Various steps taken for FDI liberalization & improving ease of doing business: Sitharaman
Minister of Commerce & Industry, Smt Nirmala Sitharaman, in a written reply in Lok Sabha states that during last 18 months, Govt has taken various steps to bring investment in the country like opening FDI in several sectors, liberalising FDI norms, improving ease of doing business in India; Further states that during Prime Minister's visit to the UK in November, 2015, commercial deals of over 9 billion pounds between India and the UK were announced; Also points out that city of London shall play an important role in channelling investment into infrastructure projects in India including railway sector : PIB
Click here to read more.
100% automatic FDI route permitted for B2B e-commerce cos., states Sitharaman
Smt. Nirmala Sitharaman in Lok Sabha states that FDI upto 100% under automatic route is permitted in companies engaged in e-commerce provided that such cos. would engage only in business to business (B2B) e-commerce; Further states that an Indian manufacturer is permitted to sell its own single brand products through e-commerce retail; Also states that to simplify FDI policy and to ensure that India remains investor friendly investment destination, Govt is undertaking stakeholder consultations with concerned Ministries, Apex Industries Chambers and other organisations : PIB
Click here to read more.
Govt has simplified FDI policy in mining sector, states Shri Vishnu Deo
Minister of State, Shri Vishnu Deo Sai, to a question on FDI in mining replies that Govt has simplified FDI in mining sector; States that FDI inflow in mining during current year (April to September) was 516.65 million US$; Further mentions that there is no data maintained centrally in regard to specific benefits to local population : PIB
Click here to read more.
FDI in petroleum sector supplements domestic investment & technological capabilities : Shri Pradhan
Minister of State for Petroleum and Natural Gas, Shri. Dharmendra Pradhan, informed the Lok Sabha in a written reply that Govt is encouraging FDI in order to supplement domestic investment & technological capabilities in petroleum sector; States that current FDI policy for petroleum & natural gas sector allows 100% automatic route for exploration, production, refining by pvt. Cos., marketing of petroleum products etc; Mentions that FDI inflow in petroleum sector during current year (April to September) was Rs. 302.62 crores : PIB
Click here to read more.
Restrains same name auto parts co. from infringing universally known MOTOROLA trademark
HC grants permanent injunction to Motorola, restrains an Indian co. ('defendant') engaged in manufacturing automobile parts from using trademark 'MOTOROLA', awards Rs. 10 lakhs as damages; Rejects defendant's contention that they were in different line of business, holds that, "even then since there is an undoubted similarity between the rival marks and the fact that the plaintiffs' mark has a reputation in India, the impugned use of the mark by the defendants would constitute infringement..."; Notes that plaintiff's product are used in automobile industry as well, states that trademark MOTOROLA is synonymous worldwide with the highest standards in quality and service in the automobile and communication industry and is a "well known" trademark entitled to highest degree of protection; Observes that "MOTOROLA is already perceived as a household name.." and a product that is inferior in quality or in capacity to that of plaintiffs would cause undue disharmony in provider-customer relationship existing since decades between plaintiffs and their age-old-patrons; Relies on SC rulings in Durga Dutt v. Navratna Pharmceuticals, Corn Products Refining Co. v. Shangrila Food Products Ltd, Mahendra and Mahendra Paper Mills Ltd. v. Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd:Delhi HC
The ruling was delivered by Justice Manmohan Singh
Advocates Mamta Jha, Shashi Pratap Ojha argued on behalf of Plaintiff.
'Inability to pay' no ground for reducing penalty; Quashes SAT order
SC sets-aside SAT order whereby penalty on respondent co., for failing to furnish documents/information u/s 15A(a) of SEBI Act, was reduced from Rs 1 crore to Rs 60,000 on the ground that respondent co. was unable to pay penalty; Observes that penalty was reduced on wholly extraneous ground not mentioned u/s15J which stipulates factors to be taken into consideration by SEBI's Adjudicating Officer while imposing penalty; Holds that Sec. 15J uses the word 'namely' which should not be read as 'including', refers to Black's Law Dictionary for meaning of the word 'namely'; However, denies imposition of Rs 1 crore and reduces it to Rs. 1.5 lakhs, as penalty was imposed prior to 2002 amendment (pre-amendment maximum penalty that could be levied was fixed as Rs 1.5 lakhs); Rejects SEBI's contention that default was a continuing default which continued post 2002 amendment, holds that, "date on which the failure occurred was ..relevant for deciding the applicable law, not the date on which the penalty was imposed", relies on SC ruling in State of Bihar v. Deokaran Nenshi (under Mines Act), rejects SEBI's reliance on SC rulin in Maya Rani Punj vs Commissioner of Income Tax, distinguishable on facts:SC
The ruling was delivered by Justice Vikramajit Sen and Justice Shiva Kirti Singh
__._,_.___
ReplyDeleteFor genuine and Serious inquiry of any form of banking instrument (BG/SBLC/MTN/DLC/LC) Which can be engage in PPP Trading, Discounting, signature project(s) such as Aviation, Agriculture, Petroleum, Telecommunication,automobile, construction of Dams, Bridges, Real Estate and all kind of projects,please Contact : Mr. Mahendra Jain ,Email :Draj.bgbroker@gmail.com Skype ID: Jaindra.bglease