DY CIT (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-1(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S. BLUEBAY MAURITUS INVESTMENT LTD., MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that brought-forward capital losses cannot be adjusted against capital gains that are exempt from tax under a Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA). The treaty benefit should be considered first, and only remaining losses can be carried forward.
What were the facts?
The assessee, a Mauritius-based FII, claimed exemption for short-term capital gains under the India-Mauritius treaty. The Assessing Officer (AO) sought to reduce the brought-forward capital losses by the amount of these exempt gains, arguing for set-off first. The assessee contended that treaty benefits should be applied before setting off losses.
What were the issues?
Whether brought-forward capital losses can be set off against capital gains exempt under a tax treaty, and the order of applying treaty benefits versus set-off of losses.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- Sachs Investment (Mauritius) Ltd. v. DCIT(International8 citing187 ITD 184 · 2021 · ITAT
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘I‘ BENCH
Before: SHRI M.BALAGANESH & SHRI KULDIP SINGH&
PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M):
These appeals in ITA Nos.1370/Mum/2021 & 1369/Mum/2021 for A.Yrs.2014-15 & 2013-14 respectively arise out of the order by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-55, Mumbai in appeal No.CIT(A)- 55, Mumbai/10164/2018-19 & CIT(A)-55, Mumbai/10228/2016-17 dated 09/02/2021 & 08/02/2021 respectively (ld. CIT(A) in short) against the M/s. Bluebay Mauritius Investment Ltd.,
order of assessment passed u/s.143(3) r.w.s.144C(3) & 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as Act) dated 21/12/2017 & 23/02/2017 by the ld. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
More judgments on Section 90(2)
- Adobe Systems Software Ireland Limited… vs ACIT, Circle 1(1)(1) Int. Taxation, DelhiITA 1930/DEL/2022[2019-20]Status: Disposed10 Sept 2026AY 2019-20
- Adobe Systems Software Ireland Limited… vs ACIT, Circle 1(1)(1) Int. Taxation, New…ITA 1929/DEL/2022[2018-19]Status: Disposed10 Sept 2026AY 2018-19
- Synamedia Limited, United Kingdom vs Commissioner of Income Tax, (It)…ITA 3009/BANG/2025[2020-21]Status: Disposed31 Aug 2026AY 2020-21
- Branch Metrics, Inc., United States of… vs Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax Circle…ITITA 1122/DEL/2025[2022-23]Status: Disposed12 Aug 2026AY 2022-23
- Asian Honda Motor Co. Ltd, Thailand, Bangkok vs ACIT, (International Tax), Circle- Noida…ITITA 244/DEL/2026[AY-2022-23]Status: Disposed10 Aug 2026
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sh Umang Uniyal vs. Commissioner Department Of Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 16 Oct 2026
- Paresh Textiles Prop Paresh Gudhka vs. Superintendent Range Iv Div VBombay · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Palladium Constructions PVT LTD. vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central TaxKarnataka · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Vk Construction vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - IiMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Sri Bhuvaneshwari And Co vs. The Deputy Commissioner (St)Madras · 15 Oct 2026