India’s Withdrawal of Transshipment Facility Impacts Bangladesh Exports

India ends transshipment facility for Bangladesh exports via land borders, citing congestion and trade disruptions. [Image via Bangla Tribune]

India has decided to discontinue the transshipment facility for Bangladesh’s export cargo to third countries—such as Bhutan, Nepal, and Myanmar—via its land borders.

In a recent notification issued by the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) on Tuesday, the Indian government announced the immediate cancellation of a previous circular dated June 29, 2020.

That circular had permitted export goods from Bangladesh to be transported to third countries through Indian Land Customs Stations (LCSs) to ports or airports, using containers or sealed trucks.

A statement from India’s Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) confirmed the withdrawal of the transshipment facility, citing the growing congestion at Indian airports and ports. “The transshipment facility extended to Bangladesh had over a period of time resulted in significant congestion at our airports and ports. Logistical delays and higher costs were hindering our own exports and creating backlogs. The facility, therefore, has been withdrawn with effect from April 8, 2025. To clarify, these measures do not impact Bangladesh exports to Nepal or Bhutan transiting through Indian territory.”

This policy reversal is likely to affect the flow of Bangladesh’s ready-made garment exports through Indian gateways, especially at Indira Gandhi International Airport in New Delhi, which handles a substantial volume of such shipments.

The suspension is expected to hinder Bangladesh’s trade logistics, particularly with neighboring nations like Bhutan, Nepal, and Myanmar, which depend heavily on Indian transport infrastructure for international commerce. The earlier arrangement had been beneficial in reducing both delivery time and shipping costs.

Also See: India, Cyber Espionage, and Political Influence: What Canada’s Report Unveils

The Apparel Export Promotion Council (AEPC) of India had been lobbying for the removal of this facility. Since India and Bangladesh are direct rivals in textile exports, eliminating the facility is seen as a step to ease congestion at Indian airports and support domestic exporters, according to AEPC Chairman Sudhir Sekhri.

Ajay Srivastava, founder of the New Delhi-based Global Trade Research Initiative (GTRI), warned that this decision could bring India’s WTO obligations into question. He highlighted that the WTO’s rules require member countries to guarantee free and uninterrupted transit of goods to and from landlocked nations.

According to Srivastava, Article V of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994 ensures such transit rights, prohibiting unnecessary restrictions, delays, or transit-related charges.

India’s apparel exports saw a 3.46% decline year-on-year in January, adding pressure on the sector. Currently, around 20–30 truckloads of Bangladeshi goods enter the air cargo terminal at Delhi’s international airport daily, contributing to overcrowding.

Sekhri also mentioned that disruptions in maritime routes—due to the Red Sea crisis and piracy threats—have prompted exporters to switch from sea to air, further inflating logistics expenses.

This news is sourced from Dhaka Tribune and is intended for informational purposes only.

News Desk

Your trusted source for insightful journalism. Stay informed with our compelling coverage of global affairs, business, technology, and more.

Recent

Centralized Power and the Core–Periphery Divide in Afghanistan

Centralized Power and the Core–Periphery Divide in Afghanistan

The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan’s return in 2021 brought rapid consolidation of power, but also the revival of a historical flaw. By concentrating authority in the hands of southern Pashtun elites, the Taliban have recreated the core–periphery divide that has destabilized every Afghan regime since the 19th century. This hyper-centralization, rooted in ethnic exclusivity and Kandahar dominance, risks a repeat of past collapses as non-Pashtun regions turn toward functional autonomy.

Read More »
Broken Promises: The Taliban’s Betrayal of Global Commitments

Broken Promises: The Taliban’s Betrayal of Global Commitments

Nearly three years after seizing power, the Taliban’s systematic violation of their international commitments under the 2020 Doha Accord has transformed Afghanistan into a sanctuary for terrorism, entrenched an autocratic regime, and institutionalized gender apartheid. Beyond moral failure, this deceit poses a grave threat to regional stability, international counterterrorism efforts, and the credibility of global diplomacy. Holding the regime accountable is now a strategic necessity, not a choice.

Read More »
Do You Remember 6/11/ 1947?: A Forgotten Jammu Genocide and the Continuing Erasure of Kashmiriyat

Do You Remember 6/11/ 1947?: A Forgotten Jammu Genocide and the Continuing Erasure of Kashmiriyat

On November 6, 1947, one of South Asia’s earliest genocides unfolded in Jammu, where hundreds of thousands of Muslims were massacred or forced to flee. Yet, unlike other global tragedies, this atrocity remains buried in silence. The Jammu Genocide not only reshaped the region’s demography but laid the foundation for India’s ongoing campaign of identity erasure in Kashmir. From demographic engineering to cultural censorship, the spirit of Kashmiriyat continues to face systematic annihilation.

Read More »
India’s Climate Policy after COP28: Net Zero 2070 — A Fair Promise or a Risky Postponement?

India’s Climate Policy after COP28: Net Zero 2070 — A Fair Promise or a Risky Postponement?

India’s Net Zero 2070 target reflects a delicate balance between development equity and climate urgency. While progress in renewables, green finance, and adaptation is visible, the absence of clear interim milestones risks turning ambition into delay. The real challenge lies in translating a distant horizon into measurable, near-term climate action before 2030.

Read More »
The Tehreek-e-Hijrat of 1920 and Its Parallels with Contemporary Refugee Politics

The Tehreek-e-Hijrat of 1920 and Its Parallels with Contemporary Refugee Politics

The Tehreek-e-Hijrat of 1920 saw thousands of Indian Muslims migrate to Afghanistan, only to be turned away when Kabul could no longer cope. A century later, Afghan officials criticise Pakistan’s refugee policies while ignoring their own historical refusal to host Muslim migrants. The parallel reveals not just irony, but the enduring challenge of compassion, capacity, and collective responsibility.

Read More »