Speaking to ESPN Cricinfo, Singh said it was not the first time he had bowled the delivery, but it was the first time he had been called for a dead ball.
Shiva compared the actions to a switch hit for batsmen.
"I use different variations in one-dayers and T20s so I thought of doing the same because the Bengal batsmen were developing a partnership," Shiva said. "The umpires said dead ball, so I asked "why are you calling it a dead ball?"
"I delivered this 360-degree ball against Kerala in the Vijay Hazare Trophy as well, where it was fine. Batsman always go for the reverse-sweep or the switch hit against bowlers. But when bowlers do something like this it's deemed a dead ball."
Australian umpiring great Simon Taufel disagreed, saying "the intent of the reverse action is different".
The law says "Either umpire shall call and signal Dead ball when … there is an instance of a deliberate attempt to distract under either of Laws 41.4 (Deliberate attempt to distract striker) or 41.5 (Deliberate distraction, deception or obstruction of batsman). The ball shall not count as one of the over."
Former England skipper Michael Vaughan said the ball was great and encouraged more bowling innovation.
The Marylebone Cricket Club, who runs the international laws of the game, said in a blog on its website there is nothing in the laws that dictate what the bowler's run-up should look like.
"The law only states if an offence is made to distract the batsman, rather than the batter actually getting distracted. Another point made by the law is for the umpire to decide if he felt the action was done in order to distract the striker," the blog read.
"The law goes on to add that only if 360-degree twirl should be part of the bowler's run-up for every delivery, then can the umpire step in to deem if the action was done to distract the batsman."
There has been plenty of debate online after the unique action came to light.
