Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Digital Signatures and Judgements: Several judgments emphasize that the judgments are digitally signed, which enhances authenticity and integrity ["MOONSHINE TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED vs TICTOK SKILL GAMES PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS. - Delhi"], ["MOONSHINE TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED vs TICTOK SKILL GAMES PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS. - Delhi"], ["MOONSHINE TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED vs TICTOK SKILL GAMES PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS. - Delhi"].
Handling of Software and Trademark Issues: Courts have addressed issues related to software marks, registration, and usage rights. For instance, the use of the mark ‘SAP’ was discussed, clarifying that defendant’s use did not infringe or misrepresent the plaintiff’s registered mark ["MOONSHINE TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED vs TICTOK SKILL GAMES PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS. - Delhi"].
Software Development and Comparability: Several judgments discuss the classification of software companies for tax and legal purposes, emphasizing the importance of functional comparability, offshore development, and specific activities (e.g., testing vs. development) to determine appropriate comparables ["2024 Supreme(Online)(ITAT) 1820"], ["2025 Supreme(Online)(ITAT) 7439"].
Tax and Reassessment Laws: Courts have clarified that amendments in law (e.g., deletion of reason to believe and insertion of opinion) impact assessment procedures. Reopening assessments based on software expenses or capital vs. revenue classification is subject to change of opinion and procedural correctness ["2024 0 Supreme(Bom) 388"], ["2024 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 11257"], ["2024 Supreme(Online)(ITAT) 2747"].
Communication and Issuance of Notices: Multiple judgments highlight that in digitized processes, the word ‘issued’ in legal context has been replaced with ‘communicated’, affecting the interpretation of notices. The timing and method of communication (e.g., via email or software triggers) are critical, and delays or procedural lapses can be attributable to the assessing authority ["MOONSHINE TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED vs TICTOK SKILL GAMES PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS. - Delhi"], ["MOONSHINE TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED vs TICTOK SKILL GAMES PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS. - Delhi"], ["MOONSHINE TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED vs TICTOK SKILL GAMES PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS. - Delhi"], ["MOONSHINE TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED vs TICTOK SKILL GAMES PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS. - Delhi"], ["MOONSHINE TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED vs TICTOK SKILL GAMES PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS. - Delhi"], ["MOONSHINE TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED vs TICTOK SKILL GAMES PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS. - Delhi"], ["MOONSHINE TECHNOLOGY PRIVATE LIMITED vs TICTOK SKILL GAMES PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS. - Delhi"].
Unhelighting a Word in Judgments: To unlight or remove emphasis from a word or phrase in a judgment selected by your software, you should:
The judgments underscore the importance of digital signatures, procedural correctness, and precise communication in legal processes involving software and notices. To unlight a word in a judgment selected by your software, it is advisable to utilize the software’s annotation features to remove or diminish emphasis without altering the original signed judgment. This preserves the document’s legal validity while allowing you to customize the view for clarity or emphasis adjustment.
References:
In the digital age, legal professionals, researchers, and students often work with electronic court judgments. These documents, frequently viewed or annotated using software tools, may feature highlighted text for emphasis during analysis. But what happens when you need to unhighlight a word in a judgment selected by your software? The question How to Unhelight Word in Judgement Selected by your Software (likely meaning unhighlight) arises commonly, blending technical needs with potential legal concerns.
While unhighlighting seems straightforward, it touches on document integrity, especially for judgments common in Indian courts. This post examines whether legal guidelines exist, provides practical technical advice, and draws from relevant case law to highlight risks. Note: This is general information, not legal advice. Consult a qualified attorney for specific cases.
Unhighlighting refers to removing visual emphasis (like background color) from selected text in digital documents such as PDFs or Word files of court judgments. Software like Adobe Acrobat, Microsoft Word, or case management tools often allows quick highlighting for note-taking.
However, judgments are official records. Altering their appearance—even temporarily—raises questions about authenticity. The provided legal documents focus on software classification, (IP), and goods under Indian law but do not explicitly address editing highlights. For instance, they discuss the classification of goods and without touching document editing procedures 2007 0 Supreme(Mad) 751.
Key takeaway: This is primarily a technical operation, not governed by specific legal protocols in the reviewed texts.
