This article comments on a recent study by Mahmood et al. (2024) on the lower Cambrian strata across the NW Himalaya. While providing a detail sequence stratigraphic framework, the authors fail to adequately considered recent developments in the Cambrian chronostratigraphic framework of the Himalaya and misinterpreted the age of rock successions, which currently range from late Cryogenian to middle Cambrian, as "Lower Cambrian" (ca. 538-512 Ma). This stratigraphic discrepancy introduced considerable confusion, disrupting the recently revised and established late Neoproterozoic to early Cambrian stratigraphic framework across the Himalaya. Consequently, this necessitates a reevaluation of their inferred depositional history and sequence stratigraphic interpretation, as these misinterpretations directly impact the timing, duration, and correlation of depositional events and sea-level changes they described. Present comments seek to address key stratigraphic uncertainties identified in the study by Mahmood et al. and offer clarity to the conflicting interpretations based on more appropriate references related to the chronostratigraphic aspects of the commented paper. This effort not only contextualized rock units being discussed within their established stratigraphic context but also facilitated future research on more precise correlation and subdivision of the late Neoproterozoic-early Cambrian strata at both regional and global scales.