Introduction

The signing of the Terms of Reference between India and the Eurasian Economic Union in September 2025 represents a watershed moment in India’s trade diplomacy. India-EAEU agreement to commence negotiations for a free trade agreement marks India’s strategic pivot towards diversifying its trade partnerships beyond traditional Western markets. The Eurasian Economic Union, comprising Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, and the Russian Federation, presents a combined market with a GDP of USD 6.5 trillion and offers Indian exporters unprecedented access to a largely untapped regional bloc.[1]

The ceremonial signing took place in Moscow, where Ajay Bhadoo, Additional Secretary of India’s Department of Commerce, and Mikhail Cherekaev, Deputy Director of the Trade Policy Department at the Eurasian Economic Commission, formalized the procedural framework that will govern the negotiation process. This development comes at a time when bilateral trade between India and the EAEU reached USD 69 billion in 2024, reflecting a seven percent increase from the previous year.[2] The momentum behind this initiative underscores both parties’ commitment to establishing a robust institutional mechanism for long-term economic cooperation.

Understanding Free Trade Agreements in India’s Trade Architecture

Free trade agreements have become instrumental tools in India’s economic strategy to integrate with the global economy while protecting domestic interests. The fundamental distinction between various types of trade agreements helps contextualize the significance of the India-EAEU negotiations. A Free Trade Agreement eliminates tariffs on items covering substantial bilateral trade between partner countries, while each nation maintains its individual tariff structure for non-members. This differs from Preferential Trade Agreements, which provide preferential access by reducing tariffs on select products, and Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreements or Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreements, which encompass goods, services, investment, and trade facilitation measures.[3]

India’s approach to free trade agreements has evolved significantly over the past three decades. The country has moved from protective trade policies to a more liberalized regime that seeks to balance domestic industry protection with the benefits of global integration. The legal architecture supporting this transformation provides the foundation for negotiating and implementing international trade agreements like the proposed India-EAEU FTA.

Legal Framework Governing Trade Agreements in India

The Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992

The cornerstone of India’s trade regulation framework is the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992, which came into force on August 7, 1992. This legislation replaced the outdated Imports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947, reflecting India’s transition toward economic liberalization. The Act establishes the legal basis for the development and regulation of foreign trade by facilitating imports into India and augmenting exports from the country.[4]

The Act empowers the Central Government to formulate and announce the Foreign Trade Policy, which is typically released every five years and contains provisions for promoting exports, regulating imports, and implementing trade agreements. Under Section 5 of the Act, the Central Government is authorized to make provisions for facilitating and regulating foreign trade through various measures including the prohibition or restriction of imports or exports, quality control and inspection requirements, and the registration of exporters and importers.

The procedural aspects of trade agreement negotiations fall within the purview of this Act, as it provides the Director General of Foreign Trade with powers to issue licenses, permissions, and other authorizations necessary for implementing trade facilitation measures. The Act’s flexibility allows the government to incorporate obligations arising from international trade agreements into domestic trade policy without requiring separate legislative approval for each agreement.

Constitutional Framework and Treaty-Making Powers

India’s Constitution does not explicitly delineate the treaty-making process, but Article 73 vests executive power in the Union Government to conduct international relations and enter into treaties. The legislative competence to implement international agreements derives from Entry 14 of List I (Union List) of the Seventh Schedule, which grants Parliament exclusive authority over matters relating to “entering into treaties and agreements with foreign countries and implementing of treaties, agreements and conventions with foreign countries.”

This constitutional architecture means that while the executive branch possesses the power to negotiate and sign international trade agreements, the implementation of such agreements often requires parliamentary approval, particularly when the agreement necessitates changes to existing domestic legislation. However, for trade agreements that fall within the ambit of executive action and do not contradict existing laws, the government can proceed with implementation through executive orders and policy notifications.

Customs Act, 1962 and Tariff Regulations

The Customs Act, 1962, works in conjunction with the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act to operationalize trade agreements. Section 25 of the Customs Act empowers the Central Government to grant exemptions from customs duties through notifications, which becomes the mechanism for implementing tariff concessions agreed upon in free trade agreements. The Customs Tariff Act, 1975, provides the framework for imposing duties on imports and exports and allows for preferential tariff treatment under trade agreements.[5]

When India enters into a free trade agreement, the tariff concessions are typically implemented through notifications under Section 25 of the Customs Act. These notifications specify the rules of origin, which determine whether imported goods qualify for preferential treatment under the agreement. The rules of origin are crucial in preventing trade deflection, where goods from non-member countries might be routed through member countries to benefit from reduced tariffs.

The Eurasian Economic Union: Structure and Significance

The Eurasian Economic Union represents a unique regional integration project that emerged from the post-Soviet space. Established through the Treaty on the Eurasian Economic Union signed on May 29, 2014, the EAEU came into force on January 1, 2015. The union’s foundational treaty created a single market among its member states, characterized by the free movement of goods, services, capital, and labor. The EAEU’s institutional framework includes the Supreme Eurasian Economic Council, the Eurasian Economic Commission, and the Court of the Eurasian Economic Union.

For India, engaging with the EAEU offers several strategic advantages beyond immediate trade benefits. The geographical expanse of the EAEU provides India with land-based connectivity to European markets through the International North-South Transport Corridor, potentially reducing logistics costs and transit times. Additionally, the EAEU’s close relationship with China through parallel Belt and Road initiatives means that India’s engagement can serve broader geopolitical objectives of maintaining balanced relationships in the Eurasian space.

