News
Trademark Registrar has no authority to restrict choice of colours – Applicant has right to choose colours
10 四月 2024
The Madras High Court has held that the Registrar of the Trademarks does not have the authority to impose restriction on the choice of the colours.
Strapping together of tyres, tubes and flaps for replacement market, is not ‘deemed manufacture’
22 三月 2024
The CESTAT Mumbai has held that strapping together of tyres, tubes and flaps, referred as ‘TTF’, at the premises of logistics service provider, for dispatch to dealers for catering to replacement market for bus/lorry operators, is not ‘manufacture’ under Section 2(f)(iii) of the Central Excise Act, 1944.
Valuation – Notional cost of specification drawings received free of cost by manufacturer from buyer, before letter of intent identifying former as supplier, is not includible
15 三月 2024
The CESTAT New Delhi has on 12 March 2024 held that the notional cost of specifications in the form of drawings and designs supplied free of cost by a company to its vendors (component manufacturers) is not includible in the assessable value of parts or components manufactured by such vendors and cleared to the company.
RoDTEP benefit extended to exports by Advance Authorisation holders and by EOU and SEZ units
13 三月 2024
The Ministry of Commerce and Industry has extended the benefit of Scheme for Remission of Duties and Taxes on Exported Products (‘RoDTEP’) on exports by Advance Authorisation holders, and by Export Oriented Units and units in Special Economic Zones.
Imports under Advance Authorisations, and by EOUs and SEZ units – Compliance with certain QCOs relaxed
12 三月 2024
The Ministry of Commerce and Industry has relaxed the compliance requirements under Quality Control Orders (‘QCOs’) issued by Ministry of Steel, Department for Promotion of Industry and Internal Trade (DPIIT) and Ministry of Textiles in case of imports by holders of Advance Authorisations (‘AA’), Export Oriented Units (‘EOUs’) and units in Special Economic Zones (‘SEZs’) for utilization/consumption in manufacture of export products.
Copyrights – Suit against groundless threat of legal proceedings becomes infructuous once ‘action’ for copyright infringement is initiated
07 三月 2024
The Bombay High Court has held that once an action is initiated for the alleged infringement of copyright by the person who claims to be the owner thereof, albeit bona fide and with due diligence, the remedy for the alleged groundless threat of legal proceeding (under Section 60 of the Copyright Act), with the opponent, ceases to operate.
13th Ministerial Conference at Abu Dhabi – Key highlights
05 三月 2024
The WTO’s 13th Ministerial Conference (MC13) was recently held from 26th February to 1st March. The key takeaways from the Abu Dhabi Ministerial Declaration and other Ministerial Decisions are as follows.
No confiscation even if classification or exemption is not in conformity with the Department’s view or held not correct in appellate proceedings
28 二月 2024
The CESTAT New Delhi has held that classification of goods by the importer, even if the same is not in conformity with re-assessment by the proper officer or even if it is held to be not correct in any appellate proceedings, does not render goods liable to confiscation under Section 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962.
Venture Capital Funds, rendering services of asset management, are not liable to service tax
20 二月 2024
The Karnataka High Court has set aside the CESTAT Order which had held that a Venture Capital Fund (VCF) set up as a Trust is a ‘distinct entity’ separate from its contributors/investors. Disregarding the principle of mutuality of interest, the Tribunal had held that a VCF was rendering taxable services of portfolio or asset management to its contributors for a consideration on which service tax was liable.
Copyrights – Owner/assignee can carry on business of granting copyright licences without registration as copyright society
08 二月 2024
The Bombay High Court has held that it is not necessary for the owners/assignees of copyright to be registered as copyright societies for carrying on the business of granting licenses of their works. The High Court for this purpose observed that Section 33(1) of the Copyright Act [relating to copyright societies] does not curtail the power of the owner/assignee/duly authorised agent to grant any interest in the copyright by license under Section 30 [relating to licences by owners of copyright].