News
Patentability of computer programme – Madras HC clarifies Section 3(k) while allowing grant of a patent
16 七月 2024
The Madras HC has set aside the Assistant Controller’s Order rejecting the patent for ‘Associating Command Services with Multiple Active Components’. The Patent Office had rejected the patent alleging exclusion under Section 3(k) of the Patents Act as constituting computer programme per se and not involving any inventive hardware. The IPO’s finding that the invention lacked inventive step under Section 2(1)(ja) in view of certain prior arts, was also set aside by the High Court here.
Tightening the screws on imports – Bolts, Nuts and Fasteners QCO, 2024
15 七月 2024
The Ministry of Commerce and Industry has issued the Bolts, Nuts and Fasteners (Quality Control) Order, 2024 (‘new QCO’)
Power of Enforcement Directorate to attach any other property as ‘value equivalent’
10 七月 2024
In the recent case of Francis Chakkalamathaom Peter[1], the Hon’ble Appellate Tribunal under Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (‘PMLA Tribunal’) has held that in the absence of the direct proceeds of crime, the Enforcement Directorate (‘ED’) has the rights to attach any other property equivalent to the value of proceeds of crime.
53rd GST Council Meeting – Highlights of Circulars issued by CBIC
28 六月 2024
The Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs has on 26 June 2024 issued 16 Circulars (Circular Nos. 207 to 222/2024-GST) to clarify various issues as also highlighted in the 53rd GST Council Meeting. A summary of all these Circulars is provided here.
53rd GST Council Meeting – Highlights of certain measures covering trade facilitation and law & procedure
23 六月 2024
GST Council Meeting presided by the Hon’ble Union Finance Minister was held on 22 June 2024 in New Delhi. The Council meeting held after more than 8 months, and the first after the General Elections, has recommended many trade facilitation measures along with many other measures relating to GST law and procedures. The Council has also recommended many changes in the GST rates for both goods and services.
Medicament or cosmetic – Telangana HC upholds assessee’s view on classification of certain Ayurvedic goods as medicaments
20 六月 2024
The Telangana High Court has held that the products Navaratan Oil, Gold Turmeric Ayurvedic Cream, Boroplus Antiseptic Cream, Boroplus Prickly Heat Powder and Sonachandi Chavanprash, are medicaments (drugs) and not cosmetics under the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act, 1957.
Solar power generation under MOOWR is valid – CBIC Instruction dated 9 July 2022 quashed
20 五月 2024
The Delhi High Court has held that the statutory scheme underlying the MOOWR Regulations cannot be construed as seeking to exclude solar power generation in terms of permissions granted under Section 65 of the Customs Act, 1962. According to the Court, neither Section 61 nor Section 65 can be justifiably construed as incorporating an inherent or implied exclusion of solar power generation.
Patents – Method for compressing digital media – Delhi High Court sets aside objections under Section 3(k) relating to computer programme
08 五月 2024
The Delhi High Court has directed for grant of a patent titled ‘Reversible 2-Dimensional Pre-/Post-Filtering for Lapped Biorthogonal Transform’, which was related to a digital media (e.g., video and image) processor and the manner in which the processor is programmed for compression of two-dimensional digital media using lapped transforms.
Valuation of exports – Amount paid by foreign buyer to overseas agent of Indian exporter is not includible
06 五月 2024
The CESTAT Hyderabad has set aside the Order-in-Original passed by Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) demanding customs duty on export of iron ore fines wherein the overseas buyer had directly paid commission to overseas agent of the Indian exporter.
GST – Penalty under Section 122(1A) can only be imposed on a ‘taxable person’
03 五月 2024
The Bombay High Court has set aside the show cause notice invoking the provisions of Section 122(1A) and Section 137 of the CGST Act, 2017 to impose huge penalty and to initiate prosecution against the petitioner, who was an individual and employee (Senior Tax Operations Manager cum Authorised Person) of the company against whom demand was raised.