The combined GDP of USD 6.5 trillion and a population exceeding 180 million people make the EAEU an attractive market for Indian goods and services. Russia, as the largest economy within the union, accounts for approximately 85 percent of the EAEU’s GDP, making bilateral India-Russia trade a significant component of overall India-EAEU economic relations. The existing bilateral trade of USD 69 billion in 2024 provides a substantial foundation upon which a free trade agreement can build momentum.[2]

Terms of Reference: Establishing the Negotiating Framework

The Terms of Reference signed in September 2025 establish both the procedural and organizational basis for conducting negotiations between India and the EAEU. This document outlines the scope of negotiations, the structure of negotiating groups, timelines for negotiation rounds, and the decision-making processes that will govern the talks. While the specific contents of the Terms of Reference have not been publicly disclosed in their entirety, standard practice suggests that such documents include provisions for dispute resolution mechanisms during negotiations, confidentiality clauses, and the framework for technical consultations on specific sectors.

Following the signing ceremony, Ajay Bhadoo engaged in discussions with Andrei Slepnev, the Minister in charge of trade at the Eurasian Economic Commission, along with heads of various negotiation groups. These consultations focused on reviewing the implementation roadmap and identifying the next steps required to launch formal negotiations. The establishment of sector-specific negotiating groups suggests that the agreement will follow a modular approach, addressing different aspects of trade relations through specialized working groups that can progress simultaneously.

The involvement of multiple negotiating groups indicates the agreement’s intended scope will extend beyond simple tariff reductions. Modern free trade agreements typically encompass provisions related to services trade, investment protection, intellectual property rights, government procurement, competition policy, and regulatory cooperation. The complexity of these negotiations requires specialized expertise across various domains, justifying the creation of dedicated working groups for each major area.

Sectoral Implications and Market Access Opportunities

Pharmaceuticals and Healthcare Products

India’s pharmaceutical industry stands to gain substantially from enhanced market access to EAEU countries. Indian generic drug manufacturers have already established a presence in several EAEU markets, particularly Russia and Kazakhstan. A free trade agreement could reduce tariff barriers on pharmaceutical products while potentially addressing non-tariff barriers related to registration procedures, clinical trial requirements, and intellectual property protections that currently impede smoother market access.

The EAEU’s pharmaceutical market represents significant potential for Indian exporters, given the region’s healthcare needs and India’s capabilities as a leading producer of affordable generic medications. However, regulatory harmonization will be crucial to fully realize this potential. The negotiating process will need to address sanitary and phytosanitary measures, good manufacturing practices recognition, and the mutual acceptance of pharmaceutical standards to facilitate trade while ensuring patient safety.

Agricultural Products and Food Processing

Agriculture represents a sensitive sector in free trade negotiations, both for India and EAEU member states. India’s agricultural exports, including rice, tea, coffee, spices, and processed foods, could find expanded markets within the EAEU if tariff and non-tariff barriers are appropriately addressed. Conversely, India will need to carefully consider the impact of agricultural imports from EAEU countries on domestic farmers, particularly in sectors where domestic production requires continued protection for food security and livelihood preservation.

The negotiation of rules of origin for agricultural products will be particularly important to prevent circumvention and ensure that the benefits of the agreement accrue to producers in the participating countries. Additionally, addressing sanitary and phytosanitary measures through mutual recognition agreements or harmonization of standards can significantly reduce trade friction in agricultural products.

Information Technology and Services

India’s information technology and IT-enabled services sector represents one of the country’s strongest export capabilities. The EAEU market offers opportunities for Indian IT companies to expand their presence through enhanced services trade provisions in the FTA. Negotiations will likely address market access for services, movement of natural persons for service delivery, recognition of professional qualifications, and data localization requirements that affect IT service providers.

The services component of the free trade agreement could follow the General Agreement on Trade in Services framework, which allows countries to make specific commitments regarding market access and national treatment across different service sectors and modes of supply. For India, securing commitments on Mode 4 (movement of natural persons) will be particularly important given the industry’s reliance on the ability to send professionals to client locations for project delivery.

Textiles and Apparel

India’s textile and apparel industry, one of the largest employers in the manufacturing sector, views the EAEU as a potential growth market. The elimination of tariff barriers on textile products could enhance the competitiveness of Indian textiles in EAEU markets. However, the sector faces challenges related to meeting specific technical standards and regulations that vary across EAEU member states.

Negotiations on textiles will need to address rules of origin that account for the global nature of textile supply chains while ensuring sufficient local content to justify preferential treatment. The agreement might also include provisions for technical cooperation to help Indian exporters meet EAEU technical requirements and facilitate certification processes.

Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises: Expanding Commercial Opportunities

The Terms of Reference specifically acknowledge the anticipated benefits for micro, small and medium enterprises, recognizing that MSMEs form the backbone of India’s export sector and require special attention in trade agreements. MSMEs often face disproportionate challenges in accessing foreign markets due to limited resources for understanding foreign regulations, establishing distribution networks, and meeting compliance requirements.

The free trade agreement can address MSME concerns through several mechanisms. First, simplified rules of origin procedures can reduce the documentary burden on small exporters. Second, provisions for mutual recognition of conformity assessment can eliminate duplicate testing and certification requirements. Third, enhanced transparency in regulations and trade procedures helps MSMEs navigate foreign markets more effectively. Fourth, the establishment of trade facilitation mechanisms, including help desks and information portals, can provide targeted support to small businesses seeking to export.

The negotiation process should consider incorporating a dedicated chapter on MSME cooperation, as seen in recent Indian trade agreements. Such chapters typically include provisions for enhancing MSME participation in global value chains, facilitating access to trade finance, promoting digital trade platforms that benefit small businesses, and encouraging cooperation between MSME support institutions in partner countries.

