9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 690X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bunal and that the appeal was argued on the basis of the provisions of the contract - This court find however that the questions sought to be raised at sr. nos. i, ii, iv and v are covered by the questions which have been raised especially at sr.no. vi - The question whether the appellant is entitled to raise the contentions u/s 17(1)(dd) of the Copy Rights Act, 1957 would arise for consideration of this court while dealing with question (vi) itself - Mere failure to mention a provision of law would not prevent the applicant from relying upon it in support of its contentions in the reference - Similarly, while deciding the reference in relation to question nos.(vi),(vii), (viii), it would be necessary for this court to construe the agreemen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntrol of any public undertaking, such public undertaking shall, in the absence of any agreement to the contrary, be the first owner of the copyright therein. Public undertaking being defined inter alia, as a body corporate established by or under any Central, Provincial or State Act? ii. Whether the Tribunal was justified in relying on clause III of the Agreement to conclude that there was a transfer of copyright to HDFC whereas the said clause applied only if a copyright in a work belonging to the Applicant was transferred to HDFC? iii. Whether the Tribunal was justified in relying upon the following two decisions pronounced under the Income Tax Act, 1961 namely ISBC Consultancy Services Ltd. Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd HDFC, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the Applicant has sold the product falling within entry CI26( 5) of the Sales Tax Act? ix. Whether the Tribunal s finding that the Agreement between the Applicant and HDFC is for sale of goods is perverse, contrary to the material on record and without considering the provisions of the Copyrights Act? x. Whether on a true and proper construction of Agreement between the Applicant and HDFC, the Tribunal was justified in holding that same does not constitute agreement for rendering service but sale of software falling within CI26( 5) of the Sales Tax Act? 3 The question is whether the Tribunal ought to be directed to raise the questions proposed at sr. nos. i, ii, iv and v. 4 It ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
