Skip to main content
FININ2MIN CUSTOMS
Customs Tariff Act, 1975

Section 5 — Levy of a lower rate of duty under a trade agreement

Current-law explanation, operational workflow, case law, delegated legislation and evidence controls

OperativeReviewed by CA Nikhil GuptaReviewed 2026-10-05

2-minute view

Authorises rules for determining origin where a trade agreement provides a lower duty rate and requires the importer to support the preference claim. It is the Tariff Act bridge between a treaty concession and a customs assessment at the lower rate.

Status control: The operative origin rules differ agreement by agreement. Section 5 should therefore be treated as an enabling provision, not a universal origin formula. The Customs Act Section 28DA/CAROTAR layer supplements administration without replacing the agreement-specific rule.

Statutory position and legal effect

For Section 5, the legal answer should be built in layers. First identify what the section itself does; second identify the Schedule, notification, rule or investigation record that activates it for the goods and date; third reconcile that result with the Customs Act assessment machinery. This avoids a frequent customs error: treating a statutory power, a tariff rate and an effective rate as if they were the same thing.

The material date matters because tariff lines, exemptions, origin rules and trade-remedy measures change independently. A defensible file should therefore retain the exact tariff extract and notification version used in the assessment. Where this page is marked historical or transitional, the section should be cited only for a period when it legally operated or for explaining the transition to the current framework.

From an evidence perspective, the strongest working paper is not a screenshot of a duty calculator. It is a reconciliation showing the declared tariff item, legal notes considered, statutory rate, effective notification serial, preference/origin basis, additional levies, trade-remedy measure if any, and the arithmetic from customs value to final duty. Section 5 should occupy its correct place in that chain.

Official text control: use the India Code/Gazette version of Section 5 and the Schedule or delegated instrument applicable on the transaction date. This page intentionally explains the law rather than reproducing a long unofficial bare-act extract.

Applicability, rights, obligations and decision workflow

  1. Step 1. Identify the trade agreement and preference notification.
  2. Step 2. Open the specific rules of origin notified for that agreement.
  3. Step 3. Test wholly obtained/change-in-tariff/RVC/product-specific criteria as applicable.
  4. Step 4. Check accumulation, minimal operations, direct consignment and certification rules.
  5. Step 5. Retain the origin evidence and map it to Section 28DA/CAROTAR fields.

The operative origin rules differ agreement by agreement. Section 5 should therefore be treated as an enabling provision, not a universal origin formula. The Customs Act Section 28DA/CAROTAR layer supplements administration without replacing the agreement-specific rule.

Thresholds, provisos, timelines and interaction with other law

The section must be read with the Customs Act, the tariff Schedules and any subordinate instrument that gives it transaction-level effect. Where the provision contains a power rather than a self-executing charge, no duty or obligation should be assumed without locating the notification, rule, agreement or investigation determination that activates the power. Historical provisions require the same material-date discipline.

Rate changes, classification changes and trade-remedy measures are different legal events. The file should say exactly which one occurred and should not infer the enabling provision merely from the fact that the landed duty increased or decreased.

Rules, notifications, Finance Acts and operational instruments

InstrumentAuthorityWhy it mattersSource
Customs Tariff Rules / agreement-specific origin rulesCBICRules made for preferential treatment and originOfficial/source route
CAROTAR 2020CBICImporter due diligence and verification administrationOfficial/source route

Case law — provision-specific research matrix

AuthorityProposition / useSource
Covestro India Pvt. Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Customs
Bombay High Court, 16 Apr 2026
Preferential origin claims require the importer to engage with Section 28DA/CAROTAR and the specific agreement rules; a certificate of origin does not eliminate importer due-diligence obligations.Judgment
M.M. Ceramics & Ferro Alloys v. Union of India
Delhi High Court, 2 Sep 2026
Preferential tariff treatment turns on the applicable agreement and rules of origin; the certificate is part of the statutory evidence framework and the material-date regime must be identified.Judgment

Worked example

Goods are invoiced from Singapore but manufactured using inputs from several countries. The lower rate is available only if the specific India-Singapore origin rule is satisfied; invoice location is not enough.

Professional result: document the legal route before doing the arithmetic. A short computation that identifies the correct provision and current notification is stronger than a long calculation based on an obsolete tariff or historical measure.

Evidence and compliance checklist

Common mistakes and professional traps

Related provisions and research routes

FAQs

Does Section 5 itself give the final duty payable?

Usually no. The final result normally requires the applicable Schedule entry, Customs Act valuation/rate-date rules and live notifications or rules. The section supplies a legal component of that analysis, not a substitute for the full computation.

Which date should be checked?

Use the date legally relevant to the customs event and the particular levy. Preserve the version of the Act, Schedule and notification in force on that date rather than relying on a later consolidated page.

Can an older judgment be used directly?

Only after checking whether the statutory text, tariff structure and delegated instrument considered by the court remain the same. Historical authorities remain valuable for principle but may not prove a current rate or notification.

What should a professional retain?

Bill of entry/shipping bill, invoice, valuation data, product literature, tariff-note analysis, notification extract, origin or trade-remedy material where applicable, calculation sheet and the final assessment/order.

Primary-source trail

Current-law/source review: 2026-10-05. Historical disputes require the law version in force on the material date.