The Bar Council of India does not permit advertisement or solicitation by advocates in any form or manner. By accessing this website, www.khaitanco.com, you acknowledge and confirm that you are seeking information relating to Khaitan & Co of your own accord and that there has been no form of solicitation, advertisement or inducement by Khaitan & Co or its members. The content of this website is for informational purposes only and should not be interpreted as soliciting or advertisement. No material/information provided on this website should be construed as legal advice. Khaitan & Co shall not be liable for consequences of any action taken by relying on the material/information provided on this website. The contents of this website are the intellectual property of Khaitan & Co.

Please accept the above


See all results for ""

WTO panel decides against India on Export Promotion Schemes


On 31 October 2019, a specialised panel constituted by the World Trade Organisation (WTO) released a report recommending the withdrawal of several export promotion schemes which are integral to India’s foreign trade policy.


The panel was constituted on 28 May 2018 by the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) in response to a reference made by the United States (US) to the WTO. The reference was made to examine whether certain identified export promotion schemes by India were violative of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM).

Article 3.1(a) read with Article 3.2 of the SCM prohibits member countries from granting or maintaining a subsidy which was contingent (whether in law or fact) on export performance.

Reference by US

As per the WTO Secretariat’s annual reports published in 2017 and 2018, India had crossed the gross national product (GNP) per capita threshold of USD 1000 for the periods 2013-15 and 2014-16. 

Basis this, the US invoked the special dispute settlement mechanism (under the DSU) by asserting that the following export promotion schemes would tantamount to subsidies that are prohibited in terms of the SCM and that India being a member country would be required to phase them out:

  • Export oriented undertaking (EOU) / Electronics Hardware Technology Parks (EHTP) / Software Technology Parks (STP) / Bio-Technology Parks (BTP) Schemes
  • Special Economic Zones (SEZ) Schemes
  • Export Promotion of Capital Goods (EPCG) Schemes
  • Duty Free Import Schemes (DFIS) (9 (nine) specific customs duty exemptions under Notification No. 50/ 2017- Customs dated 30 June 2017 which have specific export performance conditions)
  • Merchandise Export from India Scheme (MEIS).

Submissions by India

  • India primarily disputed the basis of the reference and submitted that there is no violation of Articles 3.1(a) and Article 3.2 of the SCM as it enjoyed an exemption for 8 (eight) years upon graduation as well under Article 27.2 of the SCM. The literal reading of Article 27.2 of SCM, however, indicates that a reprieve was granted to developing countries for 8 (eight) years from the date of the WTO Agreement (1995) coming into force.
  • India defended the identified export promotion schemes on the ground that these do not qualify as prohibited export subsidies and instead qualify as the “permitted duty remissions / exemptions” as per Footnote 1 to Annexure 1 of the SCM.

Findings of the panel

The panel in its report dated 31 October 2019, dismissed the submissions put forth by India and found that all the identified export promotion schemes, in fact, qualify as prohibited subsidies under the SCM. The panel recommended that India should phase out the EOU / EHTP / STP / BTP Schemes, EPCG Scheme, SEZ Scheme and MEIS within 120 days and the DFIS should be phased out within 90 days from the date on which the report is accepted.


MEIS, EPCG and the other disputed schemes have been popular among the Indian exporters. Withdrawal of these benefits will hamper pricing of products and the international competitiveness.

While the recommendations of the panel must be accepted by DSB within 60 days of circulation to WTO members, India has the option to file an appeal against the panel’s report before the Appellate Body of the WTO. In the alternative, India will need to revise the export benefits to make them WTO compliant.

Nevertheless, the trade will have to be compensated in the long run to ensure attractiveness of the ‘Make in India’ schemes.

-          Rashmi Deshpande (Partner) and Anjali Krishnan (Senior Associate)

For any queries please contact: editors@khaitanco.com

Rashmi Deshpande (partners)

We have updated our Privacy Policy, which provides details of how we process your personal data and apply security measures. We will continue to communicate with you based on the information available with us. You may choose to unsubscribe from our communications at any time by clicking here.

For private circulation only

The contents of this email are for informational purposes only and for the reader’s personal non-commercial use. The views expressed are not the professional views of Khaitan & Co and do not constitute legal advice. The contents are intended, but not guaranteed, to be correct, complete, or up to date. Khaitan & Co disclaims all liability to any person for any loss or damage caused by errors or omissions, whether arising from negligence, accident or any other cause.

© 2021 Khaitan & Co. All rights reserved.


One Indiabulls Centre
13th Floor, Tower 1
841 Senapati Bapat Marg
Mumbai 400 013 India

T: +91 22 6636 5000

E: mumbai@khaitanco.com

New Delhi

Ashoka Estate, 12th Floor
24 Barakhamba Road
New Delhi 110 001 India

T: +91 11 4151 5454

E: delhi@khaitanco.com


Simal, 2nd Floor
7/1 Ulsoor Road
Bengaluru 560 042 India

T: +91 80 4339 7000

E: bengaluru@khaitanco.com


Emerald House
1B Old Post Office Street
Kolkata 700 001 India

T: +91 22 6636 5000

E: kolkata@khaitanco.com