Customs Holds in India: When Can Demurrage and Detention Be Waived?

Your container is on a customs hold at Nhava Sheva. The container freight station (CFS) is billing ground rent by the day, and the shipping line says its container detention clock keeps running. Indian customs regulations provide grounds to challenge both charges, but the protection depends on why customs held the goods, what the investigation found and which company issued the invoice.

On 24 September 2026, CESTAT Mumbai upheld the suspension of an NVOCC’s customs registration after it failed to honour a detention and demurrage waiver certificate covering two DRI-seized containers. The ruling in Aegon Shipping shows how a customs hold can become a regulatory enforcement issue for the carrier. It also raises a practical question for importers: when does the 60-day limit on container detention waivers apply, and when can a longer waiver be enforced?

This guide examines the two principal Indian regulations, the court decisions interpreting them, and the steps available when a carrier or CFS refuses to waive charges. US cargo operates under a different framework, covered in How to Contest Demurrage and Detention During a Customs Hold in the U.S.

Does a customs hold stop demurrage in India?

A customs hold does not automatically stop every demurrage or detention charge. Two regulations provide the principal protections, and they address different charges and circumstances.

Regulation 6(1)(l) of the Handling of Cargo in Customs Areas Regulations, 2009 (HCCAR) prohibits a Customs Cargo Service Provider from charging rent or demurrage on goods seized, detained or confiscated by customs, subject to other applicable law. The provision has no express 60-day limit.

Regulation 10(1)(l) of the Sea Cargo Manifest and Transhipment Regulations, 2018 (SCMTR) prohibits an authorised carrier from demanding container detention charges when customs detains loaded containers to verify entries under Section 46 or Section 50 of the Customs Act and those entries are found correct. Its proviso permits the carrier to demand detention charges after 60 days.

The regulations can overlap. A shipping line or NVOCC operating within a customs area may have obligations under HCCAR as well as SCMTR. The reason for the hold, the provider’s legal status and the outcome of customs proceedings all matter when determining which protection can be enforced.

Customs situation	Relevant protection	Charges and parties involved	Key limitation
Goods seized or formally detained by customs	HCCAR 2009, Reg. 6(1)(l)	Rent or demurrage charged by a Customs Cargo Service Provider, potentially including CFS operators and qualifying carriers or NVOCCs	No express 60-day cap, but the waiver depends on applicable law, the circumstances and the outcome of customs proceedings
Loaded containers held to verify Bill of Entry or shipping bill entries	SCMTR 2018, Reg. 10(1)(l)	Container detention charged by an authorised carrier	Entries must be found correct; charges may be demanded after 60 days under the proviso
Cargo remains uncleared without a qualifying customs detention	No automatic waiver under either provision merely because cargo remains uncleared	Applicable carrier and CFS charges	A refused delivery, pending re-export request or commercial delay does not itself establish waiver eligibility

These situations are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Check the customs records, the final adjudication and the legal status of each service provider before relying on a waiver.

There is a further qualification in HCCAR: Regulation 6(1)(l) begins with the words “subject to any other law for the time being in force.” Supreme Court decisions concerning port trusts and operators with independent statutory charging powers show why the legal basis for a custodian’s tariff matters. A waiver dispute involving a privately operated CFS may therefore differ from one involving a statutory port authority.

What is a detention certificate in Indian customs?

A detention certificate, often called a detention/demurrage waiver certificate, is a customs document identifying the period for which goods were held and recording the basis for a recommended waiver of charges. It may be addressed to a custodian, CFS, carrier or another relevant service provider.

The document is important evidence, but its enforceability depends on the applicable regulation and circumstances. A certificate issued during an unresolved investigation does not necessarily establish the importer’s final entitlement to a refund.

The most significant appellate guidance comes from K. Steamship Agencies Pvt. Ltd. v. Balaji Dekors, a consolidated Madras High Court Division Bench judgment delivered on 4 July 2024. The court considered numerous disputes involving customs detention, shipping lines, CFS operators and waiver certificates, including appeals arising from the earlier Sai Lakshmi Engineering, Isha Exim and G.K. International decisions.

The court held that HCCAR and SCMTR obligations can prevail over contractual charging terms. It also made the outcome of customs adjudication central to waiver eligibility. Where proceedings end in the importer’s favour without an adverse duty, fine or penalty finding of the kind addressed by the judgment, the statutory waiver can be enforced. Where the importer is found responsible for misdeclaration or other relevant customs violations, the entitlement may fail.

