Tariff Policy

Tariffs as a means of improving the balance of  payments are regarded as an alternative to exchange depreciation and to deflation of money prices and incomes. The possibility of unbalanced trade implies the existence of capital movements. These, however, are supposed to be merely of an accommodating character. Whenever exports exceed or fall short of imports the gap is filled automatically by changes in the foreign cur- rency reserves. All other capital movements are neglected, and the balance of payments is identified with the balance of trade. Unbalanced trade implies also that domestic expenditure of a country, i.e. total expenditure, on imports and on home produced goods, is not equal to total income derived from production. To counteract deflationary or inflationary tendencies in prices the govern- ment is supposed to supplement consumers' incomes by allowances or to reduce them by taxation; and to run a budget deficit in the first case and a budget surplus in the second case. This policy is supposed to be sufficient to maintain the economy in a state of full employment. The conditions of the model do not allow for any direct expenditure of the government on goods and services.

In the initial years, India followed a policy of protectionism. Subsequently, import substitution was encouraged. The growing adverse balance of payment compelled to explore measures to earn foreign exchange. As a result, export promotion measures started getting prominence in the trade policy. The recent EXIM policy has further strengthened the export promotion measures and liberalised the trading environment. Protection of indigenous industry through a variety of controls, like import duties and preference for indigenous goods in respect of government purchases, were accepted as the main plank of the trade policy of free India. This protectionism came to be enormously strengthened when during 1956 a serious foreign exchange crisis co~npelledth e Government to tighten up the import controls. Since then, protectionisn~ in India's foreign trade policy has operated more through the foreign exchange controls and through customs duties on the imports.

Subsequently, The Government adopted a policy aimed at attaining as rapidly as possible a virtual self-sufficiency with regard to capital equipment and important raw materials. Beginning with 1956, it was also realised that throughout this period foreign exchange constraint would continue to be a major problem. In view of these factors, it was but logical that import substitution became the keystone of India's foreign trade policy. Whenever any Indian manufacturer could produce an item which was previously imported, the import of this item was ilnrnediately banned by the import control authorities. In particular, through the powerful Directorate-General of Technical Development (DGTD), an all out drive was launched to establish indigenous capacities in respect of every important item which was being imported. During the period from 1962 to 1966, some export promotion policies were introduced, but these were related mainly to and integrated with the system of import controls. The devaluation of the rupee in June 1966, was intended to help exporters but because of the follow-up liieasures it failed to serve its purpose.
TIILISt,i ll tlie end of the sixties not much stress was laid on export drive. In 1977-78, the import policy was liberalised and this policy continued in the following two years. On the basis of the recommendations of the Alexander Committee, the Trade Policy for 1979-80 and 1980-81 carried forward tile policy of import liberalisation and simplification of procedures to a great extent. Tliis trade policy aimed at to increase domestic production and efficiency while at the same time providing incentives to exporters.

The import-export policy 1981-82 allowed flexible and liberal access to import requirements for Actual Users, consistent with the aims of strengthening and diversifying the production base of the economy. Trading Houses were encouraged to increase their export activity and to promote exports of products manufactured in the small scale sector. During this period the role of Public Sector canalising agencies was also strengthened. The proposal to establish an Export-Import Bank (EXIM Bank) to provide assitance to exporters and importers was approved by the Parliament.

Tlie import liberalisation attempted in the early eighties was in consonance with the economic liberal.isation introduced in India and covered also fiscal and industrial policy ofthe Government. In the subsequent few years, the import-export policy was continuously modified, so as to provide a framework for a flexible and liberal response to the growing needs of the economy for increasing production and exports. In particular, the policy was aimed at providing Actual Users adequate access to raw materials, intermediates and components needed for tlie maintenance and enhancement of production.

The governlnent of lndia announced sweeping changes in the trade policy during the year 1991. As a ~~esutlht,e new Export-Import policy came into force from April 1, 1992. This was an important step towards the economic reforms of India. In order to bring stability and continuity. tlie policy was made for the duration of 5 years. In this policy import was liberalised and export promotion measures were strengthened. The steps were also taken to boost the doniestic industrial production. The major aspects of the export-import policy (1992-97) include: introduction of the duty-free Export Promotion Capital Goods (EPCG) scheme, strengthening of the Advance Licensing System, waiving of the condition on export proceeds realisation, rationalisation of schemes related to Export Oriented Units and units in tlie Export Processing Zones. The thrust area of this policy was to liberalise imports and boost exports.