Trade Facilitation and Customs Cooperation

Modern free trade agreements extend beyond tariff reductions to address trade facilitation measures that reduce the time and cost of moving goods across borders. The India-EAEU Free Trade Agreement negotiations will likely incorporate provisions aligned with the World Trade Organization’s Trade Facilitation Agreement, which India ratified in 2016. These provisions could include commitments on transparency and predictability in customs procedures, simplification of import and export documentation, implementation of risk management systems, and establishment of authorized economic operator programs.

Customs cooperation provisions can enhance the effective implementation of the agreement by addressing issues such as verification of rules of origin, exchange of customs data, mutual administrative assistance in preventing customs fraud, and harmonization of customs valuation methodologies. The development of electronic systems for submitting and processing trade documents can significantly reduce clearance times and facilitate commerce, particularly for time-sensitive products.

Investment Protection and Promotion

While the primary focus of free trade agreements is on trade in goods and services, investment provisions have become increasingly common in modern trade agreements. India and the EAEU both seek to attract foreign investment for economic development, making investment protection and promotion a natural component of their negotiations. The agreement could include provisions on investment liberalization, national treatment for established investments, fair and equitable treatment standards, and investor-state dispute settlement mechanisms.

India’s approach to investment protection has evolved following its experience with bilateral investment treaties that led to numerous arbitration cases. The Model Indian Bilateral Investment Treaty, finalized in 2016, reflects this evolution by incorporating safeguards such as narrower definitions of investment, exhaustion of local remedies before international arbitration, and carve-outs for sensitive sectors. The EAEU negotiations will likely reflect this more cautious approach while still providing sufficient protection to encourage investment flows.

Regulatory Cooperation and Standards Harmonization

Technical barriers to trade often pose greater obstacles than tariffs in contemporary international commerce. Differences in product standards, testing requirements, certification procedures, and labeling regulations can effectively prevent market access even when tariff barriers are eliminated. The India-EAEU FTA negotiations must address these technical barriers through provisions on regulatory cooperation and standards harmonization.

The agreement might establish mechanisms for mutual recognition of conformity assessment, whereby products tested and certified in one country are accepted in partner countries without additional testing. This reduces costs and delays for exporters while maintaining appropriate standards for consumer protection and safety. Additionally, regulatory cooperation chapters can promote alignment of standards with international norms, enhance transparency in standard-setting processes, and provide for dialogue between regulatory authorities.

Intellectual Property Rights Considerations

Intellectual property protection represents a sensitive area in trade negotiations, balancing innovation incentives with access to knowledge and technology. India has consistently advocated for a balanced approach to intellectual property rights that promotes innovation while ensuring access to essential goods like medicines. The EAEU countries have varying levels of intellectual property protection, and the negotiations will need to find common ground that satisfies both parties’ interests.

The intellectual property chapter of the agreement might address patents, trademarks, copyrights, geographical indications, and protection of traditional knowledge. Given India’s pharmaceutical industry interests, provisions related to patent linkages, data exclusivity, and compulsory licensing will require careful negotiation to preserve India’s ability to produce generic medicines while respecting the EAEU’s intellectual property framework.

Competition Policy and State-Owned Enterprises

Competition policy provisions in free trade agreements aim to ensure that the benefits of trade liberalization are not undermined by anticompetitive practices. As both India and EAEU countries have significant state-owned enterprise sectors, the agreement will need to address the competitive neutrality of state-owned entities and prevent anticompetitive conduct that could distort trade.

India’s Competition Act, 2002, provides the domestic legal framework for addressing anticompetitive practices, including cartels, abuse of dominant position, and anticompetitive mergers. The FTA negotiations might include provisions for cooperation between competition authorities, exchange of information on competition matters, and commitments to apply competition laws in a non-discriminatory manner. However, both parties will likely seek carve-outs for strategic sectors where state involvement is considered necessary for national security or economic development.

Dispute Resolution Mechanisms

Effective dispute resolution mechanisms are essential for ensuring that parties comply with their obligations under the agreement and for providing predictability to exporters and investors. The India-EAEU Free Trade Agreement will likely establish a multi-tiered dispute resolution system, beginning with consultations between the parties, potentially followed by mediation or good offices, and ultimately providing for arbitration through an ad hoc panel or standing tribunal.

The design of dispute resolution mechanisms requires balancing effectiveness with sovereignty concerns. India has traditionally preferred diplomatic approaches to trade disputes and has been cautious about binding arbitration mechanisms that significantly constrain policy flexibility. The negotiations will need to find an appropriate balance that provides sufficient enforcement while allowing parties reasonable flexibility to respond to legitimate public policy concerns.

Environmental and Labor Standards

Contemporary trade agreements increasingly incorporate provisions related to environmental protection and labor standards, reflecting growing recognition that trade liberalization should not come at the expense of environmental sustainability or workers’ rights. The India-EAEU negotiations might include chapters addressing environmental cooperation, sustainable development, and labor rights, though the specific commitments will depend on the negotiating priorities of both parties.

India has traditionally viewed environmental and labor provisions in trade agreements with some caution, concerned that such provisions might be used as protectionist tools or might impose standards that do not account for different levels of development. However, India has increasingly accepted that appropriate environmental and labor provisions can be part of a balanced trade agreement, provided they focus on cooperation and capacity building rather than punitive enforcement mechanisms.

Implementation Timeline and Institutional Arrangements

Following the signing of the Terms of Reference in September 2025, the negotiating parties have expressed their commitment to concluding the agreement as expeditiously as possible. Based on India’s experience with other recent trade negotiations, the negotiation process typically extends over eighteen to thirty-six months, depending on the complexity of issues and the political will of both parties. Statements from Indian diplomatic officials suggest an ambitious timeline of approximately eighteen months for completing the negotiations.[6]

The institutional arrangements for implementing the agreement will likely include the establishment of a joint committee or council comprising senior officials from both sides, responsible for overseeing implementation, addressing implementation issues, and considering amendments or updates to the agreement. Sector-specific committees might be created to address technical issues in particular areas such as customs procedures, sanitary measures, or technical barriers to trade.

