Latest Supreme Court judgements

s. 32(1)(ii) Techno Shares Reversed By Supreme Court

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).

S. 80HHC vs. 115JB Ajanta Pharma Reversed By Supreme Court

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).
 

Thanks Sir

THANKS..................................................

Thanks Aditya Ji for updating all of us and sharing very useful information...............

Thanks for the information.....

Can you please send me the above info. in a file. ?

Thanks for the information.

thanks for information............

Thanks for the information.

Thanks very much for the update...

What should we make out of the 1st judgement ?

What precautions a payer must take before making payment to a non-resident?

Dear Subhash

Read this article

/articles/taxability-of-fees-from-offshore-services-post-finance-act-6859.asp

thxs for sharing............

CAN ANY ONE REPLY LATEST JUDGE MENTS ON SECTION 40(a) (ia), regarding provisonal entry not passed in the books of account subsequently in the next fin. year TDS have been deducted and credited to the central government of india and form 26q have been electronically filed. form 16a have been issued to respective parties. they claimed the TDS amount.

bye