9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (4) TMI 1072X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Customs Act, Customs authorities, on the facts and circumstances of this case, should have acted in accordance with the procedure laid down under these Rules, goods imported by the appellant are still under absolute confiscation, application is, therefore, allowed - - - M/148/2011-WZB/C-I/(CSTB) - Dated:- 8-4-2011 - S/Shri P.G. Chacko, Sahab Singh, JJ. REPRESENTED BY : Shri Satish Sundar, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri B.P. Pereira, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : P.G. Chacko, Member (J)]. The Commissioner has enhanced the value of 19 items in the consignment imported by the appellant to Rs. 14,27,147/- and that of the remaining three items in the consignment to Rs. 7,92,172/-. The combined assessable va ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by him, at the port of import of the goods infringing intellectual property rights, in accordance with the IPR Rules, requesting for suspension of clearance of the goods suspected to be infringing IPR Rules and further that, upon receipt of such notice, the Deputy Commissioner of Customs or the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, as the case may be, shall suspend the clearance of the case, if he has reason to believe that the goods are suspected to be infringing IPR Rules. The rules further provided that the Deputy Commissioner/Assistant Commissioner of Customs shall give notice of such suspension to the importer and the IPR holder stating the reasons for the suspension. It is further provided that, where clearance of the branded goods has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fault with the Collector of Customs having proceeded against the Writ Petitioner under Section 167 of the Sea Customs Act without choosing to proceed against other similar importers who had committed similar offence. 3. We have heard the learned JDR also, who has reiterated the available findings of the Commissioner. 4. We have found a strong case for out-of-turn disposal of this appeal. The appellant has apparently been kept in the dark about the action taken by IPR holder even though such information is extremely relevant to the appellant s claim for release of the branded goods. The IPR Rules referred to by the learned counsel were issued under Section 156 of the Customs Act and the same were not intended to be a dead letter. The Cus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