Challenges and Critical Considerations

Despite the promising potential of the India-EAEU Free Trade Agreement, several challenges must be navigated during negotiations and implementation. One significant concern involves balancing trade liberalization with protection of sensitive domestic sectors. Indian agriculture, for instance, employs a substantial portion of the population, and hasty liberalization could adversely affect farmer livelihoods. Similarly, certain manufacturing sectors that are still developing require continued protection from import surges until they achieve sufficient competitiveness.

The diversity within the EAEU itself presents coordination challenges. While Russia dominates the union economically, the other member states have distinct economic profiles and priorities. Ensuring that the agreement addresses the specific interests of all EAEU members while maintaining coherence requires careful negotiation and potentially differentiated timelines for implementing various provisions.

Geopolitical considerations cannot be ignored in India’s engagement with the EAEU. The union’s close relationship with Russia and China, combined with India’s own strategic relationships with Western powers, creates a complex diplomatic landscape. The trade agreement must be structured to yield economic benefits without creating political complications or constraining India’s flexibility in its broader foreign policy.

Non-tariff barriers often prove more challenging than tariff reductions in trade agreements. Differences in regulatory frameworks, standards, and certification requirements between India and EAEU countries can impede trade even after tariff elimination. The agreement’s success will depend significantly on its effectiveness in addressing these non-tariff barriers through regulatory cooperation and harmonization initiatives.

Comparative Analysis with India’s Other Trade Agreements

India’s trade agreement landscape provides useful reference points for understanding the likely contours of the India-EAEU Free Trade Agreement. The India-Korea Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement, which entered into force in 2010, demonstrates India’s willingness to enter into ambitious agreements covering not just goods but also services, investment, and economic cooperation. However, concerns about the agreement’s impact on India’s trade balance led to subsequent reviews and adjustments, highlighting the importance of balanced market access commitments.

More recently, the India-European Free Trade Association Trade and Economic Partnership Agreement, signed in March 2024, showcases India’s evolving approach to trade agreements. This agreement includes innovative provisions on investment promotion, with EFTA states committing to facilitate significant investment flows into India. The India-EAEU negotiations might similarly incorporate investment promotion commitments given both parties’ interest in attracting foreign investment for economic development.[7]

The India-United Kingdom Free Trade Agreement, concluded in July 2025, represents another relevant comparison. This agreement reportedly includes provisions on digital trade, intellectual property rights, and services liberalization that reflect contemporary priorities in trade policy. The India-EAEU Free Trade Agreement will need to address similar issues, adapted to the specific contexts and priorities of India and the EAEU member states.[8]

Economic Impact Projections

While comprehensive economic modeling of the proposed India-EAEU Free Trade Agreement has not been publicly released, certain projections can be made based on the existing trade relationship and the potential for trade creation. The current bilateral trade of USD 69 billion provides a baseline, with significant potential for expansion across multiple sectors. Trade agreements typically generate trade creation effects through tariff elimination, trade diversion effects as preferential access shifts trade patterns, and dynamic effects from increased competition and economies of scale.

For Indian exporters, particularly in pharmaceuticals, IT services, textiles, and certain agricultural products, the agreement could open substantial new market opportunities. The EAEU’s combined market of over 180 million consumers represents significant demand potential. On the import side, India could benefit from access to EAEU energy resources, minerals, and certain manufactured goods at competitive prices, potentially reducing input costs for Indian industries.

The agreement’s impact on micro, small and medium enterprises deserves particular attention in economic assessments. If the agreement successfully incorporates MSME-friendly provisions on trade facilitation, technical assistance, and simplified procedures, the trade creation effects for small businesses could be substantial. However, MSMEs are also potentially vulnerable to import competition, necessitating appropriate adjustment assistance and capacity building programs.

The Road Ahead

As India and the EAEU embark on formal negotiations for a free trade agreement, both parties enter with clear economic interests and strategic objectives. For India, diversifying trade partnerships and securing access to new markets aligns with its goal of becoming a USD five trillion economy. The EAEU represents an underexplored market where Indian exporters can potentially gain first-mover advantages in sectors where they possess competitive strengths.

For the EAEU, deepening economic engagement with India offers a hedge against excessive dependence on any single economic partner and provides access to India’s growing consumer market and manufacturing capabilities. The agreement can also strengthen the EAEU’s institutional capacity and international profile as it seeks to expand its network of free trade agreements.

The success of the India-EAEU Free Trade Agreement will ultimately depend on the negotiators’ ability to craft an agreement that is comprehensive enough to yield significant economic benefits while being sensitive to the legitimate concerns of stakeholders in both parties. This requires not just technical expertise in trade policy but also political wisdom in balancing competing interests and managing implementation challenges. The Terms of Reference signed in September 2025 have established the framework for this endeavor, and the coming months of negotiations will determine whether this framework can be translated into a mutually beneficial trade agreement that stands the test of time.

Conclusion

The initiation of free trade agreement negotiations between India and the Eurasian Economic Union represents a significant development in international trade relations. Built upon a solid foundation of existing bilateral trade worth USD 69 billion and supported by a clear legal framework under India’s Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992, this agreement has the potential to reshape trade flows between South Asia and Eurasia. The Terms of Reference signed in Moscow in September 2025 establish the procedural and organizational basis for negotiations that will likely span the next eighteen to twenty-four months.

The agreement’s success will require addressing complex issues ranging from tariff liberalization to regulatory cooperation, from services trade to investment protection, and from intellectual property rights to dispute resolution. Both parties have expressed their commitment to concluding the agreement expeditiously, recognizing the mutual benefits that enhanced trade and economic cooperation can bring. For India, this agreement represents another step in its journey toward greater integration with the global economy while maintaining policy space for addressing domestic concerns. For the EAEU, the agreement offers an opportunity to deepen engagement with one of the world’s fastest-growing major economies.

