Back Next

judgement

The court upheld the confiscation of counterfeit goods and mis-declared goods under the Customs Act, while also addressing the valuation of goods and the imposition of penalties.

2024-08-23

Subject: Customs Law - Intellectual Property Rights

The court upheld the confiscation of counterfeit goods and mis-declared goods under the Customs Act, while also addressing the valuation of goods and the imposition of penalties.

BY Supreme Today News Desk,

Add Supreme Today News Desk on Google

Supreme Today News Desk

Court Upholds Confiscation of Counterfeit Goods in Landmark Customs Case

Background

In a significant ruling, the court addressed a case involving Sh. Pankaj Gupta , the proprietor of M/s Daya Enterprises, who faced allegations of importing counterfeit and mis-declared goods. The goods were imported from M/s Pride International Company Ltd., China, and were found to contain various international brand names, leading to suspicions of intellectual property rights violations.

Arguments

The appellant, Sh. Pankaj Gupta , argued that the goods in question were mis-declared and that he had ordered unbranded items, claiming that the branded goods were sent by mistake. He contended that the customs authorities did not follow proper procedures and that the right holders had not participated in the investigation. Conversely, the customs department maintained that the goods were indeed counterfeit and that Gupta had knowingly mis-declared the values and descriptions in the Bill of Entry.

Court's Analysis and Reasoning

The court analyzed the evidence presented, noting that Gupta had abandoned the counterfeit goods and admitted to mis-declaring the nature of the imported items. The court found that the customs authorities had reasonable grounds to reject the declared transaction value under Rule 12 of the Customs Valuation Rules, as the actual goods differed significantly from those declared. The court upheld the confiscation of the counterfeit goods and the imposition of penalties, while also addressing the valuation of the mis-declared goods.

Decision

The court upheld the absolute confiscation of the counterfeit goods and confirmed the confiscation of mis-declared goods, albeit with a reduction in the redemption fine. The penalty imposed on Gupta was also reduced, reflecting the court's recognition of the circumstances surrounding the case. This ruling reinforces the importance of accurate declarations in customs and the enforcement of intellectual property rights.

#CustomsLaw #CounterfeitGoods #IntellectualProperty #CustomsExcise&ServiceTaxAppellateTribunal

Case Title: DAYA ENTERPRISES vs NEW DELHI(ICD TKD) - 2024 Supreme(Online)(CESTAT) 104

Breaking News

View All

The court upheld the confiscation of counterfeit goods and mis-declared goods under the Customs Act, while also addressing the valuation of goods and the imposition of penalties.

Supreme Today News Desk

Court Upholds Confiscation of Counterfeit Goods in Landmark Customs Case

Background

Arguments

Court's Analysis and Reasoning

Decision

Breaking News

Related Judgments

M/S.WALCHAND NAGAR INDUSTRIES vs THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS - 2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 71649

Baig Mizra Faheed, Hyderabad VS Joint Secretary To The Govt. Of India - 2024 Supreme(Telangana) 662

Commissioner Of Customs (Imports), Mumbai VS Ganpati Overseas Through Its Proprietor Shri Yashpal Sharma - 2023 Supreme(SC) 1019

COMMNR. OF CUSTOMS, LUCKNOW vs G.P. JAISWAL .

GYANGURU ENTERPRISES vs -COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (II) CHENNAI - 2026 Supreme(Online)(CESTAT) 170

Hughes Network Systems India Ltd. VS Commissioner of Customs (Import & General) New Delhi - 2024 Supreme(Del) 130

Shri Tukaram Rao Devraja Prop vs CC AIR CARGO Ch - VII - 2026 Supreme(Online)(CESTAT) 327

Commissioner of Customs, Patna Veer Chand Patel Path VS Krishna Bahadur Chhetri - 2022 Supreme(Pat) 651

A. M. Ahamed VS Commissioner of Customs, Custom House, New Harbour Estate, Tuticorin - 2022 Supreme(Mad) 3889

RAMA KRISHNA SALES PVT. LTD. vs C.C. NEW DELHI (IMPORT & GENERAL) - 2026 Supreme(Online)(CESTAT) 183