Delhi HC asks Customs to respond on IndiGo's ₹900 crore duty refund plea

The Delhi High Court on Friday sought a response from the Customs department on a plea by InterGlobe Aviation, which operates the IndiGo airline, seeking a refund of more than Rs 900 crore paid as Customs duty on aircraft engines and parts re-imported into India after overseas repairs.

A bench of Justices V Kameswar Rao and Vinod Kumar issued the notice to the deputy commissioner (refund), office of the principal commissioner of Customs, Air Cargo Complex (Import), and asked the authorities to file a counter affidavit within two weeks.

The court listed the matter for next hearing on April 8, 2026.

InterGlobe, in its plea, contended that the levy of Customs duty on such re-imports was unconstitutional and amounted to double levy on the same transaction.

The counsel for the Customs opposed the plea, claiming it is pre-mature and that the issue based on which the present claim has been filed is pending before the Supreme Court.

The counsel said the Supreme Court has not passed any stay order and urged the high court to grant him some time to file his reply.

InterGlobe's counsel has submitted that at the time of re-import of aircraft engines and parts after repairs, it paid the basic Customs duty without any dispute.

Besides, since the repair constitutes a service, it also discharged Goods and Services Tax (GST) on a reverse charge basis.

However, the Customs authorities insisted on levying duty again by treating the same transaction as import of goods, the counsel claimed.

The company claimed the issue was settled earlier by the Customs tribunal, which held that Customs duty could not be levied again on re-imports following repairs.

It said the exemption notification was later amended but the tribunal ruled that the amendment would apply only prospectively.

The company said it paid the duty under protest for more than 4,000 bills of entry, amounting to more than Rs 900 crore.

When InterGlobe later filed refund claims, the Customs authorities refused them on the ground that the airline must first seek reassessment of each bill of entry.