DGFT Proposes Comprehensive Non-Preferential Rules of Origin for Imports and Exports; Comments Due September 29

# DGFT Proposes Comprehensive Non-Preferential Rules of Origin for Imports and Exports; Comments Due September 29

Finin2min 2-minute summary

DGFT Trade Notice No. 27/2026-27 proposes a rewritten Para 2.93 of the Handbook of Procedures covering non-preferential origin for exports and imports, including importer self-declaration, 35% value-addition or tariff-heading tests, and status-holder self-certification.

What changed

DGFT has put a comprehensive draft non-preferential origin framework out for comment rather than limiting Para 2.93 to export-certificate administration.

Why it matters

Country-of-origin determination affects customs declarations, trade remedies, labelling, procurement and sanctions/compliance screening even where no preferential tariff is claimed.

Who is affected

Importers, exporters, status-holder manufacturers, customs teams, trade bodies, export promotion councils, freight/customs brokers and compliance professionals.

Action / control point

Stakeholders should map current origin evidence against the draft and submit comments by September 29; treat the document as a consultation, not operative law, until a final Public Notice is issued.

Key verified facts

• DGFT invited comments within 15 days of the September 14 Trade Notice, making September 29 the consultation deadline.
• The draft would comprehensively prescribe non-preferential origin rules for exports and imports.
• For import Chapters 01-14, origin is based on wholly obtained/produced status subject to a 1% de-minimis tolerance.
• For other imported goods, origin may be determined where non-originating materials undergo a change in tariff heading at the four-digit level OR the good achieves at least 35% value addition.
• Importers would make a self-declaration of origin; a separate CoO would generally not be required unless another law or country-specific requirement mandates it.
• Status-holder manufacturer exporters would be eligible for self-certification for qualifying Indian-origin exports.
• Non-preferential export CoO applications would remain online with a ₹200 certificate fee under the draft.

What happened and how it works

The draft is more consequential than a certificate-format change because it introduces a substantive import-origin framework. Importers would be responsible for declaring origin based on information available to them, with risk-based verification later. That shifts control emphasis toward importer records, supplier evidence and internal origin analysis.

The two alternative tests for most goods—change in tariff heading or at least 35% value addition—need careful product mapping. A company cannot assume that a country of shipment is the country of origin. Manufacturing steps, non-originating inputs and classification changes determine whether the test is met.

The proposal to avoid a routine separate certificate for imports could reduce front-end clearance friction, but it increases the importance of audit-ready evidence. Customs may verify later where there are reasonable grounds to doubt the declaration. Importers should therefore preserve bills of materials, supplier declarations, manufacturing information and valuation records even when clearance is initially based on self-declaration.

For exports, status-holder self-certification can simplify documentation for eligible manufacturer exporters. But self-certification raises governance expectations because the exporter takes responsibility for satisfying origin criteria. An internal origin SOP, classification control and periodic sample testing become more important than relying on an external chamber to catch errors.

Non-preferential origin is different from FTA preferential origin. A non-preferential CoO does not confer a lower FTA tariff. Companies using India-UK CETA or other preferential agreements must continue to apply the agreement-specific rules and proof. The proposed Para 2.93 should be integrated into, not confused with, the preferential-origin compliance stack.

Finance, legal, tax and accounting lens

Importers should treat the draft as a compliance scenario, not today’s operative origin rule. If the proposed self-declaration and 4-digit CTH/35% value-add tests are finalised, procurement systems will need supplier origin evidence, bill-of-materials data and document retention that can withstand customs verification. Until then, existing law and current documentary requirements continue to control.

Customs valuation and origin are different questions. A product can satisfy value-add or tariff-shift origin criteria without changing the assessable value, classification or applicable duty rate. Finance teams should therefore avoid booking duty savings or compliance-cost reductions merely because the consultation proposes simpler certification.

For exporters, any self-certification privilege for eligible status-holder manufacturers would reduce document friction but increase responsibility for the accuracy of the declaration. False origin claims can trigger duty recovery, penalties and commercial disputes, so internal product-origin governance remains essential.

Practical decision framework

Importers should take the top 20 imported SKUs and test the proposed origin logic using supplier manufacturing data. Identify products that qualify only through value addition, only through tariff-heading change, or have insufficient evidence. Those are the highest-value consultation cases.

Exporters with status-holder recognition should assess whether self-certification would reduce time and cost without weakening controls. A maker-checker origin review and central evidence repository can be built before the rule is final.

What not to infer

Do not treat the draft as already operative, assume country of shipment equals origin, or use non-preferential origin proof as a substitute for an FTA certificate/declaration.

What to watch next

• Final DGFT Public Notice after consultation
• Any Customs implementation instructions
• Clarification of verification/document-retention expectations
• Interaction with country-specific trade-remedy and labelling rules

Finin2min Q&A

Is the 35% value-addition rule final?

No. It is in the draft consultation and can change before DGFT issues a final Public Notice.

Will importers always need a separate CoO?

Under the draft, generally no, unless another law or country-specific requirement expressly requires one; the importer would still be responsible for origin declaration and evidence.

Source and methodology

• Controlling source: Directorate General of Foreign Trade — https://content.dgft.gov.in/Website/dgftprod/c0ac01bd-f0fb-47cd-ac97-7b4d1bccd5f9/Trade%20notice%2027_0001.pdf
• Source reference: DGFT Trade Notice No. 27/2026-27 dated 14 Sep 2026; official record URL identified and text cross-checked
• Research cutoff: **2026-09-15 22:22 IST**

Finin2min uses a primary-source-first hierarchy. Official regulator, government, court, exchange and company documents control operative facts where reasonably available. Reuters is used for live markets, direct interviews, source-based reports and developments where it is the natural or strongest timely controlling evidence. Competitor finance portals are discovery-only and do not control publishable facts in this batch.

Disclaimer

This material is for general information and education only. It is not investment, tax, legal, accounting or financial advice. Markets, regulations, litigation, transaction terms and source-reported facts can change after the stated cutoff. Verify the latest controlling source and obtain appropriate professional advice before acting on a material decision.