India asks every patentee, and every licensee, to say periodically whether the patented invention is actually being used in the country. The answer goes on Form 27, it is public, and not filing it carries a penalty.
The 2024 Rules changed almost everything about how often and in what form. Most of what is still published about Form 27 describes the old annual regime and is now wrong. This guide describes the current one.
Quick reference
| Who files | Every patentee and every licensee, each separately |
| How often | Once for every period of three financial years |
| First period | Starts with the financial year after the year of grant |
| Due | Within six months of the period ending — 30 September |
| What it asks | Worked or not; if not, why; available to license? |
| Extension | Up to three months, then up to a further six — nine in all, on payment |
| Penalty for not filing | Up to ₹1 lakh, then ₹1,000 a day |
| Penalty for a false statement | 0.5% of turnover or ₹5 crore, whichever is less |
Who must file
The patentee, and every licensee — exclusive or non-exclusive — each files their own Form 27. A licensee’s filing does not discharge the patentee’s obligation, and the reverse is equally true.
Where one patentee holds several related patents — a family, or a parent and its divisionals — a single Form 27 may cover all of them. Unrelated patents need separate forms.
When: the three-year cycle
Until March 2024, Form 27 was an annual filing. It is now filed once for every period of three financial years, and the cycle works like this:
- The first period begins with the financial year immediately after the one in which the patent was granted.
- Each period runs for three financial years.
- The statement for a period is due within six months of that period ending — which, since financial years end on 31 March, means 30 September.
One form covers the whole three-year block. You do not file three annual statements together.
Where existing patents stand
The transition caused enough confusion that the Patent Office issued an FAQ. The position it set out:
| Patent granted | First three-year period | First statement due |
|---|---|---|
| On or before 31 March 2023 | FY 2023–24 to FY 2025–26 | 30 September 2026 |
| In FY 2023–24 | FY 2024–25 to FY 2026–27 | 30 September 2027 |
| In FY 2024–25 | FY 2025–26 to FY 2027–28 | 30 September 2028 |
A patent that expires during a period needs a final statement for the years up to expiry, due by the 30 September after the financial year in which it expired.
For most existing portfolios, then, 30 September 2026 is the date, and the statement covers three years of working.
What the form now asks
The 2024 form is short, and deliberately so. It asks:
- Whether the invention has been worked in India during the period — commercially, on any scale.
- If not, why not — from a set of reasons the form offers, such as the invention being under development or trials, awaiting regulatory approval, or the subject of licensing discussions.
- Whether the patent is available for licensing, and if so, contact details.
That is all. The revenue figures, quantities and values that earlier versions demanded are gone, and so is the obligation to explain how the invention was worked. The information is a yes-or-no with a reason, not an accounting exercise.
Because it is short, there is no good reason to file it late, and no plausible one for filing it wrongly.
What counts as “worked”
The form asks whether the invention was worked. Neither the form nor the Act defines the word, and the gap matters most to a patentee who supplies the Indian market but manufactures everywhere else.
Importing can count. Manufacture in India is not required in every case. Both the appellate tribunal and the Bombay High Court accepted as much in the litigation that followed India’s only granted compulsory licence.
It is not automatic. The Act’s general principles say a patent is not granted merely to let the patentee enjoy a monopoly on importing the article, and a compulsory licence may be sought where working the invention in India on a commercial scale is being prevented or hindered by importation. The Bombay High Court put the burden on the patentee: one relying on import should be able to show why manufacturing here is impracticable or prohibitive.
The form no longer asks. Until 2024 Form 27 wanted the revenue split between what was manufactured in India and what was imported, and older versions wanted quantities and the countries goods came from. All of that is gone. Nothing on the current form distinguishes the two.
So for filing purposes, a patentee who supplies India by import answers that the invention was worked. The distinction resurfaces only if someone applies for a compulsory licence — and that is the point at which the commercial reasoning needs to be on record: why import rather than manufacture, what the product costs here, and whether demand is being met.
Extensions
Two extensions are available, both on request on Form 4 and both on payment of a monthly fee:
- Up to three months, under the Form 27 rule itself.
- A further period of up to six months, under the Controller’s general power to extend time.
That is nine months in total, taking a 30 September deadline to the end of June. The monthly fees rise steeply for the second extension, and for larger applicants they run to tens of thousands of rupees a month.
There is no other route. The Patent Office has said in terms that a missed Form 27 cannot be condoned by petition for correction of an irregularity. Once the nine months are gone, the statement is simply late, and the penalty provisions apply.
The penalties
These changed in August 2024, when a swathe of patent offences were converted from criminal to civil.
Failing to file, or filing an incomplete statement: a penalty of up to ₹1 lakh, and if the failure continues after that, ₹1,000 for every further day.
Knowingly filing a false statement: a penalty of 0.5 per cent of the total turnover of the business, or ₹5 crore, whichever is less. This replaced a provision for imprisonment. The jail term has gone; the financial exposure, for a business of any size, is substantial.
Why it matters beyond the penalty
Form 27 is a public document, and it feeds directly into the compulsory licensing provisions. Three years after grant, any person may apply for a compulsory licence on the ground that the patented invention is not being worked in India, or that reasonable requirements of the public are not being met. A pattern of “not worked” statements — or, worse, no statements at all — is the first thing such an applicant will point to.
The statement is also the record a licensee, an investor or an acquirer will read when they look at the patent. Filing it accurately and on time is part of the patent’s value, not an administrative afterthought.
Frequently asked questions
How often must Form 27 be filed in India now? Once for every period of three financial years, starting with the financial year after the one in which the patent was granted. Before the 2024 amendment it was filed every year.
When is Form 27 due? Within six months of the three-year period ending, which means 30 September. For patents granted on or before 31 March 2023, the first statement under the new regime covers FY 2023–24 to FY 2025–26 and is due on 30 September 2026.
Does a licensee have to file Form 27 separately? Yes. Every patentee and every licensee, exclusive or non-exclusive, files their own statement. One party’s filing does not cover another’s obligation.
What does Form 27 ask for? Whether the invention was worked commercially in India during the period; if not, the reason, chosen from options the form provides; and whether the patent is available for licensing. Revenue and sales figures are no longer required.
Does importing the product into India count as working the patent? It can. Manufacture in India is not required in every case, and the current form does not distinguish import from local manufacture — so a patentee supplying India by import answers that the invention was worked. But the Act says a patent is not granted merely to give a monopoly on importation, and a patentee relying on import should be able to explain why manufacturing here is impracticable if a compulsory licence is ever sought.
Can the Form 27 deadline be extended? Yes, by up to three months on request, and then by up to a further six months under the Controller’s general power — nine months in all, each on payment of a monthly fee. Beyond that there is no condonation.
What is the penalty for not filing Form 27? Up to ₹1 lakh, plus ₹1,000 for every day the failure continues. A knowingly false statement attracts a penalty of 0.5 per cent of turnover or ₹5 crore, whichever is less. Both apply from August 2024, replacing the earlier criminal provisions.
Useful official resources
- IP India — patents — Form 27, Form 4 and the fee schedule
See our related notes on restoring a patent that has lapsed, compulsory licensing in India and disclosing your foreign applications on Form 3.
Several patents, several licensees and a 30 September deadline? Talk to us. The form is short; the penalty for missing it is not.