Delhi HC To Hear IndiGo's Plea For ₹900+ Crore IGST & Customs Duty Refund On Re-Imported Aircraft Parts; Customs Alleges No Double Levy
The Delhi High Court is set to hear a plea by Interglobe Aviation Limited (Indigo) over denial of an estimated refund of over Rs. 900 crores of Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) and Customs duty on re-imported aircraft parts that were repaired abroad. The Customs Writ Petition filed on December 11, 2025 was mentioned before a Bench comprising Justice Prathiba M. Singh and...
The Delhi High Court is set to hear a plea by Interglobe Aviation Limited (Indigo) over denial of an estimated refund of over Rs. 900 crores of Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST) and Customs duty on re-imported aircraft parts that were repaired abroad. The Customs Writ Petition filed on December 11, 2025 was mentioned before a Bench comprising Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Shail Jain.
As a common practice in the Aviation sector, aircraft components overseas are sent for essential maintenance, repair, and overhaul (MRO) services.
Indigo has contended that levy of customs duty when IGST had been paid on the import amounts to double levy as already decided by Delhi High Court in March.
Contrarily, the Customs Department has assailed the maintainability of writ petition and reliance paid by Indigo on March judgment the on the ground that same has not attained finality as Supreme Court had issued notice in the Special Leave Petition filed by the Customs Department. On the aspect of double taxation, the Customs Department put forth that since re-import was a two-part transaction which included arrival of goods along with added service components, where one will be subjected to IGST and other to customs duty as 'separate' and 'independent levy'.
The Customs Department called-into question the hypothesis employed in the March, 2025 judgment to strike down IGST levy on re-imported aircraft parts. It was put forth that same was an overly broad assumption that Article 246A of the Constitution overrides the authority to levy additional customs duty under Section 3(7) of the Customs Tariff Act. Customs Department refuted that this assumption was 'flawed' when Section 5 of the IGST Act dealt with the levy on services, whereas Section 3(7) of the Customs Tariff Act pertains specifically to the levy on import of goods.
The matter is to be listed for hearing before another Bench as Justice Shail Jain has recused.
Case Detail: Interglobe Aviation Ltd. vs. Deputy Commissioner (Refund), Office of The Principal
Commissioner of Customs, Air Cargo Complex (Import) & ORS.
For Petitioner: Advocate V. LakshmiKumaran
For Respondent: Senior Standing Counsel Anurag Ojha
Click Here To Read/Download Order