The judgment also addressed importers who paid charges while adjudication remained pending simply to secure their goods. Such payment does not necessarily extinguish a later refund claim. The Division Bench directed refunds in the cases before it where charges had been collected pending proceedings that ultimately concluded in the importer’s favour.

That distinction matters operationally. If a line refuses delivery unless charges are paid, keep the invoice, payment record, written objections and customs documents. Payment to secure release may still leave a claim to pursue after the investigation is resolved.

Other courts have placed limits on waiver claims. In Bhavik S. Thakkar v. Union of India (14 February 2023), the Delhi High Court refused to direct CONCOR to waive terminal service charges where the importer had been penalised following a customs misdeclaration. The presence of a customs certificate did not overcome the circumstances of that case.

These judgments should be read in their legal and factual contexts. A favourable decision about one CFS or carrier does not necessarily settle every dispute involving a different service provider, tariff regime or customs outcome.

What CESTAT decided in Aegon Shipping

Two containers of electrolytic tough pitch copper wire rod arrived at Nhava Sheva from Jebel Ali under a bill of lading dated November 2019. Aegon Shipping India Pvt Ltd was involved as an NVOCC. The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence investigated and seized the imported goods.

The dispute eventually reached the Bombay High Court. In related proceedings, the court issued directions on 22 January 2026 concerning clearance of the copper wire, payment conditions and issuance of a detention and demurrage waiver certificate. Customs subsequently issued a certificate dated 23 March 2026, followed by an addendum on 27 March, recommending waiver from the date of the hold through delivery.

Aegon declined to honour the waiver beyond 60 days, relying on the proviso to SCMTR Regulation 10(1)(l). The Commissioner of Customs suspended its SCMTR registration under Regulation 11. Aegon appealed, arguing that the dispute was commercial and that its registration category did not make it subject to the obligations asserted by customs.

On 24 September 2026, CESTAT Mumbai dismissed the appeal (Customs Appeal No. 86698 of 2026, Final Order No. A/86193/2026).

The Tribunal distinguished the 60-day SCMTR provision from HCCAR Regulation 6(1)(l). SCMTR addresses container detention during verification of customs declarations. HCCAR separately restricts rent and demurrage on goods seized or detained by customs. Because DRI had seized the goods, the Tribunal applied HCCAR and held that Aegon could not rely on SCMTR’s 60-day provision to disregard the waiver.

The Tribunal also relied on Jawaharlal Nehru Custom House Public Notice No. 169/2016, which addresses the HCCAR obligations of shipping lines, freight forwarders and NVOCCs handling goods within customs areas. It treated Aegon’s failure to comply with HCCAR as a breach of SCMTR Regulation 10(1)(m), requiring compliance with applicable customs laws and regulations.

The result was a substantial regulatory consequence. The Tribunal upheld the suspension of Aegon’s registration. JNCH Public Notice No. 96/2026 had specified restrictions on Aegon’s operations as an Authorised Sea Agent within the JNCH jurisdiction, including restrictions on new operations and statutory filings there.

For importers, the significance is the enforcement route. Where a qualifying carrier or NVOCC refuses a legally enforceable customs waiver, the dispute may engage its regulatory obligations as well as its commercial terms. A documented complaint to the jurisdictional Commissioner of Customs can therefore be more consequential than an ordinary billing dispute, although suspension or other regulatory action remains subject to the applicable legal process.

The case also involved specific directions from the Bombay High Court, including conditions concerning customs duties and a redemption-fine deposit. The Tribunal’s ruling should not be read as granting an unconditional waiver for every DRI seizure or every importer under investigation.

Does the 60-day SCMTR limit still apply?

Yes. Regulation 10(1)(l) expressly allows an authorised carrier to demand container detention charges after 60 days where the regulation governs the hold. The period is counted from customs detention, as reiterated by JNCH in Public Notice No. 79/2026.

CESTAT Ahmedabad applied the proviso in ASR India Pvt Ltd v. Commissioner of Customs, Mundra (Customs Appeal No. 10401 of 2025, order dated 10 June 2025).

The dispute involved four import containers held by the Special Intelligence and Investigation Branch (SIIB) for examination. Three were held for 14 days and one for 26 days. Following the no-objection certificate, additional time elapsed before permission was granted to transfer the goods.

Customs had directed waiver until clearance. The Tribunal found that direction improper under SCMTR and confirmed that the carrier could demand detention charges after the 60-day period. It set aside the registration action against ASR India, while criticising the carrier’s inconsistent responses to customs correspondence.

