Bribes, Tweets, and Shutdown: The Importer Who Took on Chennai Customs

Wintrack Inc has accused Chennai Customs of demanding repeated bribes. But the story dates back to January 2025.

Talking to The Quint, Prawin Ganeshan maintained that corruption was at the root of the delays.

(Photo: Vibhushita Singh/The Quint)

The Finance Ministry’s official social media handle on Thursday, 2 October issued a statement reaffirming the government’s commitment to transparency and ease of doing business. The ministry highlighted recent initiatives such as the adoption of the Taxpayer Charter, the introduction of faceless customs procedures, and the establishment of appellate bodies for dispute resolution.

The statement came in response to allegations made on X by Wintrack Inc, a Tamil Nadu-based import firm, which accused Chennai Customs of systemic corruption.

Wintrack provides sourcing, importing, and shipping services, primarily from China and Thailand, to India. The company acts as an intermediary for businesses and individuals in India who purchase products from foreign e-commerce sites.

“The matter is being dealt with utmost seriousness, and the Government is committed to taking appropriate and expeditious action in accordance with the law,” the ministry tweeted. It added that the Department of Revenue had been instructed to undertake a fair and fact-based inquiry, with a senior officer deputed to conduct hearings, examine officials, and scrutinise all relevant documentary evidence.

The ministry’s tweet has drawn widespread attention from import-export firms across India.

How the Controversy Started

The issue first surfaced on X when Wintrack accused Chennai Customs of demanding repeated bribes, forcing the company to shut down its India operations. However, the story dates back to January 2025.

Speaking to The Quint, the company's founder Prawin Ganeshan explained that his firm began regular shipments in January. The first shipment, worth around $1,300, allegedly led to a bribe demand of Rs 8 lakh from an officer in Delhi during the faceless assessment procedure.

When the demand was not reduced, Ganeshan purportedly recorded a call with the officer's agent and exposed it on X. Following this, the shipment was released, the matter was resolved, and Ganeshan even publicly thanked Chennai Customs before deleting the tweet.

Wintrack's services include receiving international orders, managing overseas shipping, clearing customs, paying duties and taxes, and delivering goods to customers in India. Clients are given an “all-inclusive quote” covering all charges to avoid hidden fees.

The company also promotes “no minimum order quantity,” factory visits, trips to the China Import and Export Fair, and sourcing guidance for Indian importers seeking to build supply chains in China. So far, the firm has done 25 shipments, mostly body massagers.

From February to May 2025, shipments continued without major hurdles. But in May, three consignments were held up simultaneously.

According to Ganeshan, officers from the Special Intelligence and Investigation Branch (SIB) and Shed sections demanded Rs 5 lakh. After negotiations, he paid Rs 3 lakh to the SIB officials, but refused to pay the Shed officials despite pressure. At that time, he was also admitted to a hospital. Despite paying to the SIB officials, his shipments were released only after a week’s delay.

Customs Officials Present a Different Story

Chennai Customs denied these allegations and issued its own explanation on X. Officials stated that an import consignment presented on 26 June consisted of electronic equipment, for which the Customs House Agent was asked to produce an Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) certificate as mandated by the Central Pollution Control Board.

They added that during examination, discrepancies were noticed, including quantities higher than declared and the absence of a battery waste EPR certificate. Queries were raised in May 2025 regarding excess quantity and the EPR requirement.

A senior customs officer, speaking anonymously, told The Quint that Ganeshan had a pattern of raising corruption allegations whenever his shipments came under scrutiny. Referring to the May incident, the officer said that Ganeshan admitted to mis-declaration of quantity—and later submitted his MSME registration to claim EPR exemption on 24 May. 

A fine and penalty were imposed, and after payment of the differential duty, fine, and penalty, the out-of-charge clearance was granted.

Ganeshan’s Version of Events

Ganeshan admitted to the mis-declaration to The Quint, but maintained that corruption was at the root of the delays. While in China in June, he learned that one of his client's shipments was being held because bribes had not been paid to a Shed officer.

The officer allegedly demanded Rs 1.5 lakh. The demand was later reduced to Rs 50,000, but Ganeshan refused to pay, citing losses already suffered due to bribes and demurrage in May. Around this time, he posted proof of the bribe demands on X, where his allegations remains live.

According to him, after June every shipment faced unusual scrutiny.

“Officers were deliberately trying to find faults to stop our shipments.”

Prawin Ganeshan

By August, he claimed the harassment intensified. One shipment was examined twice, and during the second check, his staff approached the Deputy Commissioner. Ganeshan said he had already complained to the Principal Commissioner and the Joint Commissioner, alleging that the harassment was a retaliation for his social media exposé. The shipment was moved to bond storage, and despite multiple follow-ups, new demands were allegedly raised each time.

