Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Court: mumbai Year: 2005 Page 4 of about 154 results (0.008 seconds)

Oct 05 2005 (TRI)

Micropure Parenterals Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Decided on : Oct-05-2005

Reported in : (2005)(190)ELT23Tri(Mum.)bai

..... natural or reproduced by synthesis (including natural concentrates) derivatives thereof used primarily as vitamins and intermixtures thereof, whether or not in any solvent while the latter covers medicaments (other than patent or proprietary) other than those which are exclusively used in ayurvedic, unani, siddha, homoeopathic or biochemic systems. the moot point thus is whether the vitamin b complex tablets merit classification ..... as vitamins under sub-heading 2936.00 or as medicaments other than patent or proprietary ones. at first blush it may appear that the specific entry "vitamin" will apply and not the general one "medicaments". but the position is not so. it was .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 04 2005 (TRI)

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Boston Consulting Group Pte. Ltd ...

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Decided on : Feb-04-2005

Reported in : (2005)94ITD31(Mum.)

..... the use of, or the right to use : (a) any copyright of a literary, artistic or scientific work, including cinematograph film or tapes used for radio or television broadcasting, any patent, trade mark, design or model, plan, secret formula or process, or for information concerning industrial, commercial or scientific experience, including gains derived from the alienation of any such right property ..... consists of lump sum consideration for the transfer outside india of, or the imparting of information outside india in respect of, any data, documentation, drawing or specification relating to any patent, invention, model, design, secret formula or process or trade mark or similar property; (b) no deduction in respect of any expenditure or allowance shall be allowed under any of the ..... the habit of those engaged in diplomacy to use legal accuracy..........." the approach of the hon'ble authority in continuing with strict legal interpretation, despite such an interpretation resulting in patent anomalies, is no longer good law. accordingly, a conclusion so arrived at is also not legally sustainable.35. finally, a co-ordinate bench, in the case of ensco maritime ltd .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 05 2005 (HC)

Shri Vijay C. Puljal Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Sep-05-2005

Reported in : 2005(5)BomCR481; (2005)107BOMLR983; [2005]128CompCas196(Bom); 2005(4)CTC705; 2005(4)MhLj5; [2005]64SCL589(Bom)

..... for the high court of australia in bank of new south wales v. the commonwealth, 1947 48 clr 76, traced the origin of the doctrine from 'pith and marrow' in patent law. the learned judge noted thus: '... the phrase 'pith and substance ... is a metaphorical phrase possibly derived from 'pith and marrow' in ..... patent law. wills j. in incandescent gas light co. v. de mare incandescent gas light system ltd. (3) said of the latter phrase :- ' 'pith' is a great deal less than the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 14 2005 (HC)

Suresh S/O Lahorimal Khatri Vs. Balkisan S/O Shivnarayanji Chandak and ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Oct-14-2005

Reported in : 2006(2)ALLMR146; 2006(3)BomCR135; 2006(2)MhLj443

..... reasoning. where two inferences are reasonably possible and the subordinate court has chosen to take one view, the error cannot be called gross or patent.(7) the power to issue a writ of certiorari and the supervisory jurisdiction are to be exercised sparingly and only in appropriate cases where the ..... ignorance or utter disregard of the provisions of law, and (ii) a grave injustice or gross failure of justice has occasioned thereby.(6) a patent error is an error which is self-evident i.e. which can be perceived or demonstrated without involving into any lengthy or complicated argument or ..... pvt. ltd. v. shankarprasad. in that case before the apex court, the point no. 1 that was for consideration was 'whether respondent's letters patent appeal was maintainable?' in answer to that point, the apex court observed thus:the writ petition invoking jurisdiction of the high court both under articles 226 and ..... by the single judge, exercise of jurisdiction under article 227 of the constitution of india is expressly barred by clause 15 of the letters patent of bombay high court.14. even on merits the learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the courts below have given a concurrent finding ..... the writ petition was found to be precisely under article 227 of the constitution of india. the present appeal under clause 15 of the letters patent of the bombay high court is not maintainable. to substantiate this, the learned counsel for the respondents placed reliance on the decision of our high .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 07 2005 (HC)

Omprakash Madanlal Pandya Vs. Shree Vallabh Glass Works Ltd. and ors.

