carry out research and
development activity, which results into generation of intellectual property
rights, which is absent in case of a captive service provider. Accordingly ... Tribunal Delhi bench held that AvaniCimcon, a software
product company having intellectual property rights or some of
the products developed by it, cannot be compared
assets including all its patents, registered designs,
trademarks, copyrights and other intellectual property rights including the
subject Trade Mark(s) to the respondent. The respondent ... June 16, 1987, Volvo assigned all its trademarks, copyrights and other
intellectual property rights without any limitation to the respondent.
Necessary entry was made
Sanjay Dalia & Another , AIR 2015 SC 3479 (referred to
hereinafter as IPRS SC). Thus, according to the learned counsel for the
plaintiff ... present suits are maintainable in this Court. Mr. Gupta
submitted that in IPRS SC (supra), the Supreme Court was dealing with a
situation where
copyrights on
08.04.2008. Therefore, it develops and owns unique intangibles/intellectual
property/process which cannot be compared with the assessee as the former
would derive ... activities undertaken by Basiz to develop its own proprietary intellectual
property and technical know-how. Referring to the same pages, he submitted
that the company
Engineering
It is engaged in research and development activities and
own Intellectual Property Rights
Page 5 of 25 IT(TP)A No. 1415/Bang/2010 ... engaged in diversified activities of products
development and services and owns Intellectual property
Rights ;
It has made strategic acquisitions during the AY 2006-07
Ground
classifiable under Consulting Engineer Service and more appropriately classifiable under Intellectual Property Right Service. He submits that as per agreement with GAIL, appellants are owners ... through patents or otherwise under service tax net under category of Intellectual Property Right Service and it is not permitted under law to charge
Creative Tours And Travels (India) Pvt. ... vs Intellectual Property Appellate Board ... on 4 May, 2016
Author: S.C. Dharmadhikari
Bench: S.C. Dharmadhikari
Dixit ... Next to Metro Cinema, Dhobi Talao, Mumbai-400020. ] .... Petitioner
Versus
1) Intellectual Property Appellate Board, ]
(Circuit Bench Sitting at Mumbai)
ig ]
Guna Complex, Annexe
view to ensuring that the procurement is made in the right way, IPR has set up various Committees, like Need Aspect Committee, Junior Purchase ... stated in the reply that the tender document itself clearly states that IPR is not bound to accept the lowest bids and IPR
learned
Senior Advocates appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the
IPR issued by the Industries Department as well as the provisions ... dated 17.02.2004 framed a purchase
policy under the IPR, 2001. Clause (3) of the said purchase policy under the
IPR, 2001 says that
assessee, the assessee paid Rs.626.08 crores towards acquisition of Intellectual Property Rights and Non-compete Fee. The break-up of the same ... upheld the order of the First Appellate Authority allowing depreciation on Intellectual Property Rights but reversed the order insofar as it relates to depreciation
