ISHARES CORE MSCI TOTAL INTERNATIONAL STOCK ETF (AS A SUCCESSOR TO ISHARE CORE TAOTAL INTERNATIONAL STOCK MAURITIUS COMPANY ),MUMBAI vs. DY CIT (INT. TAX)-2(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadavshri Sandeep Singh Karhailishares Core Msci Emerging Markets Etf (As A Successor To Ishares Core Emerging Markets Mauritius Company) C/O Ernst & Young Llp, 17Th Floor, The Ruby, 29, Senapati Bapat Marg, ............... Appellant Dadar (West), Mumbai - 400028 Pan : Aafci3337N V/S Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax (International Tax) - 2(2)(2) Room No.606, 6Th Floor, Kautilya Bhavan, ……………… Respondent C-41 To C-43, G-Block, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai – 400051 Ishares Msci All Country Asia Ex Japan Etf C/O Ernst & Young Llp, 17Th Floor, The Ruby, 29, Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar (West), Mumbai - 400028 Pan : Aabti7439L ............... Appellant

5 of the Act. 9. erred in holding that mode of computation of capital gains should be as per the provisions of the Act and the provisions of IM treaty should be applied only to the 'net capital gain which forms part of total income; 10. failed to appreciate that as per section 90(2) of the Act, each provision

RELIANCE POWER LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE 15(3)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, ground of appeal raised by assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh& Shri Omkareshwar Chidara(Physical Hearing) Dcit – 15(3)(1), Mumbai Reliance Power Limited Room No. 460, 4Th Floor, H-Block, 1St Floor, Dhirubhai Ambani Vs Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Knowledge City, Koperkhairane, Mumbai – 400020] Navi Mumbai-400710 [Pan: Aaacr2365L] Appellant / Revenue Respondent / Assessee Reliance Power Limited Dcit – 15(3)(1), Mumbai Room No. 460, 4Th Floor, Aayakar Reliance Centre, Ground Floor, 19 Vs Walchand Hirachand Marg, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Ballard Estate, Mumbai – 400001. Mumbai – 400020] [Pan: Aaacr2365L] Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue

5. The assessing officer further noted that during the year under consideration, the assessee company is sold a helicopter and has shown long term capital gain. The assessing officer further noted that helicopter was acquired from Reliance Natural Resources Ltd (RNRL) on demerger during F.Y. 2010-11. The helicopter was sold during the year for Rs. 8.84 crores. The written

TATA COMMUNICATIONS LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. PRINCIPLE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI

In the result, the question of law referred to the Special Bench is answered in favour of the assessee

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Arun Khodpiatata Communications Limited Pr. Cit, Videsh Sanchar Bhavan, Mumbai-1 Vs. M. G. Road, Fort, Mumbai-400 001 Pan/Gir No. Aaacv 2808 C (Appellant) : (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri J. D. Mistri Respondent By : Shri Ritesh Misra, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 25.09.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.09.2025 O R D E R Per Saktijit Dey: The Present Appeal, At The Instance Of The Assessee, Assails Order Dated 21.03.2025, Passed U/S. 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘The Act’ For Short), By Learned Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax (‘Ld. Pcit’ For Short), Pertaining To The Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2018-19. 2. Though The Assessee Has Raised Multiple Grounds, Both On Jurisdictional Issues As Well As On Merits, However, There Is Consensus Between The Parties That The Appeal Can Be Decided On Merits, In Which Event, There Is No Need To Go Into Various Other Issues Raised In Appeal.

5 Tata Communications Limited vs. Pr. CIT 18. The said section starts with non-obstante clause, that is, exception has been carved out to section 2(42A) of the Act, which provides definition for a short term capital asset. The said definition reads as under:- (42A) “short-term capital asset” means a capital asset held by an assessee

SAMIR NARAIN BHOJWANI ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 4(2)(1), MUMBAI

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

gains computed under section 50, arising on transfer of long term capital assets, at the rates mentioned in section 112 of the Act instead of charging them at the normal rates as has been done by the AO.” ITA No. 1022/Mum/2025 – Revenue “1. Whether on the facts in the circumstances of the case the Ld.CIT(A) was justified in allowing

FIDELITY SALEM STREET TRUST FIDELITY SAI EMERGING MARKETS INDEX FUND ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2(3)(1), MUMBAI

The appeals are partly allowed

Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

5. According to the Assessing Officer, the Assessee should have determined the Net Short Term Capital Gain for STT Paid transactions taxable at the rate of and Net Short Term Capital Gain for Non-STT Paid transactions, separately, since the non- STT trade transactions were taxable at the rate of 30% under Section 115AD and STT paid transaction were taxable

EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM OF TEXAS ,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT (INT. TAX)-2(2)(1), MUMBAI

The appeals are partly allowed

Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

5. According to the Assessing Officer, the Assessee should have determined the Net Short Term Capital Gain for STT Paid transactions taxable at the rate of and Net Short Term Capital Gain for Non-STT Paid transactions, separately, since the non- STT trade transactions were taxable at the rate of 30% under Section 115AD and STT paid transaction were taxable

ISHARES MSCI INDIA UCITS ETF ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION )-2(2)(2), MUMBAI

