IndiGo seeks ₹900 crore refund for customs duty on re-imported aircraft parts
In its plea, IndiGo claims that it paid the disputed customs duty “under protest” across more than 4,000 bills of entry, despite previous rulings from tribunals and the High Court that re-imported aircraft parts should be considered services under GST, not physical goods.
- Dec 12, 2025,
- Updated Dec 12, 2025 2:36 PM IST
InterGlobe Aviation Ltd, the parent company of India’s largest airline IndiGo, has filed a petition before the Delhi High Court seeking a refund of over ₹900 crore in customs duty paid on aircraft engines and parts re-imported into India after overseas repairs.
The airline argues that the customs duty levied on these re-imports is unconstitutional, asserting that it amounts to a double levy on the same transaction. IndiGo maintains that such re-imports should be treated as a service under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime, rather than as goods subject to customs duty.
The case, listed before Justices Prathiba M Singh and Shail Jain, saw Justice Jain recuse herself from the bench due to a potential conflict of interest as her son is an IndiGo pilot. The matter will now be assigned to a different bench for hearing.
In its plea, IndiGo claims that it paid the disputed customs duty “under protest” across more than 4,000 bills of entry, despite previous rulings from tribunals and the High Court that re-imported aircraft parts should be considered services under GST, not physical goods. The airline has already contested the matter with the customs authorities, who have denied its refund requests. The issue is currently pending before the Supreme Court.
Representing IndiGo, Advocate V Lakshmikumaran argued that while the airline paid the basic customs duty upon re-importation without raising objections, repairs on the aircraft are considered a service. The airline also paid GST under the reverse charge mechanism for these repairs. However, customs authorities proceeded to impose duty again by treating the re-import as a fresh import of goods, effectively subjecting the same transaction to double taxation.
IndiGo highlighted that customs tribunals have previously ruled that such double taxation is impermissible under law.
In a separate development on December 12, IndiGo disclosed that it has received a tax penalty notice of ₹58.75 crore from the Additional Commissioner of CGST, Delhi South Commissionerate, concerning the financial year 2020–21. The order includes a GST demand along with penalties. IndiGo has indicated its intention to challenge the notice before the appropriate appellate authority.
In a filing to the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE), the airline described the tax order as “erroneous” and expressed confidence in its position, backed by external tax advisors. The airline emphasised that the development is not expected to have a material impact on its financial position, daily operations, or broader business activities.
InterGlobe Aviation Ltd, the parent company of India’s largest airline IndiGo, has filed a petition before the Delhi High Court seeking a refund of over ₹900 crore in customs duty paid on aircraft engines and parts re-imported into India after overseas repairs.
The airline argues that the customs duty levied on these re-imports is unconstitutional, asserting that it amounts to a double levy on the same transaction. IndiGo maintains that such re-imports should be treated as a service under the Goods and Services Tax (GST) regime, rather than as goods subject to customs duty.
The case, listed before Justices Prathiba M Singh and Shail Jain, saw Justice Jain recuse herself from the bench due to a potential conflict of interest as her son is an IndiGo pilot. The matter will now be assigned to a different bench for hearing.
In its plea, IndiGo claims that it paid the disputed customs duty “under protest” across more than 4,000 bills of entry, despite previous rulings from tribunals and the High Court that re-imported aircraft parts should be considered services under GST, not physical goods. The airline has already contested the matter with the customs authorities, who have denied its refund requests. The issue is currently pending before the Supreme Court.
Representing IndiGo, Advocate V Lakshmikumaran argued that while the airline paid the basic customs duty upon re-importation without raising objections, repairs on the aircraft are considered a service. The airline also paid GST under the reverse charge mechanism for these repairs. However, customs authorities proceeded to impose duty again by treating the re-import as a fresh import of goods, effectively subjecting the same transaction to double taxation.
IndiGo highlighted that customs tribunals have previously ruled that such double taxation is impermissible under law.
In a separate development on December 12, IndiGo disclosed that it has received a tax penalty notice of ₹58.75 crore from the Additional Commissioner of CGST, Delhi South Commissionerate, concerning the financial year 2020–21. The order includes a GST demand along with penalties. IndiGo has indicated its intention to challenge the notice before the appropriate appellate authority.
In a filing to the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE), the airline described the tax order as “erroneous” and expressed confidence in its position, backed by external tax advisors. The airline emphasised that the development is not expected to have a material impact on its financial position, daily operations, or broader business activities.