As negotiations progress, stakeholders including exporters, importers, industry associations, and civil society organizations will play important roles in shaping the agreement’s provisions through consultations and inputs. The ultimate measure of the agreement’s success will be its ability to generate tangible economic benefits for businesses and consumers while maintaining appropriate protections for sensitive sectors and ensuring that trade liberalization contributes to broader objectives of sustainable and inclusive development.

References

[1] Press Information Bureau, Government of India. (2025). “India and Eurasian Economic Union sign Terms of Reference to launch FTA negotiations.” Retrieved from https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2158480 

[2] Law.asia. (2025, September 15). “India, EAEU sign agreement to start free-trade talks.” Retrieved from https://law.asia/india-eaeu-free-trade-agreement/ 

[3] Indian Trade Portal. (n.d.). “Free Trade Agreements.” Retrieved from https://indiantradeportal.in/vs.jsp?lang=0&id=0,55,288 

[4] India Code. (1992). “Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992.” Retrieved from https://www.indiacode.nic.in/handle/123456789/1947 

[5] Chambers and Partners. (2025). “International Trade 2025 – India.” Global Practice Guides. Retrieved from https://practiceguides.chambers.com/practice-guides/international-trade-2025/india 

[6] Drishti IAS. (2025). “India – Eurasian Economic Union FTA Negotiations.” Retrieved from https://www.drishtiias.com/daily-updates/daily-news-analysis/india-eurasian-economic-union-fta-negotiations 

[7] European Free Trade Association. (2024). “India.” Retrieved from https://www.efta.int/trade-relations/free-trade-network/india 

[8] India Briefing. (2025, September 1). “India’s Free Trade Agreements: Updates in 2025.” Retrieved from https://www.india-briefing.com/news/indias-free-trade-agreements-updates-2025-36271.html/ 

[9] Indian Kanoon. (n.d.). “The Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Act, 1992.” Retrieved from https://indiankanoon.org/doc/137887/ 

The post India-EAEU Free Trade Agreement: A Comprehensive Analysis of Legal Framework and Economic Implications appeared first on Bhatt & Joshi Associates.

Introduction to Customs Administration in India

Customs administration forms the backbone of India’s international trade framework, and understanding customs procedures is essential for ensuring smooth movement of goods across borders. The Customs Act of 1962 establishes the legal foundation for controlling the movement of goods across India’s borders, whether by sea, air, or land.[1] This legislative framework operates under the constitutional authority granted by Article 265 of the Indian Constitution, which explicitly mandates that no tax shall be levied or collected except by authority of law. Furthermore, Entry 83 of List I to Schedule VII empowers the Union Government to legislate on matters concerning duties of customs, including import and export duties.

The primary objectives of customs regulation extend beyond mere revenue collection. The system serves to protect India’s domestic economy from unfair trade practices, safeguard national security interests, prevent the smuggling of prohibited and restricted goods, and ensure compliance with various international trade agreements to which India is a signatory. The quantum and nature of customs duties are determined through a comprehensive legal framework comprising the Customs Act 1962, the Customs Tariff Act 1975, subordinate rules, notifications issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs, circulars providing procedural guidance, judicial precedents, and annual amendments through Union Finance Acts.

India imposes several categories of customs duties depending on the nature and purpose of imports. Basic Customs Duty represents the standard import duty applied to most goods entering the country. Countervailing Duty serves to neutralize the benefits of subsidies provided by exporting countries to their manufacturers. Additional Customs Duty or Special Countervailing Duty addresses domestic taxes such as excise duties that would otherwise create an uneven playing field. Protective duties shield nascent domestic industries from international competition during their developmental phase. Anti-dumping duties counter the practice of selling goods below their normal value in international markets, thereby protecting domestic producers from predatory pricing strategies.

Constitutional and Legal Framework Governing Customs Administration

The constitutional architecture supporting customs administration in India demonstrates the framers’ intent to centralize control over international trade. The Customs Act extends to the whole of India and governs the entry and exit of vessels, aircraft, goods, and passengers across Indian borders. This centralized approach ensures uniformity in customs procedures across the country, preventing the fragmentation that could arise from state-level variations in import-export regulations.

The relationship between the Customs Act 1962 and the Customs Tariff Act 1975 represents a dual approach to customs regulation. While the Customs Act provides the procedural framework for clearance of goods, assessment of duties, and enforcement mechanisms, the Customs Tariff Act classifies goods and prescribes the rates of duty applicable to different categories of imports and exports. This bifurcation allows for flexibility in tariff adjustments through annual Finance Acts without necessitating amendments to the core procedural provisions of the Customs Act.

Import Procedures: From Arrival to Clearance

Filing of Bill of Entry

The import process commences when goods arrive at an Indian port, airport, or land customs station. Section 46 of the Customs Act mandates that importers file a Bill of Entry for goods intended for home consumption or warehousing.[2] This document serves as the importer’s declaration regarding the nature, quantity, value, and classification of imported goods. The Bill of Entry must be filed in the prescribed form and accompanied by supporting documents including the commercial invoice, packing list, bill of lading or airway bill, insurance documents, import license if applicable, and any certificates required under specific import regulations. Compliance with these customs procedures ensures that imports are legally cleared for entry into the domestic market.

The legislation recognizes that certain goods may not require immediate customs clearance at the port of arrival. Sections 52 through 56 of the Customs Act provide special procedures for goods in transit to destinations outside India, goods intended for transshipment to another customs station within India, and goods that will be transferred to another vessel or aircraft at the same port for onward journey. For such goods, detailed customs procedures are simplified, though procedural compliance remains mandatory. The Import General Manifest or Import Report filed by the carrier must clearly indicate the transit or transshipment status of such goods.