5 of the Act.\n\n9. erred in holding that mode of computation of capital gains should be as per\nthe provisions of the Act and the provisions of IM treaty should be applied only\nto the 'net' capital gain which forms part of total income;\n\n10. failed to appreciate that as per section

SCHWAB EMERGING MARKETS EQUITY ETF ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX INTERNATIONAL TAXATION -4(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

5 of the Act.\n9. erred in holding that mode of computation of capital gains should be as per\nthe provisions of the Act and the provisions of IM treaty should be applied only\nto the 'net' capital gain which forms part of total income;\n10. failed to appreciate that as per section 90(2) of the Act, each provision

ISHARES MSCI ALL COUNTRY ASIA EX JAPAN ETF(AS A SUCCESSOR TO ISHARES MSCI ALL COUNTRY ASIA EX JAPAN MAURITIUS CO),MUMBAI vs. DCIT (INT)-2(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

5 of the Act.\n9. erred in holding that mode of computation of capital gains should be as per\nthe provisions of the Act and the provisions of IM treaty should be applied only\nto the 'net' capital gain which forms part of total income;\n10. failed to appreciate that as per section 90(2) of the Act, each provision

ISHARES MSCI INDIA ETF(AS A SUCESSOR TO ISHARES INDIA INDEX MARUITIUS COMPANY),MUMBAI vs. DCIT (INT)-2(2)(2), MUMBAI

5 of the Act.\n9. erred in holding that mode of computation of capital gains should be as per\nthe provisions of the Act and the provisions of IM treaty should be applied only\nto the 'net' capital gain which forms part of total income;\n10. failed to appreciate that as per section 90(2) of the Act, each provision

ISHARES CORE MSCI EM IMI UCITS ETF,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (INT)-2(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

5 of the Act.\n9. erred in holding that mode of computation of capital gains should be as per\nthe provisions of the Act and the provisions of IM treaty should be applied only\nto the 'net' capital gain which forms part of total income;\n10. failed to appreciate that as per section 90(2) of the Act, each provision

ISHARES CORE MSCI TOTAL INTERNATIONAL STOCK ETF (AS A SUCCESSOR TO ISHARES CORE TOTAL INTERNATIONAL STOCK MAURITIUS CO ),MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2(2)(2), MUMBAI

5 of the Act.\n9. erred in holding that mode of computation of capital gains should be as per\nthe provisions of the Act and the provisions of IM treaty should be applied only\nto the 'net' capital gain which forms part of total income;\n10. failed to appreciate that as per section 90(2) of the Act, each provision

ISHARES MSCI EMERGING MARKETS ETF (AS A SUCCESSOR TO ISHARES EMERGING MARKETS INDEX MAURITIUS CO ),MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

5 of the Act.\n9. erred in holding that mode of computation of capital gains should be as per\nthe provisions of the Act and the provisions of IM treaty should be applied only\nto the 'net' capital gain which forms part of total income;\n10. failed to appreciate that as per section 90(2) of the Act, each provision

ISHARES INDIA 50 ETF (AS A SUCCESSOR TO ISHARES INDIA MAURITIUS CO ),MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

5 of the Act.\n9. erred in holding that mode of computation of capital gains should be as per\nthe provisions of the Act and the provisions of IM treaty should be applied only\nto the 'net' capital gain which forms part of total income;\n10. failed to appreciate that as per section 90(2) of the Act, each provision

ISHARES MSCI EM UCITS ETF USD DIST ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2(2)(2), MUMBAI

5 of the Act.\n\n9. erred in holding that mode of computation of capital gains should be as per\nthe provisions of the Act and the provisions of IM treaty should be applied only\nto the 'net' capital gain which forms part of total income;\n\n10. failed to appreciate that as per section

ISHARES CORE MSCI EMERGING MARKETS ETF (AS A SUCESSOR TO ISHARES CORE EMERGING MARKETS MAURITIUS COMPANY),MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) 2(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

5 of the Act.\n9. erred in holding that mode of computation of capital gains should be as per\nthe provisions of the Act and the provisions of IM treaty should be applied only\nto the 'net' capital gain which forms part of total income;\n10. failed to appreciate that as per section 90(2) of the Act, each provision

MORGAN STANLEY MAURITIUS COMPANY LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-CIRCLE 3(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2020-21 Morgan Stanley Mauritius Company Dy. Cit (International Taxation) – Ltd., Circle 3(2)(2), Vs. C/O S R B C & Associates Llp, 14Th 16Th Floor, Room No. 1615, Air India Floor, The Ruby, 29, Senapati Bapat Building Nariman Point, Marg, Dadar (West), Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400028. Pan No. Aadcm 5927 G Appellant Respondent

11 and submitted that exempt source o and submitted that exempt source of loss does not enter f loss does not enter into return of income and therefore, the capital loss which was of income and therefore, the capital loss which was exempted under exempted under the treaty provisions was not entitled or eligible for to be carried the treaty

SIR RATAN TATA TRUST,MUMBAI SUBURBAN vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)-2(1), MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee in both AY 2014-15 and AY

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

gains of business, the provisions of clause (iii) of this proviso shall not apply unless the trust or institution maintains separate books of account in respect of such business. (emphasis supplied) 9. The contention of the revenue is that funds of the assessee Trust that were invested before 01.03.1983 in Tata Sons Ltd which is not a modes specified