Meeting No-3 dated 20.04.2005 1.pdf - Directorate General of ...

made to Russia (RPA) under the debt payment agreement against advance licence issuedto export of goods to GCA countries . The committee after deliberation, decided to callfor a detailed report of the case from the RLA concerned. The case was therefore deferredfor four weeks.Case No. M- 58ALC NO.:03/06Dated:20.04.2005Reference from Jt. DGFTChennaiM/s. Sara Lee Household &Body Care India Pvt. LtdChennai01/87/162/1114/AM05/DES-VIIIClarification of item namely instantshoe shine sponge for availing DEPBbenefitThe committee considered the case as per agenda. The committee noted thecontents of Letter dated 7.3.05 received from Zonal Jt.DGFT, Chennai seekingclarification as to whether the export item namely Instant shoe shine sponge may beclassified under Sr.No. 566 of DEPB schedule (product group: Chemicals and alliedproducts) for allowing the benefit of DEPB. The committee after deliberation decidedthat the export product Instant shoe shine sponge couldn t be classified under Sr.No.566 and hence the same is ineligible for DEPB benefit.Case No. M - 59ALC NO.:03/06Dated:20.04.2005M/s. S.B. Packagings Ltd NewDelhi01/87/50/657/AM05/DES-VIIIRLA,F.No.05/24/40/260/AM04Adv. Lic. No. 0510135546Dated: 17.08.2004The case was considered by ALC as per agenda for fixation of input output normsfor the export product Plain / printed flexible packing material of one layer in the form ofrolls or pouches or bags under Para 4.7 of HBP (Vol.1). The case was deferred for fourweeks for want of comments from the D/o C&PC (PC.II division).Case No. M- 60ALC NO.:03/06Dated:20.04.2005M/s. Stericate Gustrings Pvt LtdNew Delhi01/87/162/987/AM05/DES-VIIIGrant of permission for reprocessingand sale of wastagefrom non sterile suture thread USPimported under duty exemptionschemeThe committee considered the request of the firm for enhancement in wastagefrom 1% allowed to them to 6.5%. The committee deliberated the matter in length andheard the views of the representative of the Deptt. of IPP present in the meeting. Thereis no merit in the request of the firm for higher wastage. As such the case was rejected.