Self-Assessment Regime

Section 17 of the Customs Act introduced a paradigm shift in customs administration by establishing a self-assessment regime.[3] Under this system, importers and exporters bear the responsibility for correctly determining the classification of goods according to the Customs Tariff, declaring the accurate transaction value, calculating the applicable duty, and claiming appropriate exemptions or concessional rates if available. Section 17 of the Customs Act introduced a paradigm shift in customs administration by establishing a self-assessment regime.[3] Under this system, importers and exporters bear the responsibility for correctly determining the classification of goods according to the Customs Tariff, declaring the accurate transaction value, calculating the applicable duty, and claiming appropriate exemptions or concessional rates if available. This approach aligns with international best practices in customs procedures, placing the onus of compliance on the trading community while enabling customs authorities to focus their resources on risk-based verification and enforcement.

The self-assessment regime presumes that importers possess adequate knowledge of customs laws and maintain accurate records of their import transactions. However, the legislation acknowledges situations where an importer may genuinely be unable to determine duty liability with certainty. Section 18 of the Customs Act provides for provisional assessment in such circumstances. When an importer cannot self-assess due to incomplete information regarding the value of goods, uncertainty about the correct tariff classification, or pending test results necessary for classification purposes, a request may be made to the proper officer for provisional assessment. The customs authority may permit provisional clearance upon the importer furnishing security in the form of a bank guarantee or bond to cover the potential difference between provisionally assessed duty and finally determined duty.

Examination of Imported Goods

Verification through physical examination forms an integral component of customs clearance, serving both revenue protection and trade facilitation objectives. The examination process balances the need for thorough verification against the imperative of expeditious clearance. Rather than examining every consignment in its entirety, customs authorities employ risk management systems to identify shipments requiring detailed examination. Factors influencing this selection include the importer’s compliance history, the nature of goods declared, discrepancies in documentation, intelligence regarding potential misdeclarations, and randomized selection protocols.

When first appraisement is warranted, either at the importer’s request or the customs appraiser’s direction, examination occurs before final assessment of duty. The importer must request this facility at the time of filing the Bill of Entry, providing justification for the request. The customs appraiser records the examination order on the Bill of Entry, which is then presented at the import shed where a designated examining officer conducts the physical verification. The shed appraiser or dock examiner opens the packages as necessary, verifies the goods against the declared description, and records detailed findings regarding quantity, quality, and any discrepancies observed.

For consignments not requiring first appraisement, examination occurs after assessment. The assessed Bill of Entry is presented at the import shed where the proper officer of customs conducts verification. Shipments found to conform to the declaration receive clearance orders, enabling the importer to take delivery. Where discrepancies emerge during post-assessment examination, the matter is referred back to the appraising group for reassessment.

Execution of Bonds and Payment of Duty

Certain import schemes and exemption notifications require importers to execute bonds with or without security to ensure compliance with stipulated conditions. These bonds represent undertakings by the importer to fulfill specific obligations such as utilizing imported goods for declared end-use purposes, maintaining proper accounts and records for verification, allowing inspection by customs officers, and paying duty if conditions are violated. The format and conditions of bonds vary depending on the applicable scheme, and execution occurs before the assessing appraiser who verifies the adequacy of security provided.

Payment of assessed customs duty represents a critical step in the clearance process. Importers must deposit the duty amount in designated banks authorized by the respective customs commissionerate. The payment process has been substantially digitized, with electronic payment modes replacing traditional challan-based payments in most locations. Banks endorse payment particulars in the system, enabling real-time verification by customs authorities. This electronic integration minimizes delays associated with manual verification of payment documents.

Amendment Procedures and Prior Entry Facility

The legislation recognizes that genuine errors may occur in Bills of Entry due to clerical mistakes, misunderstanding of complex classifications, or inadvertent omissions. Amendment procedures allow importers to rectify bonafide mistakes after submission of documents. Such amendments require approval from the Deputy Commissioner or Assistant Commissioner of Customs, and the importer must submit a formal request supported by documentary evidence justifying the amendment. The customs authority examines whether the error was genuinely inadvertent and whether the proposed amendment is substantiated by original transaction documents.

Section 46 of the Customs Act facilitates trade by permitting filing of Bills of Entry prior to the arrival of goods, a facility known as prior entry or advance filing. This provision enables importers to initiate clearance procedures while goods are still in transit, thereby reducing dwell time after arrival. A Bill of Entry filed under prior entry remains valid if the carrying vessel or aircraft arrives within thirty days from the date of presentation. Importers must file additional copies including an Advance Noting copy, and must declare that the vessel or aircraft is expected within thirty days. Upon arrival and filing of the Import General Manifest, the importer presents the Bill of Entry for final noting, completing the clearance process expeditiously.

Warehousing Procedures

The warehousing facility under Sections 58 through 73 of the Customs Act allows importers to store goods in customs-bonded warehouses without immediate payment of duty. This facility proves particularly valuable when importers need time to arrange finances for duty payment, wish to store goods pending identification of buyers, or intend to re-export goods without clearing them for home consumption. The Bill of Entry for warehousing follows a format distinct from Bills of Entry for home consumption, though the documentary requirements and assessment procedures remain largely similar.

Payment of assessed customs duty represents a critical step in the clearance process. Importers must deposit the duty amount in designated banks authorized by the respective customs commissionerate. The payment process has been substantially digitized, with electronic payment modes replacing traditional challan-based payments in most locations. Banks endorse payment particulars in the system, enabling real-time verification by customs authorities. This electronic integration reduces errors and ensures that all import transactions comply with established customs procedures.

