INCYTE HOLDINGS CORPORATION v. DR REDDYS LABORATORIES LIMITED

M/s. Shell India Markets Private LimitedvsIncome Tax Department (represented by ITO International Taxation)

The assessee, Shell India Markets Private Limited, challenged the tax department's order holding that payments made for accessing copyrighted software constituted royalty and were liable for TDS. The Tribunal examined whether the payment was for a mere user right or a transfer of copyright rights. Following precedents favoring the assessee (specifically citing the Delhi High Court), the Tribunal held that the sale/transfer of software in this context is not taxable as royalty. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the assessee was found not liable to deduct tax at source.

M/S. Navneet Education Ltd.vsM/s. Balsam Publishing House Pvt. Ltd.

Navneet Education Ltd. filed a suit seeking permanent and mandatory injunction and damages against Balsam Publishing House Pvt. Ltd., alleging infringement of copyright in its educational materials, specifically 'GRAFALCO Pre-School Numbers (1 to 100)'. The court examined the similarities between the two books but ultimately found that the content lacked originality and was not a substantial copy.

Ustad Faiyaz Wasifuddin DagarvsMr. A.R. Rahman & Ors.

Ustad Faiyaz Wasifuddin Dagar filed a suit seeking recognition of copyright and injunction against Mr. A.R. Rahman and others regarding the musical composition 'Shiva Stuti'. The plaintiff alleged that his ancestral work was being used in the song 'Veera Raja Veera' without proper attribution or authorization. The Delhi High Court, while addressing an interim application, found prima facie evidence of copyright infringement. Consequently, the court directed mandatory changes to credit slides on online platforms and ordered a substantial deposit from the defendants.

Institute For Inner Studies & Ors.vsCharlotte Anderson & Ors.

The plaintiffs, representing the estate of Master Choa Kok Sui, filed suit alleging that defendants were infringing on their copyrights by conducting courses and selling materials related to Pranic Healing. The core dispute centered on whether the techniques themselves or the associated literature were protected under copyright law. The court issued an interim order clarifying that while defendants could perform the techniques without using the plaintiffs' copyrighted material, they were restricted from using the Master's name in a way that suggested unauthorized affiliation.

Eastern Book Company & Ors.vsD.B. Modak & Anr.

Eastern Book Company, publisher of the 'Supreme Court Cases' (SCC), sued defendants for infringing its copyright. The appellants argued that their copy-edited version of Supreme Court judgments constituted an original literary work. The High Court initially ruled against them, but the Supreme Court partially allowed the appeals, granting additional relief to protect the unique editorial inputs and headnotes of SCC.