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jun-07-2005

Reported in : 2005(4)BomCR516; [2006]131CompCas527(Bom)

..... court either the original jurisdiction or appellate jurisdiction thereof. merely because the companies act is enacted in 1956 and letters patent is of 1860 does not mean that provision of s. 460 is not applicable. the last contention advanced by the learned counsel that none except official ..... contention advanced by the learned counsel in his written submission is that the present suit is of year 1979 and the same is filed under the letter patent of the high court and therefore proceedings pending in this court is not affected by provision of s. 446 which has been part of companies act ..... .13. the next contention advanced by the learned counsel by virtue of the fact that the high court is established by virtue of letters patent the provision of s. 446 would not be attracted and the jurisdiction of high court is not affected by s. 446 merely because it is created ..... 1 of 1956.it has been contended that the letters patent being a superior legislation the provisions of the company's act cannot affect the jurisdiction of the high court which is established under the said letters ..... by letters patent in my opinion has no merits whatsoever. the establishment of high court under letters patent is obviously subject to various laws enacted from time to time and obviously subject to jurisdiction vested by this .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 25 2005 (HC)

Tulsabai W/O Narayanrao Deshpande (Died) Through L.R. Madhavrao Naraya ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Nov-25-2005

Reported in : 2006(3)ALLMR144; 2006(2)MhLj219

..... mesne profits as accruing from the period commencing three years preceding the institution of the suit until the delivery of possession.25. we, therefore, allow the letters patent appeal. however, in the facts of the case, there would be no order as to costs.26. after pronouncement of the judgment, the counsel appearing on ..... is followed by this court in the case of tata press ltd. v. mtnl reported in : air1995bom107 to hold that in an appeal under the letters patent, the court is entitled to go into all findings of fact. even otherwise, in the instant case, we had an opportunity to deal not only with ..... the limitations on the power of the court imposed by sections 100 and 101 civil procedure code cannot be made applicable to an appellate court hearing a letters patent appeal for the simple reason that single judge of the high court is not a court subordinate to the high court.the decision of the apex court ..... , in spite of execution of tamliknama, the plaintiff was entitled to succeed.7. the dismissal of first appeal no. 151 of 1976 gave rise to this letters patent appeal. we heard the appeal for quite a number of days with the able assistance from learned senior counsel shri p. r. deshmukh, learned senior counsel shri ..... the judgment of a single judge in the first appeal is not limited and observed thus :the power of a division bench hearing a letters patent appeal under clause 10 from the judgment of a single judge in first appeal is not limited only to a question of law under section .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 28 2005 (TRI)

The Morarjee Goculdas Spg. and Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax,

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Decided on : Jan-28-2005

..... could not have claimed any depreciation allowance and, in that case there would not have been any allegation of undisclosed income. thus, on the facts of the case it was patent that entries in the books of accounts or other documents or transactions were bound to be disclosed for the purpose of income-tax act or else the proceedings in question .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 23 2005 (TRI)

Manmohan Gupta and Actis Vs. Commissioner of Customs

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Decided on : Feb-23-2005

Reported in : (2005)(102)ECC217

..... " submitted by the respondent, a purported document which cannot be relied upon. it is evident that to hide relevant and material fact which would have enabled the appellant to demonstrate patent flaws and/or irrelevancy of the purported us report this wrongful and illegal methodology has been adopted by the respondent customs authorities in the present case, thus vitiating the entire ..... price trend in respect of it products which went down with passage of time. (vi) the us customs had reported that m/s performa was started in 1998 which was patently wrong as the annexure a and annexure b of the indian customs which proposed to levy differential customs duty gave instances of supplies made by the m/s performa are .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 18 2005 (TRI)

Commissioner of C. Ex. Vs. Oboi Laboratories

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Decided on : May-18-2005

1. revenue is in appeal. issue is classification of medicaments assesed as patent and proprietory on basis of a russian language label zymicin which is patent medicine in russia & the gentamycin drops also assessed as generic medicine when not being exported as zymicin to russia.2. revenue contends that there is no provision to accept the russian language label for product zymicin which bears the english inserptic 'gentamycin injection i.p' on it to be patent and proprietary medicine.3. we find no infirmity in accepting zymicin to be a brand name to bring in the classification as patent and proprietary medicine, even if label is not printed in english and is in russian...goods are exclusively meant for export. the definition of mark in chapter note 2(ii) of chapter 30 does not restrict the 'invented words' to be only in a particular script. that goods cannot have two classification i.e.patent and proprietary and generic medicine as taken by revenue, in violation of the central excise law that that goods have to be classified as they emerge and have to pay duty as on clearance. if same gentamycin injection is packed bearing a label, monogram etc. it has to pay duty as patent and proprietary medicine and if it does not bear the same, it has to be classified as generic medicaments the script and language of the brand, monogram and on label is not material. there is no reason to interfere with the order of cce (a). revenue appeal is required to be dismissed.

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 07 2005 (TRI)

Manmohan Gupta and Actis Vs. Commissioner of Customs (import)

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai

Decided on : Jul-07-2005

Reported in : (2005)(191)ELT907Tri(Mum.)bai

..... " submitted by the respondent, a purported document which cannot be relied upon. it is evident that to hide relevant and material facts which would have enabled the appellant to demonstrate patent flaws and/or irrelevancy of the purported us report this wrongful and illegal methodology has been adopted by the respondent customs authorities in the present case, thus vitiating the entire ..... price trend in respect of it products which went down with passage of time. vi) the us customs had reported that m/s performa was started in 1998 which was patently wrong as the annexure a and annexure b of the indian customs which proposed to levy differential customs duty gave instances of supplies made by the m/s performa are .....

Tag this Judgment!


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