2008 (3) TMI 179

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... augrav Mitra, Advocates, for the Appellant. Shri Amit Jain, DR, for the Respondent. [Order per: M. Veeraiyan, Member (T)]. - We heard both sides extensively on the stay petition. 2. The applicant who became the successor in business to M/s. Du Pont, a manufacturer of polyethylene and they hold by inheritance the patent for processes technology associated with the manufacturing of the said produ .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the supplementary license agreement by the learned Advocate for the appellant. He submits that the applicant is basically a patent holder and not a consulting engineering firm. They have transferred the necessary technology/processes (for which they hold patent) to increase the capacity from 160 million kgs. to 210 million kgs. per annum. As in any case of transfer of technology, certain services .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ated as consulting engineering service. 4. He also relies on several judgments of the Tribunal to support the contention that agreements for transfer of technology/know-how can not considered to fall under category of consulting engineer, in spite of certain components of services like technical assistance, training being imparted in pursuance of the agreements. 5. Learned Departmental Represent .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X