News
Circumvention of anti-dumping and countervailing duties – Retrospective and provisional anti-circumvention measures
03 February 2021
The Union Budget 2021 has proposed many changes by clauses 93 and 94 of the Finance Bill, 2021 in Sections 9 and 9A of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 relating to anti-dumping and countervailing duties. As per one change, anti-dumping/countervailing duty after an anti-circumvention investigation cannot be imposed for the period before the date of initiation of such anti-circumvention investigation.
Interest on sum borrowed to repay loan utilised for construction of commercial property deductible under Section 24(b)
25 January 2021
Observing that Section 24(b) of the Income Tax Act uses the expression ‘property’ and not residential or commercial property, ITAT Bangalore has held that irrespective of the nature of the property, whether residential or commercial, deduction must be allowed under Section 24(b).
Standard Essential Patents – Confidentiality Clubs and fixing of FRAND rates – Prayer for keeping certain documents inaccessible to defendant, unacceptable
11 January 2021
In a case involving alleged infringement of Standard Essential Patent, the Delhi High Court has rejected the request for constitution of a two-tier Confidentiality Club. The plaintiff had suggested that the ‘outer tier’ documents be accessible to the advocates, experts appointed by them, as well as representatives of both parties, whereas the ‘inner tier’ documents will be accessible only to non-inhouse advocates and not to the parties as well as their officials and employees.
Arbitration – Supreme Court propounds test for non-arbitrability
04 January 2021
The Larger Bench of the Supreme Court of India has propounded a four-fold test for determining when the subject matter of a dispute in an arbitration agreement is not arbitrable. The Apex Court however noted that these tests are not watertight compartments; they dovetail and overlap, and have to be applied with care and caution.
Transfer of winding up proceedings from High Court to NCLT
22 December 2020
The Supreme Court has held that transfer of winding up proceedings from High Court to NCLT on application of financial creditor not party to proceedings before Court is permissible.
Arbitration – Two Indian parties can choose a foreign law as the law governing arbitration
18 December 2020
Observing that an arbitration agreement between the parties is an agreement independent of the substantive contract and the parties can choose a different governing law for the arbitration, the Delhi High Court has reiterated that two Indian parties can choose a foreign law as the law governing arbitration.
Designs – Transfer of design infringement suit to High Court not having Commercial Court Bench
17 December 2020
The 3-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court of India has upheld the view that the suit for alleged infringement in designs, where the defendant had in a counter claim sought cancellation of the registered design, is to be transferred to a High Court even if it does not have a Commercial Court Bench, i.e. High Courts which do not have ordinary original civil jurisdiction.
Complaint filed before Consumer Fora against builder is not barred by RERA
14 December 2020
The Supreme Court has held that the Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (‘RERA Act’) does not bar the initiation of ‘consumer complaints’ by the apartment allottees against builders under the extant consumer protection laws.
Patents – Divisional application with different combination of components, permissible
10 December 2020
The Intellectual Property Appellate Board (‘IPAB’) has allowed the appeal filed againt rejection of the patent application in a case involving divisional application with different combination of components . The Appellant’s patent application was earlier refused by the Controller under Section 15 of the Patents Act, 1970.
Patents – Declaration under PCT Regulation 4.17(ii) is sufficient for ‘proof of right’
04 December 2020
In Dow Agrosciences LLC v. The Controller of Patents, the sole and primary issue pertained to the filing of proof of right by the applicant. The IPAB made reference to the applicable provisions of the Patents Act, 1970, the Patents Rules, 2003, and the relevant regulations under the Patent Cooperation Treaty. It was held that declaration as per Rule 4.17(ii) of the PCT Regulations serves as sufficient proof of right.