GS STRATEGIC INVESTMENTS LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, INTERNATIONAL TAX CIRCLE-2(3)(2), MUMBAI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that if long-term capital gains are exempt under the DTAA, Section 74 of the Act is not triggered, and losses should not be set off. However, the exemption claim itself was not tested, leading to a remand.
What were the facts?
The assessee claimed exemption for long-term capital gains under the India-Mauritius DTAA and sought to carry forward brought forward long-term capital losses. The Assessing Officer set off these losses against the current year's capital gains, which the assessee contested.
What were the issues?
Whether brought forward long-term capital losses can be set off against current year's long-term capital gains when the latter are claimed as exempt under a DTAA. Whether the exemption claim under the DTAA needs to be examined by the Assessing Officer.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
Section 74,Section 143(3),Section 92CA,Section 144C(13),Section 153(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(3)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.
- (5)) 3.12. DCIT v. Patni Computer Systems Ltd.44 citing114 ITD 159 · 2008 · ITAT
- Sachs Investment (Mauritius) Ltd. v. DCIT(International8 citing187 ITD 184 · 2021 · ITAT
- Flagship Indian Investment Co. (Mauritius) Ltd. v. ACIT6 citing133 TTJ 792 · 2010 · ITAT
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, I” BENCH, MUMBAI
[ Per Rahul Chaudhary, Judicial Member:
This present appeal preferred by the Assessee against the Final Assessment Order, dated 18/10/2023, passed by the Assessing Officer under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 92CA r.w.s. 144C(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’], as per the direction issued by Dispute Resolution Panel (1), Mumbai [for short ‘DRP’] on 26/09/2023 under Section 144C(5) of the Act for the Assessment Year
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 74
- Yashpal Singh Yadav, Noida vs ACIT Circle-2(3)91), JhansiITA 443/AGR/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed14 Oct 2026AY 2016-17
- Jain Pravin Hiralal HUF, Pune vs ITO Ward 6(1), PuneITA 1072/PUN/2025[2020-21]Status: Disposed22 Sept 2026AY 2020-21
- Gluhend India Private Limited, Delhi vs DCIT - 3(1)(1), MumbaiITA 271/MUM/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed27 Aug 2026AY 2022-23
- Maasis Inter Fashion Private Limited… vs ACIT, Circle 11(1), KolkataITA 1864/KOL/2026[2022-2023]Status: Disposed25 Aug 2026AY 2022-2023
- Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax… vs Wexford Spectrum Investors Mauritius…ITA 1914/MUM/2026[2015-16]Status: Disposed10 Aug 2026AY 2015-16
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Hindustan Coca-Cola Beverages PVT. LTD. vs. The Commissioner, CGST And Cx, Dibrugarh And AnrGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Shree Sushruta Health Services Private Limited vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 14 Oct 2026
- M/S Rst Batteries vs. Deputy Commissioner CGST Delhi West & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026
- Dr.Sunil Kumar Padhi vs. The Chief Commissioner, GST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- N.K Fashion Through It Proprietor Mr. Narender Agarwal vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Central Goods And Service Tax, Delhi EastDelhi · 14 Oct 2026