>
TaxCalc.pk
FY 2026-27
Stop counterfeit imports at Pakistani borders. Learn FBR Customs IP recordation under Section 15 Customs Act 1969, seizure powers, and notices.
By Syed Asad Hussain Zaidi · 8 September 2026
Author Note / Last Updated: Updated September 2026 by Syed Asad Hussain Zaidi | Advocate High Court | Senior Corporate & IP Litigation Counsel.
For multinational corporations, regional brand manufacturers, and domestic intellectual property owners, domestic market raids alone are rarely sufficient to halt brand piracy. Once counterfeit pharmaceuticals, automotive components, consumer electronics, fast-moving consumer goods (FMCG), or apparel infiltrate wholesale hubs such as Shah Alam Market in Lahore, Bolton Market in Karachi, or Raja Bazaar in Rawalpindi, enforcement costs multiply exponentially while tracing the illicit supply chain becomes nearly impossible.
The most cost-effective and decisive enforcement mechanism against counterfeit merchandise is interdicting goods directly at the point of entry. Under Pakistani statutory law, the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR) Directorate General of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Enforcement and Pakistan Customs possess extensive powers to intercept, detain, seize, and destroy infringing imports before they clear customs bonded warehouses.
However, Pakistan Customs does not routinely monitor every shipping container for trademark infringement unless a brand owner has proactively registered its intellectual property rights within the customs database or formally petitioned for border interdiction. This legal treatise provides an exhaustive guide for brand protection managers, general counsel, and corporate attorneys on recording registered trademarks with Pakistan Customs, invoking border enforcement under the Customs Act, 1969, navigating detention notices, and destroying pirated consignments.
Border enforcement of intellectual property rights operates at the intersection of international trade law, customs administration, and specialized IP statutes:
| Statutory Pillar | Legislative Provision | Operational Role in Border Enforcement | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Customs Act, 1969 | Section 15 | Absolute statutory prohibition on import or transit of counterfeit and pirated goods. | | Trade Marks Ordinance, 2001 | Sections 94–98 | Empowers registered trademark owner to give formal notice to Customs Collector to seize infringing cargo. | | Directorate General IPR Customs | Centralized Risk Engine | Manages centralized IPR database, profiles suspicious consignments, and triggers automated WeBOC interdict alerts. |
Section 15 of the Customs Act, 1969 serves as the primary gateway for import restrictions. Subsection (d) explicitly prohibits the importation into Pakistan of:
"goods made or produced beyond the limits of Pakistan, and having applied thereto any name or trade mark being, or purporting to be, or being a colourable imitation of, the name or trade mark of any manufacturer, dealer or trader in Pakistan, unless that name or trade mark is accompanied by a definite indication of the goods having been made or produced in a country outside Pakistan;"
Furthermore, Section 15(f) prohibits the importation of goods that infringe copyrights, patents, industrial designs, or trademarks registered under the laws of Pakistan. Under Section 16 of the Act, the Federal Government possesses statutory authority to prohibit or restrict the import or export of any goods by notification in the official Gazette.
While the Customs Act empowers customs officers, the Trade Marks Ordinance, 2001 (TMO 2001) establishes the procedural rights of the registered proprietor:
Recognizing that decentralized customs stations often lacked specialized expertise in detecting counterfeit marks, the Federal Board of Revenue established the Directorate General of Intellectual Property Rights (Enforcement) Customs headquartered in Islamabad, with operational regional directorates in Karachi and Lahore.
Brand recordation is not mandatory for a trademark owner to enjoy statutory protection in Pakistan, but without customs recordation, the probability of ex-officio border interdiction drops to near zero. Customs officers process hundreds of thousands of Twenty-Foot Equivalent Units (TEUs) annually across Karachi International Container Terminal (KICT), Pakistan International Container Terminal (PICT), Qasim International Container Terminal (QICT), and inland dry ports. Proactive recordation places your brand on the customs surveillance radar.
