The United States has rejected India’s notice to the World Trade Organization proposing retaliatory tariffs after Washington increased the import duties on aluminium and steel to 25%, The Indian Express reported on Tuesday.

The US argued that it had imposed the tariffs on the grounds of national security and claimed there were procedural errors in India’s case.

In a note sent to the World Trade Organization on May 23, the US stated that India had wrongly treated the tariffs on aluminium and steel as safeguard measures, the newspaper reported. Washington said that it had imposed the levies under section 232 of the US law, which allows such measures if imports are considered a threat to national security.

In response to the challenge made by India, the US told the World Trade Organization that it “will not discuss the section 232 tariffs under the Agreement on Safeguards as we do not view the tariffs as a safeguard measure”, reported The Indian Express.

The US also claimed that India had committed procedural errors by not acknowledging Washington’s offer to discuss the tariffs in a communication dated April 16. “Accordingly, India has not complied with the obligations under the Agreement on Safeguards, the agreement that it mistakenly contends applies to the tariffs in question,” the newspaper quoted the US as having said.

On May 9, India notified the World Trade Organization that it may impose retaliatory tariffs on the US after Washington increased the import duties on aluminium and steel to 25%.

The Donald Trump administration had first imposed higher tariffs on aluminium and steel imports in 2018. This was modified in February to impose duties of 25% on imports of the two metals. The measures took effect in March. Washington also removed country-specific and product-specific exemptions that several countries had managed to negotiate.

On Friday, US President Donald Trump announced that his administration will double the tariffs on steel to 50%.

While Washington has claimed that the increased tariffs had been taken in the interest of national security and were not safeguard measures, New Delhi argued that the actions were safeguard measures.

“The measures have not been notified by the United States to the WTO, but are, in essence, safeguard measures,” The Hindu had quoted India as having communicated to the international organisation in May. “India maintains that the measures taken by the United States are not consistent with the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade 1994 and the Agreement on Safeguards.”

India argued that it had the right to impose retaliatory tariffs as the US had not held consultations, as are mandatory under the Agreement on Safeguards.

India’s levies were to take effect a month from the date it notified the World Trade Organization. New Delhi said that the measures it was proposing would be in the form of suspending concessions on select products from the US. This effectively meant an increase in tariffs on the products.

The Indian reciprocal tariffs could be imposed on imports worth $7.6 billion from the United States, which would lead to a duty collection of $1.9 billion, The Hindu had quoted the communication as saying.

This came amid India and the US negotiating a bilateral trade deal.