'The basic approach of the government since 1991 while reforming the custom duty structures has been to gradually reduce the high rate of import duty, so as to lower costs of production and improve competitiveness of user industries. However, this gradual reduction of import tariff allowed reasonable time to domestic producers to adjust to competition from similar goods.

The Indian import tariff system is based on the Customs Cooperation Council (Brussels) Nomenclature. Over the last few years most of the import tariffs have been made ad valorem. Total duties on imports include basic duty, auxiliary, andlor countervailing duties. Countervailing duties are levied in order to link the import tax burden with India's internal
excise duties. Usually, consumer goods, and components and parts that can be made in India bear higher import duties. Duty drawback is available for imported raw materials used in the products exported. Duty free imports of raw materials required for export production are also permitted under certain conditions.

The following major changes have been introduced in the new EXIM Policy: Quantity Based Advance Licence scheme will continue but Value Based Advance Licence and the old pass book schemes have been replaced by a new scheme 'Duty Entitlement Pass Book Scheme' which combines the positive features of both the schemes, besides being easy to administer and more transparent. Under the new scheme exporters, on the basis of notified entitlement rates, will be granted duty credits, which will entitle them to import goods duty free. The changes in the import tariff regime have been in accordance with the recommendations of the Tax Reforms Committee headed by Dr. Raja Chelliah. According to the Committee, a phased reduction should be carried out in tariffs so that the ad valorem import duty rates on industrial inputs would range from 5 per cent to 30 per cent, while the import duty on nonessential consumer goods should be 50 per cent. This means that the import tariff reforms can be expected to continue in the coming years.
 

 Figure I represents the familiar box diagram. The quantity of A's goods produced in country A is OA, the quantity of B's goods produced in country B is OB, and the free-trade position is at the point F at which the two offer curves OA and OB intersect; the price line OF is there tangential to indifference curves of both countries. If country A imposes a tariff on imports and the adjustment is through changes in the terms of trade without any change in the balance of trade, the new position of equilibrium must be at some point Q on B's offer curve, and the new terms of trade are shown by the slope of the line OQ. If, however, the adjustment is through changes in the balance of trade with the terms of trade remaining constant, the new position of equilibrium will be at some point T which satisfies the following conditions. The terms-of-trade line TM is parallel to OF.

As there are no tariffs in country B the line TM represents also the internal price ratio in country B. It must be, therefore, tangential at T to one of B's indifference curves. The internal price ratio in country A differs from that in country B by the rate of the tariff. Suppose that the ratio is as the slope of the line  DT, D being the rate of the tariff. The line DT must then be tangential at T to one of A's indifference curves. The situation is thus this. Country B is producing OB of B's goods. Its total expenditure in terms of B's goods is BM. The con-sumers in country B move along the price line MT up to the point T. They spend, therefore, BP on home produced goods and PM on imports (PT of A's goods). But country B's exports are only OP of B's goods. The difference, OM, represents country B's deficit of the balance of trade.

 Country A is producing OA of A's goods. Its total expenditure in terms of A's goods is DA. The consumers move along the price line DT up to the point T, and they spend SA on home produced goods and DS on imported goods. A part of the latter sum, DC, is paid to the government as tariffs; only the rest, CS, represents the actual payments for imports (for TS of B's goods). And as country A's exports are OS, its surplus of the balance of trade in terms of A's goods is OC. In terms of B's goods it is equal to OM, i.e., to the deficit in country B

 In order to determine the relation between the changes in the balance of trade and the rate of tariff, let us complete the diagram in the following way. Extend the line CT up to the point H at which it is tangential to one of A's indifference curves; draw a vertical line through T and horizontal lines through F and H; and mark the points of intersection R, K and L. The terms which will enter into the solution are then as follows. First there is the rate of the tariff. In the case on the diagram it is,

 Second, we have the surplus of the balance of trade (OC). It will be convenient to have it expressed in relation to the value of imports. The ratio is

 The third term we shall need is the marginal propensity to import in country A, i.e., the proportion of the change in the expenditure on imports to the change in the total expenditure, prices remaining constant. In order to establish its value consider the points F and H. They represent country A's positions of equilibrium corresponding to the price lines OR and CH. As the price lines are parallel one to the other, they represent the same prices. The total expenditure, however, is greater at the point F than at H; the difference being OM = RT in terms of B's goods. The difference in A's demand for imports is KL (i.e., KS - LS). The marginal propensity to import is thus

