 "WTO, trade")
We refer to Para 10.6 of HBP regarding the procedure for grant of General Authorisation for Export of Chemicals and related Equipment (GAEC) for SCOMET items. Para 10.16 A.II.b.ii says that the applicant exporter is required to declare that the items that are intended to be exported shall not be used for any purpose other than the purpose(s) stated in the EUC (End User Certificate) and that such use shall not be changed nor the items modified or replicated without the prior consent of the Government of India. We can understand the government asking for EUC from the end user but how can the exporter be expected to comply with such a condition after the goods have been exported and he has no control over the goods or what the end user does with it. Please advise.
I think the government wants to ensure that the exporter has enough confidence in the buyer/end user to take responsibility for their actions.
We refer to the DGFT Policy Circular no.8 dated 27th December 2023 which says that valid ad-hoc norms ratified on or after 1.4.2015 will also be applicable to pending case/applications filed under self declaration scheme on or after 1.4.2015 which were filed prior to the application against which ratification of such norms was done. How can we know the date of the application against which ad-hoc norms were approved?
The search in the DGFT database for ad hoc norms gives the date of the meeting when the norms were ratified. So, from the minutes of the norms committee on the date of the meeting you can look for the relevant decision where you will find the license no. and date. You can take that license date as the date of the application and proceed. In any case, I think you can simply quote Para 4.12(vi) of HBP as amended by DGFT PN 09/2023 dated 25.04.2023 and the said policy circular no. 8 and seek application of the notified ad-hoc norms for your pending applications filed on or after 1.4.2015 for the same products.
In an LC for our exports, the LC issuing bank had put a condition that we must submit an additional set of copies of documents submitted for negotiation. By mistake, we had missed that condition. Now, the LC issuing bank has pointed it out as a discrepancy. How to proceed further?
You can contest the stand of the issuing bank quoting paragraph (ix) of the Preliminary Conditions of the International Standard Banking Practices for Examination of Documents under UCP 600, the ICC Publication no. 821 (ISBP 821), which says that ‘an issuing bank should not incorporate in a credit administrative conditions such as a requirement for an additional set of copy of documents to be presented for the issuing bank’s use or a condition that all documents may not be stapled. If nevertheless, such conditions are incorporated into a credit but not complied with, this will not constitute a reason for refusal.’
Business Standard invites readers' SME queries related to GST, export and import matters. You can write to us at smechat@bsmail.in