Analyzing core documents reveals no explicit procedures for unlighting or unhighlighting words in judgments. They emphasize precise legal language and markings' effects but skip digital modification steps. As noted, The documents describe various legal interpretations and rulings related to the treatment of software as goods, , and related legal concepts 2007 0 Supreme(Mad) 751 2007 0 Supreme(Mad) 1767 2004 8 Supreme 629 2005 4 Supreme 31 2016 7 Supreme 372.
Instead, themes include maintaining document integrity:- Proprietary notices and copyright protections are highlighted, with regulations on removal
.- No protocols for modifying digital highlights in judgments.
Main Legal Finding: No specific guidance exists in these documents for unhighlighting words. It's treated as technical, outside legal principles discussed.
Since no legal procedure applies, rely on standard software functions. Always work on copies to preserve originals.
Many judgments are , as seen in cases like
: This is a Judgement.1. Open in Adobe Acrobat or free tools like Foxit PDF.2. Select the highlighted text using the Select tool.3. Right-click > Properties > Set Highlight color to No Color or use Edit > Remove Highlight.4. Save as a new file.
Caution: PDFs lock edits; breaking the signature voids certification. Recreate highlights non-destructively using comments.
: Microsoft Word).
reference SAP software, but general PDF editors suffice.
These steps are routine but irrelevant to law unless authenticity is compromised.
Editing legal documents implicates IP, evidence rules, and digital signatures. Reviewed sources underscore protections:
Frequent in :
,
,
. Altering these may invalidate signatures, affecting .
Unauthorized edits risk infringement under (Sections 2(ffc), 51).
details Microsoft Office software protections: The `Microsoft Office' family includes versions like Office 97... Microsoft Word... Unauthorized use or circumvention invites injunctions and damages.
In a piracy case: Unauthorized use of copyrighted software constitutes infringement under the Copyright Act, allowing for and damages.
2016 0 Supreme(Del) 2907 notes technical measures protecting copyrights: Please describe the software or other technical measure that you believe protects your copyrighted material... Editing judgments hosted online (e.g., YouTube-like platforms) triggers duties.
Less direct, but 2025 Supreme(Online)(ITAT) 2870 stresses functional similarity: software development services. Analogous to ensuring edits don't alter document function for legal use.
Cases like 2014 0 Supreme(Del) 3205 on CITICORP marks warn against deceptive alterations: Defendants passed off services, leading to injunctions.
Exceptions:- Official records require court approval for changes.- Internal use may be fine if integrity is maintained
.
Recommendations:- Employ software's remove highlight function for reviews 2007 0 Supreme(Mad) 751.- Document changes for audits.- Avoid edits in evidence-bound docs without authorization.
Unhighlighting words in software-selected judgments lacks specific legal procedures in analyzed documents—it's technical. However, Indian case law stresses preserving judgments' integrity, copyrights in editing tools, and risks of unauthorized changes
.
Prioritize to balance usability and compliance. For complex scenarios, professional advice is essential.
Final Note: Legal texts confirm no formalities for unhighlighting unless authenticity is at stake. Stay cautious to avoid IP pitfalls or evidentiary issues.
This post draws from provided legal references and is for informational purposes only.
#LegalTech, #JudgmentEditing, #DigitalDocuments
software. ... This is a digitally signed Judgement. ... This is a digitally signed Judgement.
Some of its ERP android software applications are used across industries for resource planning, customer relationship management, supply chain and supplier This is a digitally signed Judgement. ... It is further submitted that Defendant No.1 does not intend to use the mark ‘SAP’ or offer training courses with respect to SAP software. This is a digitally signed Judgement. ... The Plaintiff has registered the ‘SAP’ word mark vide application bearing no. 578462 from 1992. 5. ... The Pl....
The `Microsoft Office' family includes versions like Office 97, Office 2000, Office XP, Office 2003, Office 2007, Office 2010 and the product line includes Microsoft Access, Microsoft Excel, Front Page, Microsoft Word, PowerPoint, Microsoft Project, Publisher and Outlook to name ... in the plaintiffs' computer programmes/software titles. ... This ID is unique to the particular PC on which the software is loaded. ... This process of enquiry culminated in the plaintiffs conducting a search within its database to determine the details of the....
