Issue of Clarification by DGFT- May 2016
June 16, 2016
Members of the Council
Sub : Incremental Exports Incentivisation Scheme under previous Foreign Trade Policy 2009-14 – Issue of Clarification by DGFT
What is this circular about ?
This circular is about clarification recently issued by office of DGFT stating that Regional Authorities (RAs) of DGFT may process applications under incremental exports incentivization scheme without imposing any cap on account of the earlier stipulation of restricting growth to 25% or incremental growth of Rs.10 crore in value, whichever is less.
As members are aware, the incremental Exports Incentivisation Scheme was announced in Dec. 2012 under the previous Foreign Trade Policy 2009-14. Under this scheme, the exporters are eligible for 2% duty credit scrip on the FOB value of exports to USA, Europe and Asia (excluding Singapore, UAE and Hong Kong) on the incremental growth during the period 01.01.2013 to 31.3.2013 compared to the period from 01.01.2012 to 31.3.2012.
This scheme was extended for the year 2013-14 on annual basis in the Annual Supplement 2013-14 to Foreign Trade Policy 2009-14 notified during April 2014. Also, exports to the following 53 notified countries in Latin America and Africa were added under this scheme vide DGFT Public Notice No. 3 (RE 2013/2009-14 dated 18th April 2013.
|African Countries||Latin American Countries|
|Burkina Faso||Netherland Antilles|
|Chad||Virgin IS US|
|C Africa REP||Antigua|
|ST Kitts N A|
|BR Virgin IS|
|Turks C IS|
The 2% incremental scrip was only for incremental exports achieved during 2013-14 as compared to the year 2012-13 for notified countries. This scrip is transferable and can be used for domestic sourcing and for payment of Service Tax.
Clarification recently issued by Office of DGFT
The Directorate General of Foreign Trade has recently issued a Trade Notice No. 4/2016 dated 5th May 2016 stating the following.
· DGFT Notification No.44/(RE-2013)/2009-14 dated 25.09.2013 (COPY ENCLOSED) states the following.
i) Benefit of Incremental Export Incentivisation Scheme for the last quarter of 2012-13 will be limited to 25% growth or Incremental growth of Rs.10 crores in value, whichever is less.
ii) Claims in excess of this value will be subjected to greater scrutiny by Regional Authority.
· On 23.9.2014, a clarification was issued by DGFT to Regional Authorities of DGFT stating that para (i) and (ii) in DGFT Notification No.44/(RE-2013)/2009-14 dated 25.09.2013 are independent. The limiting of claim was clearly mentioned in the first sub-para of Notification which fixes the upper limit of grant benefit. The second sub-para in the Notification only direct RAs to exercise caution while dealing with cases of incremental growth of export under the scheme. It does not entitle any applicant to higher levels of benefits under the scheme.
· The Notification No. 44 dated 25.9.13 on the issue of limiting the entitlement has been challenged by many exporters in different high courts. In view of the decision of various High Courts, the matter has been re-examined in consultation with the Department of Legal Affairs and accordingly, the following instructions are hereby issued for processing the cases of the IEIS claims by RAs.
1. In supersession of clarification dated 23.9.14, RAs may further process the cases without imposing any cap on account of the earlier stipulation of restricting growth to 25% or incremental growth of Rs.10 crore in value, whichever is less.
2. RAs must, however, exercise due diligence while processing such claims by following guidelines of greater scrutiny as prescribed in Public Notice No. 28 dated 25.9.2013 (copy enclosed for ready reference of members) to check claims having high growth % and/or value and against irregularities. In this regard, the Policy Notification No. 27 dated 28.12.2012(copy enclosed for ready reference of members) may also be carefully seen, in addition to other relevant provisions. Inter alia, transfer of export performance from any other IEC holder was not permitted under the scheme as per Para 3.14.4.(d). Similarly disclaimer provision of para 3.17.10(b) was also not admissible as per para 3.14.4.(c)
3. If in any case there are doubts/ suspicions about the authenticity/genuineness of the increments in aspects like turnover /growth etc., the matter may be referred to investigating agencies like DRI etc., and the case may be finalized after taking into account their report.
4. All these cases should be approved by Head of the Office
5. The above stipulations will not be a bar to the RAs in scrutinising small value claims also, where there is prima facie case to do so.
6. It is pertinent that no right is vested in favour of the claimant when impropriety fraud has been detected.
Members may please note the above.
Thanks & Regards
R.Ramesh Kumar, I.A.S.
Council for Leather Exports