Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Court: customs excise and service tax appellate tribunal cestat delhi Year: 2005 Page 1 of about 14 results (0.089 seconds)

Apr 12 2005 (TRI)

Yamaha Motors (India) Pvt. Vs. Cce

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Decided on : Apr-12-2005

Reported in : (2005)(186)ELT161TriDel

..... to acquire:- "whereas, yamaha owns technical information relating to the manufacture and assembly of certain motorcycles parts and components thereof and certain trademarks and other intellectual property rights such as patents, design patents and utility models relating to motorcycles, parts and components thereof, all of which are part of the goodwill of yamaha in the production and worldwide sale of motorcycles, parts ..... specify and give technical explanation of the basic manufacturing methods and process required for the manufacture of locally manufactured parts for motorcycles." "1.10 "intellectual property rights" shall mean any patents, utility models, designs and applications therefore relating to the motorcycles or parts owned or controlled by yamaha as on the date of execution of this agreement". "1.11 "trademarks" shall ..... as "payment to a patentee by agreement on every article made according to agreement". block's law dictionary defines it to be "a payment reserved by the grantor of a patent ... and payable proportionately to the use made of the right by the grantee' it also refers to it as "a payment made to an inventer in respect of each article ..... of goods sold. 'royalty' is defined in jowitt's dictionary of english law, fifty edition, volume 2 page 1595 as follows. "royalty, a payment reserved by the grantor of a patent, lease of a mine or similar right, and payable proportionately to the use made of the right by the grantee. it is usually a payment of money, but may be .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 18 2005 (TRI)

Majestic Auto Ltd. and Shri Pankaj Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Decided on : Feb-18-2005

..... stands satisfied in the present case. therefore, the finding of non existence of seller buyer relationship between mal and its dealers on the basis of incorrect interpretation of loi is patently wrong.17. the commissioner has compared return of stocks lying unsold in swil case with the rebate/discount in price shared between mal and its dealers to conclude that facts ..... that the transaction between mal and its dealers were not transactions of sale but agency transactions, and relationship between mal and its dealers was that of principal and agent, is patently incorrect as this finding has been arrived at on a wrong application of the decisions cited in paragraphs prior to paragraph 5.3.21. in those case, the facts were .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 12 2005 (TRI)

Samsung Electronics Co. Limited Vs. Cce

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Decided on : Apr-12-2005

..... of the appellant company is that no service tax was attracted as engineering consultancy in regard to technology and trade mark agreements. it is being pointed out that know-how patent, trade mark are intellectual property and trading in them is not rendering any service, but is transfer of property. it is also being contended that the issue raised in this .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 30 2005 (TRI)

DolphIn Laboratories Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Decided on : Mar-30-2005

Reported in : (2005)(185)ELT206TriDel

..... issue involved is whether they are the manufactures of gesdyp and dolamide or m/s. ranbaxy laboratories ltd. 2. shri b.l. narasimhan, learned advocate, mentioned that the appellants manufacture patent or proprietary medicines by using their own raw materials; that they also act as job worker for m/s. ranbaxy laboratories ltd. (m/s. ranbaxy in short) under an agreement .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 30 2005 (TRI)

DolphIn Laboratories Ltd. Vs. Cce

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Decided on : Mar-30-2005

..... issue involved is whether they are the manufactures of gesdyp and dolamide or m/s. ranbaxy laboratories ltd. 2. shri b l narasimhan, learned advocate, mentioned that the appellants manufacture patent or proprietary medicines by using their own raw materials; that they also act as job worker for m/s.ranbaxy laboratories ltd. (m/s. ranbaxy in short) under an agreement .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 01 2005 (TRI)

WavIn India Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Decided on : Apr-01-2005

Reported in : (2005)(186)ELT90TriDel

..... supreme court in the case of s. balram, income-tax officer company v. volkart brothers, air 1971 sc 2204 that a mistake apparent on record must be an obvious and patent mistake not something which can be established by a long drawn process or reasoning on points on which there may conceivably be two opinions. through an application for rectification of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 29 2005 (TRI)

Khandelwal Cement Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Decided on : Jul-29-2005

Reported in : (2005)(190)ELT42TriDel

..... by the tribunal, in the impugned order. the case law cited at that time had been also referred to and distinguished.4. since the order does not suffer from any patent mistake of fact or law, the rom application of the appellants is without any merit and the same is dismissed.

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 14 2005 (TRI)

Saibaba Surfactant P. Ltd., Shri Vs. Cce

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Decided on : Dec-14-2005

Reported in : (2006)(105)ECC184

..... he agrees with the adjudicating authority and dismiss the appeal.7. in my view, the order-in-appeal without dealing the grounds of appeal of the appellants is improper and patently incorrect.8. under the circumstances, i have no option, but to set aside the order-in-appeal dated 5.9.2003 and allow the appeal by way of remand to .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 04 2005 (TRI)

Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Paharpur Cooling Towers Ltd.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Decided on : Mar-04-2005

Reported in : (2005)(186)ELT72TriDel

..... the commissioner (appeals).no prejudice has been said to have been caused to them by passing the final order of the tribunal. the impugned order does not suffer from any patent mistake of fact or law. the same cannot be recalled. the rom application is dismissed.

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 17 2005 (TRI)

MartIn and Harris Laboratories Vs. Commissioner of C. Ex.

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi

Decided on : Mar-17-2005

Reported in : (2005)(185)ELT421TriDel

..... excise) has confirmed the duty demand with penalty, as detailed therein, for the period 1998-99 to 2001-02, against them.2. the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of patent or proprietary medicaments other than those medicaments which are exclusively ayurvedic, unani etc. they had been paying duty @ 16% ad valorem by classifying their products under chapter sub-heading 3003 .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //