All Writ Petitions, Appellate Side and Original Side, upto the year 1990 irrespective of the category/classification will be taken up by the Division Bench presided over by Hon’ble the Chief Justice. All Writ Petitions, Appellate Side and Original Side, from the year 1991 to 1995 irrespective of the category/classification will be taken up by the Division Bench presided over by Hon’ble Shri Justice D.K. Deshmukh

Sitting list and assignment of Judicial Work on the Original side of the Bombay High Court on and from Monday, the 15th November 2010

In CIT vs. Ajanta Pharma 318 ITR 252 the Bombay High Court held (reversing the Special Bench judgement in DCIT vs. Syncome Formulations 292 ITR (AT) 144)) that the “sunset clause” of s. 80HHC (1B) applies to s. 115JB as well. This judgement has been reversed by the Supreme Court today (9.9.2010). It has been held that MAT companies are not subject to the limitations of s. 80HHC (1B)

In CIT vs. Techno Shares & Stocks 323 ITR 69 the Bombay High Court considered the definition of an “intangible asset” in s. 32(1)(ii) and held that a stock exchange card was not an intangible asset eligible for depreciation. This judgement has been reversed by the Supreme Court today (9.9.2010). It has been held that a stock exchange card is a “license” and eligible for depreciation u/s 32(1)(ii).

The Supreme Court today (9.9.2010) pronounced judgement in a batch of appeals challenging the judgement of the Karnataka High Court in CIT vs. Samsung Electronics 320 ITR 209 where it was held that u/s 195 the payer was not entitled to consider whether the payment was chargeable to tax in the hands of the non-resident recipient or not

The ITAT Bar Association organized a felicitation function on 24th August 2010 in honour of Justice F. I. Rebello on his elevation as Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court

In CIT vs. Samsung Electronics 320 ITR 209, the Karnataka High Court that u/s 195 the payer was not entitled to consider whether the payment was chargeable to tax in the hands of the non-resident recipient or not. A batch of appeals challenging the said judgement was heard by a Supreme Court Bench of the Hon’ble Chief Justice S. H. Kapadia and Hon’ble Mr. Justice K. S. Radhakrishnan. After extensive hearing, judgement was reserved today (19.8.2010).

The sitting list and assignment of Judicial Work on the Original side on and from Monday, the 23rd August 2010 until further orders will be as under