CTSIPL is in software development while the Assessee is engaged in Integrated Circuit Design, CAD tools and computer software Development service as well as in ITES? ... We find that the Ld.CIT(A) after considering the material placed on records and has given finding on facts in respect of the functional comparability of the comparables selected by the TPO. The Revenue has failed to effectively rebut the finding of Ld.CIT(A). ... By excluding these comparables, Ld.CIT(A) placed reliance upon the judgement of the Hon’ble....
ITA .No.1689/ Hyd./2019, order dated 19.10.2020, in our considered view, as already stated in earlier part of this order, a reference to any judgement cannot be made in isolation with the facts and context under which such observation was made. ... Learned Counsel for the Assessee, made a statement at Bar, that L & T was part of comparable selected by the appellant in it’s TP documentation. ... software development services. ... The appellant computed the PLI at 16.69% while the PLI range of 14 comparables selected by ....
Accordingly, the TPO rejected the comparable selected by the assessee and conducted a fresh TP study. The TPO in the fresh TP study selected 11 comparable for working out the ALP using the TNMM and operating profit/ operating cost as profit level indicator. ... Thus, when this company is having revenue from software services as well as software product, the same cannot be considered as comparable with software development service providing company. 22. ... are engaged in diversified activity of #HL_STAR....
This is a digitally signed Judgement. ... This is a digitally signed Judgement. ... This is a digitally signed Judgement. ... Hence, on 8th This is a digitally signed Judgement. ... This Court held:- This is a digitally signed Judgement.
Under the Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1987 , Parliament not only deleted the words "reason to believe" but also inserted the word "opinion" in section 147 of the Act. ... In petitioner’s case the Assessing Officer having allowed the amount of software consumables as a revenue expenditure now seeks to treat the same as capital expenditure which is a clear change of opinion. ... The relevant extract of the judgement is reproduced as under:- “…….However, one needs to give a schematic interpretation to the words "reason to believe" faili....
Under the Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1987 , Parliament not only deleted the words "reason to believe" but also inserted the word "opinion" in section 147 of the Act. ... In petitioner’s case the Assessing Officer having allowed the amount of software consumables as a revenue expenditure now seeks to treat the same as capital expenditure which is a clear change of opinion. ... The relevant extract of the judgement is reproduced as under:- “…….However, one needs to give a schematic interpretation to the words "reason to believe" faili....
Under the Direct Tax Laws (Amendment) Act, 1987 , Parliament not only deleted the words "reason to believe" but also inserted the word "opinion" in section 147 of the Act. ... In petitioner’s case the Assessing Officer having allowed the amount of software consumables as a revenue expenditure now seeks to treat the same as capital expenditure which is a clear change of opinion. ... The relevant extract of the judgement is reproduced as under:- “…….However, one needs to give a schematic interpretation to the words "reason to believe" faili....
2. Please describe the software or other technical measure that you believe protects your copyrighted material and how it works. Please answer some or all of the following questions: 1. What is the copyright protected work at issue? 3. What is depicted at this URL that you believe circumvents the protection you described above?
“The CITI never sleeps, dreaming up new ways to ……”, “in your dreams, your kid makes millions in software, and you bank by PC free of charge. Plaintiffs run advertisement campaigns using variations on these themes such as, “The CITI never sleeps, so you can …”,
“The CITI never sleeps, dreaming up new ways to ……”, “in your dreams, your kid makes millions in software, and you bank by PC free of charge. Plaintiffs run advertisement campaigns using variations on these themes such as, “The CITI never sleeps, so you can …”,
This fault will not only make the selection of Bablu Chaudhary as illegal and unfair; rather it makes the entire selection process unfair. It is very strange how Bablu Chaudhary was selected without writing a single word in his answer book. The learned District Judge had also found that answer books of some candidates like Bablu Chaudhary were left blank, this was also a serious irregularity. It shows that the District Judge did not fairly conducted the selection.
What were the terms and details of engagement accepted by your firm from Exim Bank relating to publication of booklet entitled, "india-Your Software Opportunity" ? The 223 Chartered Accountants of India A impugned order states that further enquiry would be made by the Disciplinary Committee keeping in view the following issues :- "1. 2. Were the contents of insertion in the booklet containing your firm s name and address in accordance with the engagement accepted ? 3. Whether you/your firm had rendered assistance, as offered in the insertion , to the "interested parties"....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
