ISHARES CORE MSCI EMERGING MARKETS ETF (AS A SUCCESSOR TO ISHARES CORE EMERGING MARKETS MAURITIUS COMPANY ,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (TP) 2(2)(2), 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

capital gains chargeable to tax under section 112 and section 112A of the Act amounting to Rs. 25079,25,33,124. Further

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

capital gains' (loss) On derivatives (63,840) (63,840) On Mutual Funds (452,624) (452,624) covered under seclion 112A] Equity shares 695,755,142 683,968,998 1,932,611 [1] 1,932,611 covered under section

RAMESH JAISINGHANI,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -5(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

112A read with section 45 read with section 48 read with Explanation (a)(iii) (AA) to section 55(2)(ac) of the Act. [This position is similar to the position FROM the insertion of certain assets under section 55(2)(a) defining cost of acquisition of certain assets as Nil and the capital gain

EMERGING MARKETS INDEX NON-LENDABLE FUND ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION )-2(2)(1), MUMBAI

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

gains chargeable to tax under section 112A at Rs.\n3,129,503,989 as against 'NIL' determined in the impugned order;\n11. Without prejudice to the above, erred in not setting off the net\nlong term capital

EMERGING MARKETS EQUITY INDEX MASTER FUND ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY CIT (INT. TAX)-2(2)(1), MUMBAI

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

gains chargeable to tax under section 112A at Rs.\n3,129,503,989 as against 'NIL' determined in the impugned order;\n11. Without prejudice to the above, erred in not setting off the net\nlong term capital

I SHARES ESG AWARE MSCI EM ETF ,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\nstatistical purposes

gains chargeable to tax under section 112A at Rs.\n3,129,503,989 as against 'NIL' determined in the impugned order;\n11. Without prejudice to the above, erred in not setting off the net\nlong term capital

MATRIX PARTNERS INDIA INVESTMENT HOLDINGS, LLC,MAURITIUS vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, MUMBAI

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai () & Ms. Padmavathy S ()

112A, 112 and 115BB he submitted that, these sections encapsulate levy of tax on different sources of income and supports that the tax needs to be computed separately in respect of income earned from different streams. He further submitted that, the concept of source of income is also well recognized under provisions of section 70 of the Act, wherein loss

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

Bench: SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA (Accountant Member)

112A, 115A, 115BBE are all contained in Chapter XII Determination of Tax in certain special cases and is an extension of tax rate applicable, modifying the same. Therefore, in the process of determination of income chargeable under the head "Capital Gains" and consequently determination of total income, the applicability of the relevant tax rates has to be brought into play

INDIUM IV (MAURITIUS) HOLDINGS LIMITED ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMM. OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION) 2(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleindium Iv (Mauritius) Holdings Limited V. Dcit (International Transaction)-2(2)(1) Office 201, 2Nd Floor, Sterling Tower Room No. 1722, 17Th Floor Air India Building, Nariman Point 14 Poudriere Street, Port Louis Mumbai – 400 021 Mauritius Pan: Aacci4907P (Appellant) (Respondent)

gains for, two classes of assets viz long term and short term assets. Classification of capital assets between long and short term is determined depending on the period of holding. Further, taxation of STCG and LTCG is also governed under different sections being 111A of the Act in case of STCG and 112 / 112A

ITO 32(3)(4), MUMBAI vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA STAFF VAIBHAV CO-OP. HSG. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and cross objection of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am Ito-32(3)(4) Vs. State Bank Of India Staff Room No.103, 1St Floor Vaibhav Co-Op Hsg. Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan Bungalow No.8, Daulat M.K.Road, Nagar, Road No.1, Mumbai – 400 020 Borivali (E) Mumbai – 400 066 Pan/Gir No.Aaias1423J (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Co No.8/Mum/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita No.5324/Mum/2016) (Assessment Year :2011-12) State Bank Of India Vs. Ito-32(3)(4) Room No.103, 1St Floor Staff Vaibhav Co-Op Hsg. Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan Bungalow No.8, Daulat M.K.Road, Nagar, Road No.1, Mumbai – 400 020 Borivali (E) Mumbai – 400 066 Pan/Gir No.Aaias1423J (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Revenue By Shri Santanu Kumar Saikia Assessee By Shri Dr. P. Daniel Date Of Hearing 13/06/2019 Date Of Pronouncement 19/06/2019

gains. Hence the answer to question no. a) raised hereinabove, is decided in favour of the assessee. 8.3. The provisions of section 55(2) of the Act states as under:- ―55(2) For the purposes of sections 48 and 49, "cost of acquisition",— (a) in relation to a capital asset, being goodwill of a business or a trade mark