 Similar considerations may be applied to the points F and T as two alternative positions of equilibrium of country B. The marginal pro- pensity to import in country 

 Finally, the last term we shall need is expenditure-compensated elas- ticity of demand for imports in country A. It may be defined as the ratio of the proportional change in the quantity demanded to the pro- portional change in the price of imports, subject to the condition that the total expenditure is so adjusted that the same quantities of both goods (of imports and of home produced goods) can be bought at both prices. In the case on Figure I, country A would move from the point T to H in consequence of a shift in the price line from DT to CH. Such a shift would mean that the price of imports has fallen from    the proportional change in price being     . As  however, both price lines pass through the point T, the total expendi- ture is so adjusted that with the price line CH the consumers in country A could buy exactly the same quantities of both goods as they are buying with the price line DT (the quantities represented by the point T). It is only owing to the substitution effect that they increase their imports from TS to LS. The proportonal change in  the quantity demand    is then LT ' and the expenditure-compensated elasticity of demand

 It represents the pure substitution element in the elasticity of demand for imports. 

 Substitute now t for   in E_A and rearrange. we obtain

 But

 And this is the solution of our problem.7 The formula says that the effect of tariffs on the balance of trade is stronger the more substi- tutable are home produced goods for import goods in the country imposing the tariff. The substitution element in the other country is irrelevant because as long as the exchange rate and the money prices of both goods are constant, there cannot be any change there in the internal price ratio, so that there is no substitution effect. The effect of tariffs on the balance of trade is also stronger the greater is the sum of the marginal propensities to import in both countries, provided only that it is not greater than unity. If it were greater than unity, the effect of tariffs would be negative; they would lead not to a sur- plus but to a deficit of the balance of trade. 

 Why does the direction of the effect of tariffs on the balance of trade depend on whether the sum of the marginal propensities to import is greater or less than unity? The condition is familiar from the theory of transfer. We know that if there is a transfer of purchas- ing power from one country to another and the sum of the marginal propensities to import is less than unity, the total demand for the goods produced in the country receiving the transfer increases, the total demand for the products of the country paying the transfer falls, and the terms of trade move in favor of the country receiving the transfer. The opposite is true if the sum of the marginal pro- pensities to import is greater than unity. Now we have established that the same condition must be satisfied if tariffs are to lead to an improvement of the balance of trade.

The question, therefore, arises: what is the connection between the effect of transfer on the terms of trade and the effect of tariffs on the balance of trade?

 Consider the following steps in the process of adjustment leading to an improvement of the balance of trade as a result of tariffs. Sup- pose first that tariffs are imposed in country A but no change in trade has taken place yet. The total expenditure in country A has been so adjusted that in spite of higher prices of the commodities imported the consumers can buy, and are still buying, the same quantities of both goods as before. Trade is still balanced. Starting from this position, any change in demand for either of the two goods can be due to pure substitution effect only. Although consumers in country A can afford to buy the same quantities of goods as before, they prefer to substitute home produced goods which have become relatively less expensive for imports which have become relatively more expensive.

As there is no change in the internal price ratio in country B, there cannot be any substitution effect there. Changes in demand on the part of the consumers in country A are thus net changes for the world as a whole; the total demand for A's goods tends to increase, and the total demand for B's goods tends to fall. An increase in demand for A's goods is equivalent to an inflationary tendency in country A, which must be counteracted by some deflationary measures; and a decrease in demand for B's goods is equivalent to a deflationary tendency in country B, which must be counteracted by some inflationary measures.

The next stage in the process of adjustment is thus an increase in the total expenditure in country B and a decrease in country A. It is at this stage tnat A's balance of trade begins to improve; some goods which otherwise would be consumed in country A are now being consumed in country B. The adjustment is exactly the same as in the case of an autono- mous transfer. The change in the balance of trade is brought about by a reduction in total expenditure in one country and an increase in the other.

The difference is only that in the case of an autonomous transfer total expenditure is so adjusted as to achieve a certain surplus in the balance of trade (equal to the autonomous transfer), prices and the terms of trade being dependent variables; and in the present case total expenditure is so adjusted as to keep the prices constant, the balance of trade (equal to accommodating transfer) being a dependent variable. But the effect on the total demand for particular goods is in both cases the same. If the sum of the marginal propen- sities to import is less than unity, there must be a fall in demand for goods produced in the country in which total expenditure has been reduced, and a rise in demand for the goods produced in the country in which total expenditure has been increased.

