The Delhi Bench of Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) ruled that different branded, unbranded shoes alleged to be violative of IPR infringement to be absolutely confiscated as being prohibited goods under Customs Act.
The appellant, M/s Sheikh & Mahajan LLP filed Bill of Entry No. 4927337 dated 24.01.2018 through its Custom House Agent2 M/s Ananya Exim. Receiving information about mis-declaration of the goods in terms of quantity and value in this consignment, the goods were examined and then seized by the Customs officers on 7.2.2018. The Panchnama states that “as the goods were found to be mis- declared in terms of quantity and value, imported goods were seized under Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962” vide seizure Memo dated 7.2.2018 on reasonable belief the same were liable for confiscation under provisions of the Customs Act, 1962. The consignment was handed over to the Central Warehousing Corporation Patparganj which was the custodian of the imported goods. On 12.2.2018, the appellant requested that the goods may be warehoused which was permitted by the Department and thereafter re-examined in detail.
The confiscation of goods cleared on higher assessed value (upon which the duty has been paid by the appellant at enhanced rate, as the goods would have been destroyed and decayed, which is the case with the balance goods which are absolutely confiscated by the learned Original Authority, as per the inspection done by the appellant of the goods at Warehouse, where the goods have been warehoused pending clearance) is illegal, arbitrary, contrary to the provisions of section 111(d) & (m) of the Customs Act, 1962.
The issue raised was Were the goods which were confiscated absolutely prohibited goods under Section 11 of the Customs Act read with Rule 6.
The coram headed by the President Justice Dilip Gupta and Technical Member, P. Venkata Subba Rao held that Different branded and unbranded shoes alleged to be violative of IPR infringement of PUMA , Adidas , Max ,Nike has been held to be absolutely confiscated under Sec 111(d) as being prohibited goods under Sec 11 of the Customs Act read with Rule 6 of the IPR Rules. The non Counterfeit goods of these brand have been held to be confiscated under Sec 111m of the Act with liabilities of differential duty and Penalties under Sec 112 of the Act upheld.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates.
