Wintrack Inc in its public statement said that over a 45-day span Customs officers in Chennai had subjected the company to repeated “unjustified harassment” following prior exposure of what it identified as bribery demands. It said that these pressures had escalated to the extent of crippling its operations, forcing the decision to halt cross-border business from 1 October. Pai seized on the announcement, charging that the government had not delivered on promises of clean governance. “You have failed to stamp out systemic corruption in our ports. Please stop this,” he posted on social media.
Chennai Customs, however, issued a detailed rebuttal, rejecting Wintrack’s allegations as “false” and “a deliberate tactic” to pressure officials. It claimed that the disputed shipment was found to be misclassified, including undeclared USB charging cables with built-in batteries, and required compliance with Extended Producer Responsibility rules under the Battery Waste Management Rules, 2022. The department insisted that all actions taken followed procedure, and that the importer had neglected required documentation. In its counterclaim, the department accused Wintrack of propagating selective narratives and deleting posts once the rebuttal emerged.
Wintrack’s founder, Prawin Ganeshan, denied the contention that procedures were not followed. He claimed that he had personally met Group 5 Assistant Commissioner P. V. Sudhakaran to relay grievances over bribe demands. Ganeshan asserted he was forced to pay ₹2,10,000 to have a shipment released, and said he had documentation naming involved officers. He also argued that the item in question—a massager—could not be separated from its charging cable, which is integrated into the product. The company additionally challenged whether Customs would investigate officers who allegedly accepted bribes, and claimed that similar violations had been tolerated in thousands of other shipments via payments.
The dispute comes amid broader scrutiny of customs operations. In September, a major gold export fraud traced to Chennai Airport alleged that a network of Customs officials facilitated the export of counterfeit jewellery to claim duty refunds, defrauding state coffers by over ₹1,000 crore. That case has led to FIRs naming multiple officials and traders. Critics argue such episodes underscore structural vulnerabilities in oversight and accountability across border agencies.
Analysts say the Wintrack episode could raise investor confidence concerns. A strong grievance from a trading firm—especially when amplified by a high-profile financier—highlights risks foreign and domestic importers may perceive in dealing with port authorities. The government’s response—or lack thereof—could influence future narratives about India’s ease of doing trade business.