The opposite would  take place if the sum of the marginal propensities to import were greater than unity. The ultimate effect of tariffs on trade is thus the result of two tendencies. One of them, the substitution effect, is to increase demand for goods produced in the country imposing the tariff and to decrease demand for the goods produced in the rest of the world. The other tendency is the result of changes in total expenditure and may be called transfer effect. The direction in which it works depends on whether the sum of the marginal propensities to import is greater or less than unity. If it is less than unity, the transfer effect works in the opposite direction to the substitution effect, and the new equilib- rium is established when they just cancel out; the total demand for either of the two goods must remain as it was, i.e., equal to the full employment output in the country concerned.

If the sum of the marginal propensities to import were greater than unity, the transfer effect would work in the same direction as the substitution effect and no solution would be possible. Restriction of total expenditure in country A and expansion in country B would not help to reduce demand for A's goods and to increase demand for B's goods. On the contrary. The result would be a still greater demand for the former and a still smaller demand for the latter. Only if the countries were to react to inflationary tendencies by increasing expenditure and to deflationary tendencies by reducing it, would stable equilibrium be possible. In that case, however, tariffs would lead not to an improvement but to a deterioration of the balance of trade.

 The last question which may be asked in connection with the above analysis is this. Suppose that the country imposing the tariff does not take any measures to counteract inflationary tendencies except collecting and not spending the revenue from tariffs. Any deflationary measures are not popular, and tariffs are often imposed just to avoid them. Suppose, therefore, that country A adopts this passive attitude of collecting only and not spending the revenue from tariffs. What will be then the effect of tariffs on the terms of trade? And if the price level in the rest of the world (the price of B's goods) remains constant, will tariffs be inflationary or deflationary in the sense of generating inflationary or deflationary tendencies in the country imposing them?

It is clear from what was said before that the terms of trade would not change and tariffs would be neither inflationary nor defla tionary if the point D on our diagram coincided with the point 0. In that case total expenditure in country A would be the same after as it was before the imposition of the tariff (OA in terms of A's goods). There would be an improvement in the balance of trade because a part of the expenditure would be taken away by the government in the form of the revenue from tariffs. But no additional measures would be required to prevent prices of home produced goods from rising or falling. The condition for the point D to coincide with 0 is that

 And this is satisfied                        

 The conclusion is thus that if the expenditure-compensated elasticity of demand for imports in the country imposing the tariff is equal to the difference between unity and the sum of the two marginal pro- pensities to import, tariffs are neither inflationary nor deflationary. If the expenditure-compensated elasticity of demand is greater than that, tariffs are inflationary, and additional deflationary measures are required to prevent prices of home produced goods from rising. If the elasticity is less than the difference between unity and the sum of the marginal propensities to import, tariffs are deflationary; they tend to depress the prices of home produced goods. If no additional measures are taken in either of these two cases, tariffs are likely to lead to an improvement in the terms of trade in the first case, and to a deterioration in the terms of trade in the second case. 

The major features of recent tariff policy are as follows:

i) The focus has been to reduce multiplicity of duty rates and rationalisation of the rate structure.

ii) The scope of discretion hes been drastically cutailed ebollshing the power to grant ad-hoc duty exemptions.

iii) An Authority for Advance ruling has B&h set up for Excise and Customs. This will inject greater transparency and provide biding rules, This will also help Intending investors about their duty liability in advance.

iv) Custom tariff has been further reduced frdm 45% to 40%.

v) To bring out a more rationa! and simplified duty structure, there has been Seven major ad valorem rates of custonls duty.

vi) Import duty structure has been rationallsod hi project imports.

vii) Import duty on number of items used In IT sector htts been reduced and rationalised.

The structure of India’s customs tariff and fees system is complex and characterized by a lack of transparency in determining net effective rates of customs tariffs, excise duties, and other duties and charges.  The tariff structure of general application is composed of a basic customs duty, an “additional duty,” a “special additional duty,” and an education assessment (“cess”). 
After ratifying the WTO Agreement on Trade Facilitation (TFA) in April 2016, India established the National Committee on Trade Facilitation (NTFC) in August 2016. In July 2017, the NTFC debuted a roadmap for trade facilitation for India, and it will facilitate domestic co-ordination and implementation of TFA provisions. The United States and India held joint workshops covering best practices in trade facilitation in October 2016 and in September 2018. The workshops included both Indian and U.S. industry representatives and focused on implementing the TFA and customs reforms expeditiously to facilitate trade