ASR India and Aegon Shipping illustrate different legal routes. The former concerned the limits of SCMTR during an examination-related hold. The latter concerned seized goods, additional HCCAR obligations and a waiver issued following Bombay High Court directions.

The 2024 Madras High Court Division Bench judgment adds another qualification: it recognised the SCMTR proviso but also held that HCCAR protection could remain relevant beyond the SCMTR period in qualifying circumstances. The legal position therefore cannot be reduced to an unconditional right to charge from day 61 or an unconditional right to waiver whenever goods are seized.

For planning purposes: treat day 60 as a potential cost boundary on an SCMTR examination hold. If the carrier resumes billing, determine whether HCCAR or another applicable legal basis provides further protection before accepting or disputing the invoice.

At Nhava Sheva, customs has a specific procedure for waiver certificates

Jawaharlal Nehru Custom House issued Public Notice No. 79/2026 on 3 July 2026 to standardise detention/demurrage waiver documentation and encourage earlier use of Section 49 storage arrangements.

Under that notice, a waiver certificate must be issued by the concerned Assistant or Deputy Commissioner, or an officer specifically authorised for the purpose, after verification of the relevant facts and records.

The certificate should identify:

The period attributable to customs detention, hold or regulatory process, for which waiver is recommended.
Brief reasons for the detention or hold, wherever possible.
The outcome or status of examination, investigation, testing, verification or Participating Government Agency (PGA) clearance, wherever relevant.
The DIN or e-Office reference number.

The notice also asks customs officers and relevant service providers to maintain records and facilitate compliance with legally admissible waivers. It expressly states, however, that it does not create an automatic, vested or enforceable right to a waiver.

The practical value of the procedure is documentary. A certificate with a clear start date, end date, reason and reference number is easier to reconcile against a CFS invoice or carrier detention statement. If customs has not resolved the investigation, ask what can be documented immediately and what must await the outcome before a waiver certificate can properly be issued.

Section 49: a way to reduce charges while customs clearance is pending

A waiver resolves who may be entitled to recover charges for a past period. Importers also need a way to limit additional charges while the goods remain uncleared.

Section 49 of the Customs Act, 1962 allows eligible imported goods to be stored in a public or private warehouse pending clearance, with permission from the proper officer. The arrangement may reduce prolonged occupation of port or CFS space and, where de-stuffing and container return are authorised and feasible, help limit further container-related charges.

JNCH Public Notice No. 79/2026 addresses a recurring problem: importers do not always learn about the Section 49 facility until substantial storage charges have accumulated.

For qualifying customs or statutory delays, the notice directs the concerned Assistant or Deputy Commissioner to inform the importer or customs broker about the facility without delay, preferably within one working day. It also requires a CFS or custodian to send a reminder if goods remain uncleared beyond specified periods without a Section 49 application.

Complete applications should ordinarily be considered within three working days, although consultation with investigating or other statutory authorities can extend the process. Permission remains conditional on legal and operational requirements.

For an importer facing a lengthy examination or investigation, the questions to put to the broker and customs officer are whether the cargo qualifies for Section 49 storage, where it could be stored, whether the container can be emptied and returned, and what handling and warehousing costs that would introduce.

Section 49 does not itself cancel accumulated demurrage or guarantee that a detained container can be released. JNCH also makes clear that the procedure does not suspend the separate statutory process for unclaimed or uncleared goods under Section 48.

The waiver covers a period, so your dates decide the dispute

Every waiver dispute eventually comes down to dates. Customs may recognise one period of detention, while the CFS and shipping line calculate charges from different milestones.

The CFS generally works from its published tariff and applicable free-time provisions. The line’s container detention follows its tariff and bill-of-lading arrangements. The statutory waiver period is linked to the qualifying customs action and the relevant certificate, which may cover only part of the time for which a commercial invoice has been issued.

For each affected container, maintain a timestamped record of:

Discharge from the vessel.
In-gate at the CFS or ICD.
Start of the customs hold or seizure, supported by written customs records.
Examination, testing, NOC and other relevant regulatory milestones.
Customs release or out-of-charge, where applicable.
Gate-out for delivery.
Empty-container return to the carrier’s designated depot.

Keep a separate record of the waiver certificate’s start and end dates, the issuing officer, the reference number and the charge categories being disputed. A certificate covering customs detention from one date to another does not automatically invalidate charges for periods outside that window.