Out of desperation, Ganeshan said he started a new company in his wife’s name and imported a shipment worth $7,000 in September. Even then, a bribe of Rs 3 lakh was demanded, and Rs 2.1 lakh was eventually paid.

“This is when I decided I would no longer do business in India involving imports or exports. I already have businesses in Thailand, China, and Nepal, so I will not be completely affected. But I wanted to expose this corruption,” he told The Quint.

"I also know they are planning revenge through raids, harassment, or even targeting my family. I am prepared for anything."

The Compliance Debate

Ganeshan argued that customs officials deliberately raised unnecessary objections. For instance, one disputed shipment involved portable body massagers. Officers questioned why charging cables were not declared separately.

“Any electronic massager comes with a charging cable in the same package. Factories don’t sell them separately. This was raised for the first time after 25 successful shipments.”

Prawin Ganeshan

He added that EPR certificate and LMPC compliance (a mandatory requirement in India for the import, manufacture, or sale of pre-packaged commodities) were suddenly enforced manually, causing further delays and demurrage charges.

Other importers supported Ganeshan's claims. Exporter Amit Jindal said that importers of rechargeable battery products from China rarely have EPR certificates—and that officers often use these rules selectively to block shipments.

On being asked about importing sex toys, which are banned in India, Ganeshan said the vibrators he imported were marketed as multipurpose massagers. He argued that obscenity laws only restrict products that directly resemble male or female organs. He pointed out that other companies had previously imported and sold similar products.

When questioned why he chose social media instead of official grievance mechanisms, Ganeshan said corruption was rampant across all levels of the customs department. He claimed that he had already approached the commissioners, but was cornered.

“Though there are a few upright officers, the system itself is corrupt. After I exposed it, my social media timeline was flooded with support from unknown people who had also suffered. They too shared their experiences,” he said.

The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs also responded on social media, stating:

“Regarding the allegations of corruption against Chennai Customs raised by @PrawinGaneshan on Twitter, it is clarified that the issue pertains to mis-declaration and misclassification by the importer. Chennai Customs has already responded on this aspect. Subsequently, the importer has shared certain names and screenshots on Twitter. The matter has been noted, and all facts will be duly examined. Necessary action, as warranted under the law, will be taken.”

Chennai Customs further described Ganeshan's allegations as “false,” “calculated,” and “a deliberate tactic to pressure officials.” They asserted that all procedures, hearings, fines, and demurrage mitigations were carried out strictly according to law.

The Faceless Assessment System and Its Gaps

An officer on the request of anonymity agreed to speak on the issue, stating that the faceless assessment method was introduced to make the clearance process more transparent, efficient, and less prone to corruption or delays.

"Customs clearance was traditionally a system where brokers had personal rapport with officers, which often helped in resolving small issues quickly. With faceless assessment, this informal but effective channel is gone. Everything is rigid and online but corruption is still prevailing," he said. 

When asked how, the officer explained, "Faceless system mainly covers assessment of bills of entry. A bill of entry filed in Chennai may be assessed by an officer sitting in Delhi, Mumbai, or Kolkata. This rotation prevents officers from forming local nexus with importers or clearing agents, but goods still need to be examined physically at the port by local officers."

"This stage is where corruption is still rampant... importers may be pressured to pay 'speed money' to avoid unnecessary delays, excessive examinations, or harassment. Officers sometimes raise frivolous or repetitive queries in the faceless system."

He further stated that the importers, desperate to clear consignments (to avoid demurrage or warehouse charges), may approach local officials or intermediaries to "fix" the problem unofficially.

"Even though the assessment is faceless, 'consultants' or clearing agents claim to have 'contacts' in the customs system who can speed up approvals or ensure favourable valuation," he said.

Many importers believe that without paying extra, their goods may face prolonged checks. Customs officers still have significant discretion in deciding whether an item is under-invoiced, wrongly classified, or eligible for exemptions. Since penalties are high, some importers choose to settle matters informally instead of entering into a legal dispute. After online clearance, goods must still physically leave the port.

At this final stage, corruption is often reported as “handling charges” or unofficial payments demanded by lower staff for smooth exit.

"Big importers with resources can manage paperwork and legal hassles. But smaller traders struggle with the technicalities, especially when unexpected queries hold up their goods, leading to demurrage and warehousing charges," he added.

As the controversy erupted, highly placed sources in the Finance Ministry confirmed to The Quint that Ganeshan has been summoned for an inquiry at the Chennai Customs House on 4 October. The inquiry will record statements from both sides, examine documentary evidence, and determine the next steps in the case.

(This is a developing story. It will be updated as more details emerge.)

(Vinodh Arulappan is an independent journalist with over 15 years of experience covering Tamil Nadu politics, socio-culture issues, courts, and crime in newspapers, television, and digital platforms.)