India’s tariff regime is also characterized by pronounced disparities between WTO bound rates  and the most favored nation (MFN) applied rates charged at the border.  According to the latest WTO data, India’s average bound tariff rate is 48.5 percent, while its simple MFN average applied tariff is 13.8 percent (per the WTO latest 2017 data available).  Given this large disparity between bound and applied rates, U.S. exporters face tremendous uncertainty because India has considerable flexibility to change tariff rates at any time.  India’s average WTO-bound tariff for agricultural products is 113.5 percent.  Applied rates are also relatively high and on a trade-weighted basis, the average agricultural tariff is 32.8percent.  In addition, while India has bound all agricultural tariff lines in the WTO, over 30 percent of India’s non-agricultural tariffs remain unbound (i.e., there is no WTO ceiling on the rate).

Despite its goal of moving toward the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) tariff rates (approximately 5 percent on average), India has not systematically reduced the basic customs duty in the past six years.

India maintains high tariffs on a number of goods, and operates a number of complicated duty drawback, duty exemption, and duty remission schemes for imports. In addition, India maintains high basic customs duties, in some cases exceeding 20 percent, on drug formulations, including life-saving drugs and finished medicines listed on the World Health Organization’s list of essential medicines.

Many of India’s bound tariff rates on agricultural products are among the highest in the world, ranging from 100 percent to 300 percent.  While many Indian applied tariff rates are lower (averaging 32.7 percent on agricultural goods), they still present a significant barrier to trade in agricultural goods and processed foods.  The large gap between bound and applied tariff rates in the agriculture sector allows India to use tariff policy to make frequent adjustments to the level of protection provided to domestic producers, creating uncertainty for importers and exporters. For example, from November 2017 through March 2018, India raised import duties from zero percent to 60 percent on chickpeas, 50 percent on peas, 40 percent on large chickpeas, and 30 percent on lentils, severely impacting U.S. pulse exports to India.

The government of India took advantage of this tariff flexibility in the 2018 budget when it increased tariffs on 52 separate line items, including key U.S. exports in the agricultural, information and communications technology, and automobile parts sectors, with no warning or public consultation process. The increased tariffs also included agricultural products such as certain fruit juices (from 30 percent to 35 percent), certain edible vegetable oils (from 20 percent to 35 percent), and several other agricultural and non-agricultural items.

India further raised duties on several information and communications technology products, including cell phones, from 15 percent to 20 percent. Prior to the tariff increases, these products were imported duty- free. Duties on automotive components such as engine and transmission parts, brakes, suspensions, gear boxes, and airbags increased to 15 percent from 7.5 percent in the case of some products and from 10 percent in the case of others.    In addition, a new 10 percent tariff on imports, labeled the “social welfare surcharge,” was instituted without public notice or consultation. The “social welfare surcharge” is applied to the aggregate of duties, taxes and cesses assessed on imports.

On June 20, 2018, India announced an intention to adopt tariffs ranging from 10 to 50 percent on various products imported from the United States, in retaliation against the President’s decision to adjust U.S. imports of steel and aluminum articles under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, as amended. The new tariffs would apply to a range of agricultural and manufactured products, including products of steel. On February 26, 2019, India announced that it would further delay the implementation of these tariffs.
The United States has urged India to work to address the common problem of excess capacity in the global steel and aluminum sectors, rather than engage in unjustified retaliation designed to punish American workers and companies. The United States will take all necessary action to protect U.S. interests in the face of such retaliation.

In September 2018, India increased import duties again on 19 items in an attempt to narrow a widening current account deficit and relieve downward pressure on the rupee against other world currencies. Tariffs were increased on jet fuel and 18 other items deemed non-essential, including air-conditioners, refrigerators, and small washing machines as well as products such as footwear, tableware, suitcases, gold and silver jewelry, and semi-processed diamonds. 

In July 2017, India implemented the Good and Services Tax (GST) system to unify Indian states into a single market and improve the ease of doing business.  The GST is designed to simplify the movement of goods within India, but it also applies to imports.  Before the GST implementation, imports could be subject to an “additional duty,” a “special additional duty,” an education cess (tax), state level value added or sales taxes, the Central Sales Tax, and/or various other local taxes and charges.  The new GST system subsumed a number of these charges, including the “additional duty” and the “special additional duty,” that were previously levied on imports into the single GST.  The tariff (or “basic customs duty”) continues to be assessed on imports separately and has not been incorporated into the GST.

