9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 1349X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion and penalties were vacated by Commissioner (Appeals) and the goods were allowed to be released - no reason found to interfere to the impugned order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - C/Misc./40315/2015 and C/40345/2015 - Final Order No. 40062 / 2017 - Dated:- 17-1-2017 - Dr. Satish Chandra, President And Shri Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Technical Member Shri K. Veerabhadra Reddy, JC (AR) for the Appellant Shri B. Satish Sundar, Advoate for the Respondent ORDER Per Justice (Dr.) Satish Chandra The present appeal is filed against Order-in-Appeal No.3/2014 dated 24.10.2014. 2. The brief facts of the case are that:- M/s. Himachal Exim filed two bills of entry viz. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d goods) Enforcement Rules, 2007 and have submitted a bond for ₹ 4,62,303/- and a bank guarantee for ₹ 1,15,576/-. It is seen that M/s. Nike did not join the proceedings nor has fulfilled the conditions of registration as provided under Rule 5 of the IPR Enforcement Rules, 2007. The LAA has held that in the case of Adidas brand, there will be a concurrent application of Notification No. 47/2007- Cus NT dated 8.5.2007 and Notification No. 51/2010 Cus. NT since they have joined the proceedings and in the case of Nike brand the Notification No. 51/2010 Cus NT dated 30.6.2010 shall apply independently. Based on that the LAA has held that all the shoes bearing Adidas brand and Nike Brand totally valued at ₹ 13,52,785/- are proh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under Bill of Entry No. 8960784 dated 7.1.2013 were examined on 181.2013 and were found to contain toys and shoes with brand name Nike and Adidas . Moreover, this consignment also contained cosmetics like glimmer sticks for eyes, eye liner pencils, eye liner pens etc. 6. The matter had reached to the Hon ble High Court of Madras in W.P. No. 32237 of 2014 filed by respondent herein. Hon ble High Court vide its order dated. 3.2.2015 observed as follows:- It is not in dispute that the order has become final and no further appeal has been filed against the said order by the department. Since the order has become final, the respondents are directed to release the goods covered under Bills of Entry No. 8960783 and 8960784 both dated 7.1. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeal in the statute is still available to the customs department. It is to be noted that on several occasions, taking note of the fact that the writ petitions are pending without exhausting the appeal remedy, this court has passed orders directing the Tribunal to consider the appeal even after expiry of appeal time without insisting upon limitation aspect. But the issue in these matters is different, where the appeal time is still available to the customs department, which this Court cannot curtail the same and prevent the customs department to agitate the matter before the appellate authority. 14. In view of the above discussion and also considering the fact that as on date, the statutory appeal preferred by the customs department as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