Export Procedures: From Documentation to Departure

Registration Requirements and Shipping Bill Filing

Export procedures begin with obtaining an Importer-Exporter Code (IEC) from the Directorate General of Foreign Trade, which serves as a unique identifier for each entity engaged in import-export activities. Under the electronic data interchange system implemented across major customs locations, the IEC number is verified online from the DGFT database, ensuring authenticity and compliance with standard customs procedures.

Exporters must also register their authorized foreign exchange dealer code, representing the bank through which export proceeds will be realized. This registration enables the customs system to generate Bank Realization Certificates, which are electronically transmitted to the designated bank for monitoring foreign exchange receipts. Exporters must maintain a current account with the designated bank for credit of drawback incentives and other benefits.

The Shipping Bill constitutes the principal document for export clearance, analogous to the Bill of Entry for imports. Different types of Shipping Bills cater to various export scenarios including free shipping bills for duty-paid goods, drawback shipping bills for claiming duty drawback on inputs used in exported goods, duty-free shipping bills for goods manufactured using duty-free inputs under export promotion schemes, and warehoused shipping bills for goods exported from customs warehouses. Each type of Shipping Bill requires specific supporting documentation relevant to the claimed benefits or concessions.

Documentation and GR Form Requirements

The foreign exchange monitoring mechanism historically relied on GR Forms, which tracked the realization of export proceeds. Exchange Control copies of Shipping Bills were forwarded to the Reserve Bank of India for monitoring purposes. However, recognizing the administrative burden this imposed, the government has granted waivers from GR Form requirements for certain categories of exports. Exports valued at or below twenty-five thousand US dollars are exempt from GR Form requirements, facilitating small-value exports. Similarly, gift exports valued up to five lakh rupees enjoy exemption, acknowledging the non-commercial nature of such transactions. These waivers reduce compliance costs for exporters while maintaining effective monitoring of significant foreign exchange transactions.

Customs Examination and Let Export Order

Upon arrival of export goods at the dock or cargo terminal, port authorities verify the physical receipt of goods against the checklist generated by the electronic system. The exporter or their customs house agent presents the checklist with port endorsement, along with original documents including commercial invoices, packing lists, and any required certificates, to the designated customs officer. This officer verifies the quantity actually received, enters confirmation in the system, and marks the electronic Shipping Bill for examination.

The dock appraiser assigns a customs officer for physical examination if risk parameters or random selection criteria indicate the need for verification. The examination may cover the entire consignment or a representative sample depending on the nature of goods, the exporter’s compliance history, and intelligence inputs. The examining officer prepares a detailed examination report in the electronic system, noting any discrepancies between declared and actual goods. If examination results prove satisfactory and all regulatory requirements are met, the dock appraiser issues the “Let Export” order, authorizing loading of goods onto the export vessel or aircraft.

In certain cases, the dock appraiser may order samples to be drawn for laboratory testing to verify quality standards, compliance with export restrictions, or accurate classification. The customs officer draws samples in duplicate or triplicate as required, prepares test memos signed by customs officials and the exporter, and dispatches samples to designated testing laboratories. Clearance is withheld pending receipt of satisfactory test reports.

Container Stuffing and Loading Supervision

For containerized cargo, stuffing operations at the dock occur under preventive supervision to ensure that goods actually loaded correspond to goods declared in the Shipping Bill and to prevent unauthorized additions or substitutions. Preventive officers verify container seals, supervise the stuffing process, and record container numbers and seal numbers in the system. After completion of stuffing, containers are moved to the vessel loading area under customs supervision.

Loading of both containerized and bulk cargo onto export vessels occurs under preventive supervision. The preventive officer present at the loading berth verifies that loaded goods match the “Let Export” Shipping Bills and provides the “Shipped on Board” endorsement on the exporter’s copy of the Shipping Bill. This endorsement confirms physical export and enables processing of drawback claims and other post-export benefits.

Amendment Procedures for Export Documents

Corrections in export documentation may become necessary due to various reasons including typographical errors in Shipping Bills, changes in shipping arrangements, corrections in quantity or value, or amendments in buyer details. The stage at which correction is sought determines the authority competent to permit the amendment. Before generation of the Shipping Bill number, corrections can be made at the service center without formal approval. After Shipping Bill generation but before the “Let Export” order, the Assistant Commissioner or Deputy Commissioner of Exports may permit amendments upon the exporter’s written request supported by justification and documentary evidence. After issuance of the “Let Export” order, only the Additional Commissioner or Joint Commissioner in charge of exports possesses authority to permit amendments, reflecting the heightened scrutiny applied to post-export modifications.

Drawback Claims and Export General Manifest

Duty drawback represents a refund of customs and central excise duties paid on inputs or raw materials used in the manufacture of exported goods. This mechanism ensures that Indian exports are not disadvantaged in international markets due to embedded duties. Section 75 of the Customs Act provides the legal basis for duty drawback, and detailed rules prescribe the rates and procedures for claiming this benefit.

Under the electronic system, drawback claims are processed automatically without requiring separate claim forms. The Drawback Branch processes claims on a first-come-first-served basis after verification of actual export through the Export General Manifest. Exporters can track claim status through query counters at service centers. If queries or deficiencies are identified, these are communicated electronically, and the claim remains pending until satisfactory responses are received.

Shipping lines and agents must furnish Export General Manifests electronically within seven days from the vessel’s sailing date. The EGM provides Shipping Bill-wise details of exported goods, enabling customs authorities to confirm actual export and release drawback claims. Despite electronic filing, manual EGMs with exporter copies of Shipping Bills continue to be filed as a redundancy measure, ensuring that technical failures in electronic systems do not disrupt the process.