Most teams reconstruct these events after the invoice arrives, using carrier portals, CFS statements and the customs broker’s correspondence. The checks in Demurrage Billing Errors: How to Check Free Time, Gate-Out and Availability apply here, with the additional requirement to reconcile charges against the documented customs hold and waiver period.

If your team is piecing together discharge, gate-out and empty-return dates after the invoice lands, see how ops teams keep a timestamped milestone record for every container across carriers.

Is there a waiver if the container is just uncleared?

There is no automatic statutory waiver simply because cargo remains at a terminal while the importer, exporter or carrier decides what to do with it.

In Modern Line-Export v. Assistant Commissioner of Customs, an Indian buyer had failed to take delivery of goods at Chennai, and the exporter sought permission to re-export them. Earlier proceedings in June 2024 concerned reconsideration of the re-export request. In July 2025, the Madras High Court addressed a separate challenge to customs’ refusal to issue a demurrage waiver certificate.

The court dismissed the waiver petition because customs had not issued a seizure, detention or confiscation order concerning the goods. The commercial problem and the pending re-export process did not establish the statutory basis for the requested waiver.

The decision shows why an unresolved shipment should not automatically be described as being under a customs detention. If a qualifying customs action has actually occurred, obtain written evidence of it. If the problem is instead refused delivery, missing commercial instructions or an uncleared shipment without a qualifying hold, focus on the available clearance, re-export, storage and commercial negotiation options.

Frequently asked questions

Who issues a detention/demurrage waiver certificate in India? The competent customs authority. Under JNCH Public Notice No. 79/2026, the concerned Assistant or Deputy Commissioner, or a specifically authorised officer, issues the certificate after verifying the facts and records. The customs broker should establish which officer handles the request and which service providers need the certificate.
Can a shipping line charge container detention after 60 days of a customs hold? SCMTR Regulation 10(1)(l) permits charges after 60 days in qualifying verification cases. However, separate HCCAR obligations or case-specific court directions may affect the result. CESTAT applied those additional obligations in Aegon Shipping.
Does a waiver apply if customs finds a misdeclaration? Waiver eligibility can be lost where the importer is found responsible for misdeclaration or another relevant violation. The 2024 Madras High Court Division Bench judgment and the Delhi High Court’s Bhavik S. Thakkar decision address these limits.
Can charges already paid be refunded? Potentially. The 2024 Madras High Court Division Bench held that payment made while customs adjudication was pending did not necessarily waive the importer’s statutory rights. Refund eligibility depends on the eventual outcome and applicable law.
What if the CFS or carrier refuses to honour the certificate? Submit a documented objection identifying the relevant regulation, customs order, certificate period and disputed invoice lines. Where statutory obligations appear to have been breached, seek intervention from the jurisdictional Commissioner of Customs. Appropriate court proceedings may also be available.

Checklist: a container under customs hold in India

Establish the status in writing. Obtain the seizure memo, detention order, examination instruction or other customs correspondence identifying why clearance is blocked. Confirm whether there is a qualifying customs action rather than only an uncleared commercial shipment.
Identify each charge separately. Determine which amounts are billed by the CFS or custodian and which are billed by the carrier or NVOCC. Check HCCAR and SCMTR applicability for each provider.
Ask about Section 49 immediately. If clearance may be delayed, ask the customs broker whether storage under Section 49 could be authorised and whether it would permit de-stuffing and container return.
Document and request the waiver. Ask the competent customs officer about eligibility and certificate requirements. Where adjudication is pending, preserve the records necessary for a later determination.
Check the certificate. Confirm the period covered, reasons, status of customs proceedings and DIN or e-Office reference. Reconcile those details against the invoices.
Track the 60-day boundary. Where SCMTR Regulation 10(1)(l) governs, calculate the 60-day period from customs detention and review potential charges after its expiry. Check whether another applicable protection changes the position.
Maintain the full event timeline. Keep discharge, CFS arrival, hold, examination, NOC, release, gate-out and empty-return records. Preserve all correspondence with customs and service providers.
Escalate a refusal with evidence. Send a written dispute to the relevant provider and, where statutory non-compliance is alleged, the jurisdictional Commissioner. Seek specialist legal advice before deciding whether to pay under protest, pursue a refund or seek court relief.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

New Report: The Future of SCM, and Why Visibility Alone Is No Longer Enough

[TRADLINX Report] 2026 Shipping Market Outlook: Falling Rates, Rising Risks