Case notes
Customs query case notes: what was asked and what worked
Short notes from our own Customs query work, with client and shipment details removed. Each one shows the query, what we checked, what we recommended and the limits of the conclusion. Written and reviewed by Shankar Jha, 27+ years in Customs and EXIM. First published 8 November 2026.
These are examples, not legal advice. Customs treatment depends on the exact goods, documents and rules in force at the time. For primary sources, see the Customs Tariff on the CBIC website.
Case 1: A long list of documents and registrations asked for on an air import
| The query | The Customs officer asked for: a pictorial catalogue and technical literature to justify the classification; earlier group-assessed Bills of Entry with remittances to test the value; LMPC and labels (or a justification if not applicable); and EPR details for e-waste, plastic packaging and battery waste. |
| What mattered | Whether the requirements the officer listed applied to the tariff head under which the goods were declared. Several of them did not. |
| What we did | We sent a written clarification explaining why LMPC, e-waste and battery-waste requirements were not applicable for that tariff head, instead of producing documents the law did not require. |
| Evidence used | IEC, GST and AD code details, commercial invoice, packing list, house and master airway bills and the other usual shipping documents. |
| Outcome | The cargo was cleared at Delhi Airport on these documents alone. |
| Limits | The result applied to this tariff head and this set of facts. A different product, or a change in the rules, could lead to a different answer. Always check the position again for each shipment. |
Case 2: Demand for COA, MSDS and a valid PTR
| The query | Customs demanded a Certificate of Analysis (COA), a Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) and a valid PTR before release. The importer was worried the shipment would be held up. |
| What mattered | Which of the three documents the importer could properly produce, and how to present the position for the others. |
| What we did | We reviewed the demand against the goods and the importer's records and suggested the format and wording of a reply letter. |
| Outcome | The reply was accepted and the shipment was cleared. |
| Limits | A reply that worked for one officer and one shipment is not a template for every case. The documents available, and the officer's concern, differ each time. |
What these cases show
- A query asks for many documents, but not every item may legally apply to your goods.
- A short reply that explains why a requirement is not applicable can be enough.
- Check each point of the query against the rule and the documents before replying.
Used an AI tool to draft your reply? Have it reviewed before you submit.
Multimodal Logistic Systems Pvt. Ltd., Pune, India. Written and reviewed by Shankar Jha, 8 November 2026. Rules and notifications change; check the position in force for each shipment.