The Delhi High Court has held that the import of counterfeit iphones misdeclared as spare parts harms consumers and brand owners.
The bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh and Justice Shail Jain while upholding the penalty of Rs. 50,000 imposed by the order of CESTAT, observed that the misdeclaration, as discussed in this case, was of the fact that these were merely parts of i-Phones, which was found to be factually incorrect. Admittedly, the i-Phones were not to be assembled in India by the Appellant or the importers and were full i-Phones which were being imported, by declaring them as spare parts. The letter given by Apple Inc., further asserts that the goods were counterfeits.
The bench stated that the import of counterfeit products would not merely affect brand owners but is also against consumer welfare in general as old and used products could get re-branded as new ones, thereby leading to deception. Consumers in India may be made to pay more for used, second hand or counterfeit products under the impression that they are original branded products. Such imports also have an impact on the brand equity and goodwill of the original manufacturers in India.
The appellant acted as a courier agency for imports by two entities namely M/s Kripa Shankar Maurya and M/s Mangalmurti Traders. All the documents including the bills of entry, invoices, etc., were submitted by the Appellant with the Customs Department for clearance of the imported goods.
The Customs Department, alleged that there was misdeclaration by the Appellant in the said consignment of imported goods in terms of quantity, value, description and classification which led to a Show
Cause Notice (SCN) being issued to the importers, as also to the Appellant, which was the courier agency involved in the import of the consignments.
The CESTAT revoked the courier registration of the Appellant was revoked for the entire term, i.e. till 4th March, 2031. In addition, the security of Rs.10 lakh submitted by Appellant at the time of its courier registration was forfeited and an additional penalty of Rs. 50,000/- was imposed.
The appellant contended that the Appellant has already been exonerated by the earlier Order-in-Original dated 5th February, 2021 which was passed after a full-fledged inquiry. Thereafter under the CIER, an opposite finding could not have been arrived at with respect to the same set of facts.
The customs department contended that the Appellant is guilty of forgery of documents and was also connected to the importers and therefore, cannot claim to be innocent. Moreover, there was a clear misdeclaration of goods which has been held in the final order dated 22nd March, 2024. He has also taken the Court through various findings of the CESTAT in the said final order to support the said submissions made.
The court held that the revocation of the courier registration shall be given effect from 18th August, 2023 till 1st September, 2025. Insofar as forfeiture of security is concerned, out of Rs.10 lakhs, a sum of Rs. 5 lakh shall stand forfeited and the remaining Rs. 5 lakh shall be treated as security for the purpose of allowing the Appellant to operate as a registered courier agency. If any further security is liable to be provided for continuing the courier registration, the same shall be submitted by the Petitioner, within one month from today. Penalty of Rs. 50,000/- imposed by the order of CESTAT dated 22nd March, 2024 is also upheld.
Case Details
Case Title: M/S Ecg Easy Connect Logistics Pvt. Ltd Versus Commissioner Of Customs
Case No.: CUSAA 35/2024 & CM APPL. 22961/2024
Date: 18th August, 2025
Counsel For Petitioner: Akhil Krishan Maggu
Counsel For Respondent: Vijay Joshi
