TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appeal Upheld: Fine Reduction for Imported Cosmetics, Exception for 'DOVE' & 'AXE' Trademarks Confiscated for IP Violation</h1> <h3>COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, TUTICORIN Versus TUSHAR IMPEX</h3> COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, TUTICORIN Versus TUSHAR IMPEX - 2013 (295) E.L.T. 610 (Tri. - Chennai) Issues: Violation of Intellectual Property Rights, Clearance of imported goods, Reduction in fine and penalty, Re-export of goods, Amendment validityViolation of Intellectual Property Rights:The case involved the import of cosmetics through Tuticorin Port, including products bearing the trademarks 'DOVE' and 'AXE.' The original authority allowed clearance of all cosmetics except DOVE and AXE, confiscating them for violating the Intellectual Property Rights of Hindustan Unilever. The lower appellate authority reduced the redemption fine and penalty, allowing re-export of DOVE and AXE. The Department appealed against this decision, arguing that the reduction in fine and penalty was inadequate.Clearance of Imported Goods:The lower appellate authority reduced the redemption fine and penalty imposed on the imported cosmetics, except for DOVE and AXE. The goods, other than DOVE and AXE, were found fit for release by the Assistant Drugs Controller, despite being imported through Tuticorin Port, which was not initially an authorized port. The violation was considered technical due to subsequent testing and compliance with regulations after Tuticorin Port was declared an authorized port.Reduction in Fine and Penalty:The Department contended that the reduction in fine and penalty was disproportionate to the value of the impugned goods. However, the appellate authority's decision was upheld based on the technical nature of the violation and the subsequent compliance with regulations post-import.Re-export of Goods:The lower appellate authority allowed the re-export of DOVE and AXE, citing a High Court decision that permitted the re-export of goods contravening Intellectual Property Rights. The decision was supported by the argument that the goods were imported in violation of Intellectual Property Rights and were thus eligible for re-export.Amendment Validity:The Department raised concerns about the validity of an amendment made on 9-4-2010, arguing that it was only a draft Government Order. However, the judgment did not find this argument compelling and dismissed the Department's appeal, upholding the lower appellate authority's decision regarding the reduction in fine, penalty, and re-export of the goods.
TaxTMI 