EPCG export obligation compliance requires proof of timely fulfillment or authorised extension under the scheme.

Under the EPCG scheme, imported capital goods must be matched by export of the stipulated value within the prescribed period, and any extension must be granted by the licensing authority. The record showed that the export obligation for the second block period was not completed on time. Although extension was said to have been sought, there was no evidence that the authority approved it, and no material showed compliance with the prescribed procedure or regularisation of the default. On that basis, the appellant failed to establish fulfillment of the export obligation or a valid extension.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant had failed to fulfill the export obligation under the EPCG scheme where no extension of time was granted by the licensing authority.

Analysis: The appellant imported capital goods under the EPCG licence and was required to export goods of the stipulated value within the prescribed period under Notification No. 49/2000-Cus. The record showed that the export obligation for the second block period was not completed within time. Although it was stated that extension of time had been sought, there was no evidence that the licensing authority granted such extension. The appellant also did not establish compliance with the prescribed procedure or furnish material showing that the default stood regularized.

Conclusion: The appellant failed to prove fulfillment of the export obligation or grant of extension by the licensing authority, and the challenge to the impugned order fails.

---