| Step | Phase | Key Action | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | 1 | Dossier Compilation | Assemble certified trademark certificates, packaging guidelines, and authenticity manuals. | | 2 | Portal / Directorate Filing | Submit formal recordation application to Directorate General of IPR (Customs). | | 3 | Technical Vetting | Customs officers evaluate marks, identify authorized importers, and configure risk profiles. | | 4 | Recordation Notice | Directorate issues official Brand Recordation Notice to all seaports, dryports, and airports. | | 5 | WeBOC RMS Flag | Integration into WeBOC Risk Management System (RMS) automatically flags unapproved consignments. | | 6 | Active Border Interdiction | Port customs examine suspect shipments on red-channel alert for physical interdiction. |
An application for brand recordation must be submitted to the Director General, IPR (Enforcement), FBR. The petition must be drafted by an Advocate of the High Courts or an authorized customs consultant and accompanied by:
The technical counterfeit detection manual is the most critical operational component of the dossier. Customs appraisers are customs tariff specialists, not brand experts. Your dossier must include a high-resolution visual comparison manual illustrating:
Upon technical review and legal satisfaction, the Directorate General of IPR issues a formal IPR Standing Order / Recordation Circular distributed across all Collectorates of Customs, including:
Simultaneously, the Directorate's Risk Management officers enter the risk parameters into the WeBOC digital engine, establishing targeted alert filters based on declared HS codes, descriptions of goods, country of origin, and consignee tax profiles.
Under Pakistani customs procedures, border interdictions occur via two distinct routes:
| Enforcement Parameter | Route A: Ex-Officio Border Interdiction | Route B: Targeted Application (Sec. 94 TMO) | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Trigger Mechanism | Routine physical examination or WeBOC automated risk alert. | Actionable intelligence provided directly by the brand owner. | | Pre-Condition | Brand previously recorded in the FBR IPR Customs Database. | Formal notice submitted to the Collector of Customs for a specific shipment. | | Shipment Data Needed | None required from the brand; relies on customs profiling. | Bill of Lading (B/L) number, container number, vessel name, estimated arrival date. | | Indemnity Bond | Requested after prima facie detention occurs. | Must be submitted upfront alongside the petition to inspect. | | Response Window | Rights holder must confirm counterfeit status within 48–72 hours. | Customs detains upon vessel discharge and summons rights holder immediately. | | Suitability | Ongoing, systematic protection against unknown counterfeiters. | High-value, specific intelligence operations against known pirate syndicates. |
When Pakistan Customs detains a suspicious container suspected of bearing counterfeit marks, a strict statutory and administrative protocol unfolds:
| Step | Stage | Action & Statutory Provision | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | 1 | Detention Memo | Port Collector issues detention memo under Sections 17 & 168 of Customs Act 1969. | | 2 | Owner Notice | Formal notice dispatched to registered trademark owner or authorized legal counsel. | | 3 | Indemnity Bond | Trademark owner furnishes statutory indemnity bond under Section 95 of Trade Marks Ordinance. | | 4 | Joint Inspection | Customs officials and brand counsel conduct joint physical inspection and sample extraction. | | 5 | Expert Verification | Brand owner provides formal technical certificate confirming pirated or counterfeit nature. | | 6 | Show-Cause Notice | Customs adjudicating officer issues show-cause notice to importer for confiscation. | | 7 | Order-in-Original (ONO) | Formal adjudication order issued ordering complete confiscation of shipment. | | 8 | Destruction & Referral | Supervised destruction of infringing merchandise and referral for criminal prosecution. |
The Customs Appraising or Preventive Officer issues a formal Detention Memo under Section 17 or Section 168 of the Customs Act, halting customs clearance. A formal notice is promptly transmitted to the recorded trademark owner or their designated legal counsel, informing them that a consignment suspected of infringing their mark has arrived and setting a tight deadline (typically 48 to 72 hours) to confirm interest.
Before authorizing physical inspection or opening the container, the Collector of Customs mandates the submission of an Indemnity Bond on non-judicial stamp paper (and in certain high-value cases, a bank guarantee or pay order). This bond indemnifies the Federal Government, the Collector of Customs, and port terminal operators against:
Customs schedules a formal Joint Inspection at the container examination yard (e.g., KICT Off-Dock CFS Yard or Port Qasim terminal). Present at the inspection:
Representative samples are drawn, marked with official customs seals, and photographed. Both parties execute a formal Panchnama / Seizure Memo detailing the quantity, packaging conditions, container seals, and marks affixed.
