R Vimal Kumar
Tirupur: The differences between exporters and dyeing unit owners here on ‘functional issues’ that came to light when the Dyers Association of Tirupur (DAT) declared an indefinite closure of dyeing units from December 25 to press their demands, looks to have deteriorated further.
The units which were run by the exporters refused to take part in the indefinite agitation citing reasons that they had invested huge amounts in setting up Individual Effluent Treatment Plants through commercial borrowings and hence, could not join the struggle pertaining to Common Effluent Treatment Plants.
On Monday, the proxy war took a new turn as Tirupur Exporters Association (TEA) president A. Sakthivel wrote an open letter written to DAT president S. Samiappan terming the dyers’ demand for a two per cent share from the duty drawback claimed by the exporters as a ‘strange claim’.
The dyers reportedly staked the share as a financial assistance to come out of the economic crunch faced them after setting up CETPs with zero liquid discharge system and to meet its further operational costs.
Supplementing his stance, Mr. Sakthivel explained to Mr. Samiappan that duty drawback scheme, administered by Union Ministry of Finance, was not a subsidy but only a refund of duty paid on input services used in the manufacturers of export goods.
In this context, the DAT claim for a share from the duty drawback availed by exporters could not be justified and it only displayed their misconception about the scheme, he pointed out.
“Moreover, we have been giving dyers an additional charge of Rs 7.50 for every kilo of fabric dyed since April 2007 to enable the dyers to meet statutory obligations and to comply with pollution control norms,” Mr. Sakthivel said.
Mr. Sakthivel called upon Mr. Saminathan to withdraw the strike in this context for the welfare of entire industry.