DelWine has learnt from reliable sources in Mumbai on conditions of anonymity that a meeting was held in Mantralaya yesterday where the concerned minister has rejected all pleas from the importers. No circular has been issued till the time of going to the Server and no material can be taken out of the excise warehouse, even when the bill of lading has been filed and the customs duty has been duly paid.
'My material has been lying ready to dispatch to a hotel who has been clamouring for it', says a Mumbai distributor.' But I am unable to deliver even though I have paid the full customs duty as the excise clearance is under suspension.'
The issue is relatively simple so far as the government is concerned. They insist that the bottle labeling be uniform for both the Indian and foreign wines. This means that the labels must have all such information as MRP or the name of importer etc on the bottle original label itself. Currently the stickers are being pasted mostly by the importers, especially the smaller ones who have to cater to many markets but with different requirements.
The bigger importers may find it at least doable because of the bigger quantities of a label for Maharashtra and the staff at hand. After all, it means getting the bottles without back labels, getting them printed in India and sticking them on before offering to excise department for removal. But small importers who may import 5-10 cases of a particular labels may find it cumbersome to administer.
The issue of MRP itself is far from being resolved. The department wants them to declare the basic manufacturing cost (say x), pay 200% duty (2x) and charge MRP of (4x+ customs duty of 150%), implying that the importer/ distributor must limit all expenses and his profit margins to x. This is not feasible for the imported wines, all importers say in agony. A case in point might be 4% SAD which has to be paid first; it is then refundable but not the easiest task to get refunded-would that be a cost or receivable with limited certainty?
The situation is reminiscent of the British Raj where the farmer was expected to carry the yoke on a semi-empty stomach (0.2x) and the privileged Thakur with his henchmen carrying guns and whips at will, reaping all the benefits (2x). In lingua franca, it means the poor vegetable farmer toiling the whole year for peanuts when the middleman makes all the profits.
Perhaps note a tasteful and perhaps a melodramatic comparison (the importers/ distributors perhaps still drink the best of single malts and enjoy the best of meals at 5- star restaurants) but the consumer suffers the most for the illogical analysis of the situation and the government loses out on the revenues. The smaller importers (remember we used to have something called small-scale industries which was actually protected by the government?) are in deep financial trouble.
The issue of the US and EU complaining to the WTO is surfacing all over again. What may be a matter of some solace is that the government seems to have the desire to listen, though not the will to implement just decisions. Apparently, it is trying to appease the ministry of commerce in Delhi. But there seems to be no justification in suspending the business during the interim period.
One is reminded of a recent period in Chennai when the hotels would tell horrific tales of not getting the beverages simply because the powerful CM would put a stop to issuing of Transfer Permits for months on end on some pretext or the other.
Maharashtra has been a very progressive and pro-active state. It must do everything in its power to keep the perception alive through its action and transparency and should show the light to the rest of the nation which along with the rest of the wine world is watching with bated breath. |