Within 5 to 7 working days of the joint inspection, the trademark owner’s certified brand protection laboratory or authorized technical signatory must deliver a comprehensive Affidavit and Technical Verification Report. The report must definitively outline why the merchandise is counterfeit, cross-referencing:
Once the Technical Verification Report confirms that the goods are counterfeit, the matter shifts from administrative inspection to quasi-judicial Customs Adjudication.
The Assistant/Deputy Collector of Customs issues a formal Show-Cause Notice to the importer, charging them with:
The importer is granted an opportunity to submit a written defense and appear at a formal hearing. If the importer claims the goods are genuine, they bear the statutory burden of producing authorized distribution agreements, direct commercial invoices from the trademark owner, and valid letters of authorization.
Upon conclusion of the hearing, the Adjudicating Officer issues an Order-in-Original (ONO). If infringement is proven, the ONO orders:
A critical legal pitfall that brand owners must guard against is the customs auction mechanism. Under standard customs procedures, abandoned or confiscated goods are regularly auctioned off to recover state revenues.
CRITICAL LEGAL DIRECTIVE: Under Section 98 of the Trade Marks Ordinance, 2001, goods confiscated on grounds of trademark infringement CANNOT BE AUCTIONED OR RELEASED INTO COMMERCE, even if the counterfeit marks are obliterated or removed.
The law recognizes that allowing counterfeit merchandise to enter the market—even without logos—undermines product safety and market integrity. Brand owners must ensure that the ONO explicitly directs destruction by incineration, shredding, or crushing under the direct supervision of a Joint Destruction Committee comprising customs officers and the brand owner's legal representatives. The cost of environmental destruction is typically borne by the rights holder or charged against the importer's seized security.
A frequent dilemma faced by corporate brand owners in Pakistan is parallel imports—genuine, authentic products manufactured overseas by the trademark owner or its licensee, but imported into Pakistan by unauthorized third parties without the domestic exclusive distributor's consent.
| Legal Dimension | Counterfeit Merchandise | Parallel / Grey Market Imports | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Manufacturing Origin | Illicit, unauthorized third-party pirate facility. | Genuine goods produced by or under license from brand owner. | | Customs Act Status | Strictly prohibited under Section 15 of Customs Act 1969. | Not automatically counterfeit; exhaustion of rights doctrine applies. | | Customs Action | Absolute seizure, confiscation, and mandatory physical destruction. | Customs will not seize unless packaging or labeling is deceptive. | | Enforcement Forum | Border interdiction + criminal prosecution under PPC & TMO. | Civil breach of distribution contract or unfair competition claims in civil court. |
Under Section 40 of the Trade Marks Ordinance, 2001, the registered proprietor’s trademark rights are exhausted once the goods have been put on the market anywhere in the world by the proprietor or with their express or implied consent (International Exhaustion), UNLESS:
Border Practice Summary: Pakistan Customs will not seize parallel imports under Section 15 simply because the domestic licensee complains of lost exclusivity. Customs border interdiction is reserved for counterfeit, pirated, or colourable imitations. To halt parallel imports, rights holders must pursue civil injunctions in the High Court or Special IP Tribunals based on trademark dilution, product impairment, or consumer deception.
To maximize border IP protection and eliminate counterfeit imports into Pakistan, enterprises should implement this operational checklist:
Protecting intellectual property in Pakistan requires aggressive, forward-looking border defense. By leveraging the statutory powers of Section 15 of the Customs Act, 1969 and Section 94 of the Trade Marks Ordinance, 2001, brand owners can dismantle illicit supply lines before counterfeit products reach Pakistani consumers.
Navigating customs recordation, technical counterfeit dossiers, and post-detention adjudication demands rigorous legal precision. For expert assistance in recording trademarks with Pakistan Customs, handling emergency border seizure notices, or conducting joint enforcement operations across Pakistani ports, contact our IP & Customs Enforcement Practice Group at TaxCalc.pk / Zaidi & Associates.
Legal & Statutory Notice: The information provided in this publication is for general educational, academic, and statutory informational purposes only under the relevant laws of Pakistan (including the Income Tax Ordinance, 2001, the Companies Act, 2017, and the Trade Marks Ordinance, 2001). This content does not constitute formal legal, financial, or tax advice. For specific assessments, consult a licensed Advocate or qualified tax professional.