The new GST is made up of three main taxes: Central GST (CGST) is a fee collected by the central government for sales in all states; State GST (SGST) is a fee collected by each state for sales within a state; and Integrated GST (IGST) is a fee collected by the central government for sales between states. Under the new system, goods and services are taxed under four basic rates – five percent, 12 percent, 18 percent and 28 percent.  Some items, like vegetables and milk, have been exempted from the GST.  The price of most goods and services increased in the immediate aftermath of the tax, and as expected, economic growth slowed for several months following GST implementation.

Classification 

Government of India’s, Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC or the Board) functioning under the Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, deals with the formulation of policy concerning levy and collection of Customs.  The classification of the imports and exports of the goods are governed by the  Customs Act of 1962 and Customs Tariff act of 1975.  The act contains two schedules, and specifies the nomenclature that is based on the Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System as “HS” and also contains description of goods chargeable to export duty.  It is also called as the “Tariff Schedule” or the “Indian Customs Tariff”.

The Indian customs classification on tariff items follows the Harmonized Commodity Description and Coding System (Harmonized System or HS).  Customs uses six-digit HS codes, the Directorate-General of Commercial Intelligence and Statistics (DGCI&S) uses eight-digit codes for statistical purposes, and the Directorate General of Foreign Trade (DGFT) has broadly extended the eight-digit DGCI&S codes up to 10 digits.

It is also worth noting that the excise authorities use HS codes for classifying goods to levy excise duty (manufacturing taxes) on goods produced in India.

How Customs Duty is calculated
All goods imported into India are subject to duty.  There are several factors that go into calculating customs duty, including:
Basic Customs Duty (BCD) 
This duty is levied either as 1) a specific rate based on the unit of the item (weight, number, etc.), or more commonly, 2) ad-valorem, based on the assessable value of the item.  In some cases, a combination of the two is used.
Social Welfare Surcharge
Social Welfare Surcharge introduced in the Budget 2018 is levied in place of education Cess. The rate is 10% of the value of goods.
Integrated Goods and Services Tax (IGST)
GST is applicable on all imports into India in the form of levy of IGST. IGST is levied on the value of imported goods + any customs duty chargeable on the goods.
Value of imported Goods + Basic Customs Duty + Social Welfare Surcharge = Value on which IGST is calculated
Value x IGST Rate = IGST Payable
GST Compensation Cess
GST Compensation Cess is a levy which will be applicable in addition to the regular GST taxes. GST Cess is levied on supply of certain notified goods – mostly belonging to the luxury and demerit category.
Anti-dumping Duty 
This is levied on specified goods imported from specified countries, including the United States, to protect indigenous industry from injury
Safeguard Duty 
The Indian government may by notification impose a safeguard duty on articles after concluding that increased imported quantities and under current conditions will cause or threaten to cause serious injury to domestic industry.
Customs Handling Fee 
The Indian government assesses a 1% customs handling fee on all imports in addition to the applied customs duty.
Total Duty 
Therefore, for most goods, total duty payable = BCD +  Customs Handling Fee.

Tariff rates, excise duties, regulatory duties, and countervailing duties are revised in each annual budget in February, and are published in various sources, including BIGs Easy Reference Customs Tariff edition.  A copy of this book is kept at the USA Trade Information Center in Washington DC and more specific information from this guide is available to U.S. Companies by calling 800-USA-TRADE.

While the Indian government publishes customs tariffs rates there is no single official publication that has all information on tariffs and tax rates on imports.

Duty exemption plan 
The Duty Exemption Plan enables duty free import of inputs required for export production.  An advance license is issued under the duty exemption plan. 

As per the Foreign Trade Policy (2015-20) (as on 31 March 2019), the duty exemption/ Remission schemes enable the duty-free import of inputs for export production, including replenishment of inputs or duty remission.  The schemes consist of:
(a) Duty Exemption Schemes, that consists of: Advance Authorization (AA) (which will include Advance Authorization for Annual Requirement) and Duty-Free Import Authorization (DFIA). 
(b)Duty Remission Scheme, that consist Duty Drawback (DBK) Scheme, administered by Department of Revenue
(c)Scheme for Rebate on State and Central Taxes and Levies (RoSCTL), as notified by the Ministry of Textiles on 07.03.2019, and implemented by the DGFT.