Section 104 of TMA : Section 104: Penalty For Selling Goods Or Providing Services To Which False Trade Mark Or False Trade Description Is Applied

Explanation using Example

Let's consider a hypothetical scenario where Mr. Sharma owns a clothing store. He purchases a batch of jeans from a wholesaler, Mr. Gupta, who claims these are genuine Levi's jeans. Mr. Sharma, without verifying the authenticity, sells these jeans in his store. Later, it's revealed that the jeans are counterfeit, not produced by Levi's but carrying the Levi's trademark.

According to Section 104 of The Trade Marks Act, 1999, Mr. Sharma could be held liable for selling goods with a false trade mark. However, he can avoid punishment if he proves any of the following:

• (a) He had taken all reasonable precautions to avoid committing this offence and had no reason to suspect that the jeans were not genuine Levi's. For example, if Mr. Gupta has always supplied genuine goods in the past.
• (b) On being questioned, he provided all the information he could about Mr. Gupta, the person from whom he obtained the counterfeit jeans.
• (c) He acted innocently, meaning he had no knowledge that the jeans were counterfeit and believed they were genuine.

If he fails to prove any of these, he may face imprisonment from six months to three years and a fine from fifty thousand to two lakh rupees. However, the court may reduce these penalties for adequate and special reasons mentioned in the judgment.