Why Indian Automakers Want a Simpler PLI Compliance Process

The Society of Indian Automobile Manufacturers (SIAM) urged the Ministry of Heavy Industries (MHI) to simplify the certification process. In a letter dated May 15, 2025, SIAM proposed allowing manufacturers to apply for Advanced Automotive Technology (AAT) certification using self-certified DVA declarations. The AAT certificate is issued by government-authorised testing agencies such as ARAI. Automakers can claim incentives only after the subsequent Technical Compliance Audit (TCA) and the claims process. The TCA is a detailed audit to verify DVA claims with supplier documents, bills of materials, and statutory auditor certificates. SIAM stated that self-certification at the application stage would improve ease of doing business without weakening oversight because the TCA would remain mandatory.

The MHI did not accept the self-certification suggestion. The ministry said the existing Standard Operating Procedure had functioned successfully for three years. At the same time, it asked testing agencies and the Project Management Agency (PMA), currently IFCI Ltd, to examine whether the certification process could be simplified within the existing framework.

Another dispute emerged over export certification. On December 22, 2025, testing agencies issued a clarification requiring manufacturers to obtain separate DVA certificates for export variants. Automakers argued that the requirement was not part of the original SOP and substantially increased paperwork. Every fresh DVA certification required companies to collect supplier declarations and supporting documents again from across the value chain. The issue reached the MHI during a review meeting on April 23, 2026. When manufacturers objected, ministry officials asked testing agencies whether the industry had been consulted before the clarification was issued. ARAI acknowledged that no stakeholder consultation had taken place. The ministry also observed that the auto PLI scheme itself does not distinguish between vehicles sold domestically and those exported. Officials advised manufacturers to submit representations directly or through SIAM and asked testing agencies to review the clarification. ARAI later relaxed the requirement, reducing documentation for many export models.

Taken together, these episodes reveal a recurring pattern. Whether it was the forex methodology, self-certification of DVA, export certification, or documentation requirements, manufacturers repeatedly stated that compliance changes often increased paperwork instead of reducing it. In more than one case, the government's approach was revised after industry objections. The auto PLI scheme has encouraged investment in advanced automotive technologies and supported localisation. Discussions between industry, testing agencies, and the MHI are increasingly shifting from the size of incentives to the process of accessing them.

Manufacturers are no longer seeking changes to the scheme's core objective. Their primary demand, as stated in multiple representations, is for a certification and compliance framework that is faster and more predictable.