Recent Reforms and Facilitation Measures

Twenty-Four by Seven Customs Clearance

The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs introduced round-the-clock customs clearance through Circular 19/2014-Customs dated December 31, 2014, marking a significant departure from traditional working hours.[4] This facility operates at eighteen major seaports and seventeen air cargo complexes, covering specified categories of imports and exports. For imports, facilitated Bills of Entry identified through risk management systems as low-risk shipments qualify for twenty-four by seven clearance. For exports, factory-stuffed containers and goods exported under free Shipping Bills benefit from this facility.

The round-the-clock clearance facility addresses a longstanding concern of the trading community regarding delays caused by restricted customs working hours. Perishable goods, time-sensitive cargo, and just-in-time manufacturing inputs particularly benefit from this reform. The facility reduces dwell time, lowers demurrage and detention charges, and enhances India’s competitiveness in international trade.

Self-Sealing of Export Containers

Traditional Customs procedures required all export containers to be stuffed and sealed under customs supervision, creating bottlenecks at ports and increasing transaction times. Recognizing the maturity of compliance systems and the need for facilitation, the Board introduced simplified procedures for self-sealing of export containers subject to conditions designed to maintain integrity. Authorized exporters with satisfactory compliance records may stuff containers at their factory premises and apply self-seals, which are subsequently verified by customs authorities.

This reform transfers responsibility for container integrity to exporters while enabling customs to focus resources on high-risk consignments. Exporters benefit from flexibility in planning their stuffing operations without depending on customs supervision schedules. The measure exemplifies risk-based facilitation that balances trade efficiency with regulatory oversight.

Electronic Systems and Integration

The comprehensive deployment of electronic data interchange systems across Indian customs locations has transformed clearance processes. The Indian Customs Electronic Data Interchange System enables electronic filing of Bills of Entry and Shipping Bills, electronic payment of duties, electronic processing and assessment, electronic communication of queries and deficiencies, electronic generation of out-of-charge orders, and electronic tracking of consignment status. These technological interventions have substantially reduced interface between importers-exporters and customs officers, minimizing opportunities for corruption and ensuring transparency in decision-making.

Integration with other government systems has further enhanced efficiency. Connectivity with the DGFT system enables real-time verification of IEC codes and import-export licenses. Integration with port operating systems allows seamless exchange of information regarding arrival and departure of vessels and cargo. Connectivity with banking systems facilitates electronic duty payment verification. These integrations create an ecosystem where information flows seamlessly across stakeholders, eliminating redundant data entry and reducing processing time.

Judicial Interpretation and Case Law

The judiciary has played a crucial role in interpreting customs provisions and resolving disputes between revenue and assessees. Courts have established important principles regarding valuation of imported goods, classification disputes, and procedural compliance. The Supreme Court has consistently held that customs classification must be determined according to trade parlance and commercial understanding rather than scientific or technical definitions in isolation. In Commissioner of Customs v. Dilip Kumar and Company, the Court emphasized that classification requires consideration of how goods are known and understood in commercial circles.[5]

Valuation controversies have generated substantial litigation, with courts addressing issues such as acceptability of transaction value, addition of post-importation costs, and valuation of related party transactions. The Supreme Court in CC v. Ferodo India Private Limited held that transaction value should ordinarily be accepted unless customs authorities demonstrate grounds for rejection based on specific evidence rather than mere suspicion.[6] This judgment reinforced the primacy of declared values while preserving revenue’s right to scrutinize transactions with objective evidence of undervaluation.

Regarding Customs Procedures compliance, courts have balanced strict adherence to statutory requirements against recognition of bonafide errors. While fundamental procedural violations cannot be condoned, courts have shown pragmatism in cases of minor irregularities that do not prejudice revenue or violate the statute’s substantive provisions. This approach prevents technical objections from frustrating legitimate trade while maintaining the integrity of customs procedures.

Conclusion

The customs procedures established under the Customs Act 1962 reflect India’s evolution from a protectionist economy to an increasingly open trading nation. The legislative framework balances revenue protection, regulatory compliance, and trade facilitation imperatives. Recent reforms demonstrate the government’s commitment to ease of doing business, with technological interventions and procedural simplifications reducing transaction costs and enhancing competitiveness. The self-assessment regime, twenty-four by seven clearance facilities, electronic integration, and risk-based clearance systems represent significant strides toward modern customs administration aligned with international best practices. As India continues integrating with the global economy, ongoing refinement of customs procedures will remain essential to supporting economic growth while safeguarding national interests.

References

[1] Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue. (n.d.). The Customs Act, 1962. Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs. 

[2] Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs. (2020). Import Procedures and Documentation. https://www.cbic.gov.in/ 

[3] Ministry of Finance. (2016). Self Assessment in Customs. Press Information Bureau, Government of India. https://pib.gov.in/ 

[4] Central Board of Excise and Customs. (2014). Circular No. 19/2014-Customs. Government of India. 

[5] Commissioner of Customs v. Dilip Kumar and Company, (2018) 9 SCC 1. Supreme Court of India. 

[6] Commissioner of Customs v. Ferodo India Private Limited, (2009) 11 SCC 1. Supreme Court of India. 

[7] Directorate General of Foreign Trade. (n.d.). Foreign Trade Policy 2023. Ministry of Commerce and Industry. https://www.dgft.gov.in/ 

[8] Reserve Bank of India. (n.d.). Foreign Exchange Management (Export of Goods and Services) Regulations. https://www.rbi.org.in/ 

[9] Ministry of Law and Justice. (1950). The Constitution of India. Legislative Department. https://legislative.gov.in/constitution-of-india 

Authorized by Prapti Bhatt

The post Customs Procedures in India: Import and Export Under the Customs Act, 1962 appeared first on Bhatt & Joshi Associates.