued from F.No. 01/36/218/42/AM-22/EPCG]