ADITYA BIRLA SUN LIFE AMC LIMITED,MAHARASHTRA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-CIRCLE 6(1)(1), MAHARASHTRA

112A of the Act and that, during the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee inadvertently admitted, by mistake, that the said amount had not been offered as short-term capital gains. Relying on such inadvertent admission, the Assessing Officer treated the amount as short-term capital gains under section

ADITYA BIRLA SUN LIFE AMC LIMITED,MAHARASHTRA vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- CIRCLE 6(1)(1), MAHARASHTRA

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar1. Ita No. 6663/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2017-18) 2. Ita No. 6701/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2018-19) 3. Ita No. 6702/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2022-23) & 4. Ita No. 6703/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2023-24) Aditya Birla Sun Life Dcitcircle-6(1)(1), Amc Limited, Room No. 502, 5Th 17Th Floor, One World Vs. Floor, Aayakar Centre Tower-1, Jupiter Bhavan, M. K. Mill Compount, 841, Road, Churchgate, Senapati Bapat Marg, Mumbai-400 020 Delisle Road, S.O. Mumbai-400 013 Pan/Gir No. Aaacb6134D (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Ronak Doshi, Shri Shrey Agrawal & Shri Aadish Jain, Ld. Ars Revenue By Shri Surendra Mohan, Ld. Dr Date Of Hearing 27.01.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 06.02.2026

112A of the Act and that, during the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee inadvertently admitted, by mistake, that the said amount had not been offered as short-term capital gains. Relying on such inadvertent admission, the Assessing Officer treated the amount as short-term capital gains under section

INDIA ACORN FUND LTD ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION)-2(2)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Smt Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm & Ms Padmavathy S, Am

Capital gains and differential rates of taxation as per section 111A or section 112A do not impact the operation of sub-section

INDER JAISINGHANI,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE -5(2), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)

Capital gains chargeable to tax under (G) = (E) - (F) Rs. 2,97,05,580 section 112AoftheAct 5.1. Accordingly, the above tabulated working, the resultant gain under section 112A

BHAGIRATHI ENTERPRISE,VILE PARLE WEST MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 34(1)(1), MUMBAI BANDRA EAST

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for the AY

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

gainfully refer to and the same reads as under: “21. We have given a thoughtful consideration to the rival submissions and perused materials on record. We have also applied our mind to the judicial precedents cited before us. The short issue arising for consideration before us is, 'whether the definition of maximum marginal rate in terms with section

BHAGIRATHI ENTERPRISE,VILE PARLE WEST MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 34(1)(1), BANDRA EAST MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for the AY

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal

gainfully refer to and the same reads as under: “21. We have given a thoughtful consideration to the rival submissions and perused materials on record. We have also applied our mind to the judicial precedents cited before us. The short issue arising for consideration before us is, 'whether the definition of maximum marginal rate in terms with section

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CC 5(2) CENTRAL RANGE-5, MUMBAI vs. M/S. WELLKNOWN BUSINESS VENTURES LLP, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

gain upon sale of such shares u/s 112A of the Act. The conditions set out in Section 112A of the Act is noted to be similar to that of the conditions set out in Section 10(38) of the Act, which also provides as follows:- “(i) the total income includes any income chargeable under the head "Capital

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CC 5(2) CENTRAL RANGE-5, MUMBAI vs. M/S. WELLKNOWN BUSINESS VENTURES LLP, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

gain upon sale of such shares u/s 112A of the Act. The conditions set out in Section 112A of the Act is noted to be similar to that of the conditions set out in Section 10(38) of the Act, which also provides as follows:- “(i) the total income includes any income chargeable under the head "Capital

MANOJ TEKRIWAL,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 24(2), MUMBAI

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

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

capital gain arising from sale of asset has to be rejected. 25. We further find that the coordinate bench of Tribunal in Ashok G. Chauhan vs ACIT: [2019] 176 ITD 717 (Mum.), while granting relief to the taxpayer under section 54F of the Act, observed as under: "8.3 Now the only question remains as to whether assessee can be said