ISHARES MSCI ALL COUNTRY ASIA EX JAPAN ETF,MUMBAI vs. DCIT (INT. TAX)-2(2)(2), MUMBAI

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

section 74 of the Act.\nGrounds of Appeal Nos. 8 12: Failure to allow set-off of brought\nforward long-term capital\n7. erred in setting off the long -term capital losses brought forward from earlier\n Assessment Years amounting to Rs. 26,506,339,311 against the current year's\nnet long-term capital gains amounting

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

13 of the India Mauritius (IM Treaty). 8. erred in holding that long term capital gains not chargeable to tax under the IM Treaty form part of the 'total income' of the Appellant as per section

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

8. The ld. CIT(A) on considering the assessment order and the submission of assessee restricted the disallowance of section 14A to the extent of exempt income i.e. Rs. 2.17 crores on relying upon the decision of Delhi High Court ITA Nos. 890 1348/Mum/2023 & C.O. 71/Mum/2023 Reliance Power Ltd. in Cheminvest Ltd. vs CIT (2016) 61 taxmann.com

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.

8 Tata Communications Limited vs. Pr. CIT 25. In our opinion, the assessee cannot be denied exemption under section 54E, because, firstly, there is nothing in section 50 to suggest that the fiction created in Section 50 is not only restricted to sections 48 and 49 but also applies to other provisions. On the contrary, Section 50 makes it explicitly

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

13. The assessee while filing the return of income has offered income to the tune of Rs. 36,35,98,346/- to tax the gain arising out of the sale of assets forming part of block of assets to be taxed at normal rate of tax. The contention of the assessee before us is that the gain on transfer

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)

8. Erred in levying interest under section 234B of the Act amounting to INR 231,937,630, Levy of interest under section 234C of the Act-Rs. 13,330 9. Erred in levying interest under section 234C of the Act amounting to INR 13,330, Initiating penalty proceedings under section 270A of the Act. 10. Erred in initiating penalty under

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)

8. Erred in levying interest under section 234B of the Act amounting to INR 231,937,630, Levy of interest under section 234C of the Act-Rs. 13,330 9. Erred in levying interest under section 234C of the Act amounting to INR 13,330, Initiating penalty proceedings under section 270A of the Act. 10. Erred in initiating penalty under

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

13(4) of India Mauritius DTAA, it is\nclear that non taxability of the capital gains in India prior to 01/04/2017 cannot\nact to the disadvantage of the tax payer. This is because section 90(2) is clear\nto mean that Government of India entered into DTAA with the Government of\nMauritius, according to which the capital gains

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

13(4) of India Mauritius DTAA, it is\nclear that non taxability of the capital gains in India prior to 01/04/2017 cannot\nact to the disadvantage of the tax payer. This is because section 90(2) is clear\nto mean that Government of India entered into DTAA with the Government of\nMauritius, according to which the capital gains

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

8\nwas observed that the assessee computed the net short-term capital gains\namounting to Rs.7,56,55,050, which is chargeable to tax as follows:\nParticulars\nShort-Term Capital Gains taxed at 30% under\nsection 115AD of the Act\nAmounts (in INR)\n4,60,58,240\nLess: Short-Term Capital Loss taxed at 15% under\nsection 111A

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

13(4) of India Mauritius DTAA, it is\nclear that non taxability of the capital gains in India prior to 01/04/2017 cannot\nact to the disadvantage of the tax payer. This is because section 90(2) is clear\nto mean that Government of India entered into DTAA with the Government of\nMauritius, according to which the capital gains

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

13(4) of India Mauritius DTAA, it is\nclear that non taxability of the capital gains in India prior to 01/04/2017 cannot\nact to the disadvantage of the tax payer. This is because section 90(2) is clear\nto mean that Government of India entered into DTAA with the Government of\nMauritius, according to which the capital gains

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

8\nwas observed that the assessee computed the net short-term capital gains\namounting to Rs.7,56,55,050, which is chargeable to tax as follows:\nParticulars\nShort-Term Capital Gains taxed at 30% under\nsection 115AD of the Act\nAmounts (in INR)\n4,60,58,240\nLess: Short-Term Capital Loss taxed at 15% under\nsection 111A

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

13(4) of India Mauritius DTAA, it is\nclear that non taxability of the capital gains in India prior to 01/04/2017 cannot\nact to the disadvantage of the tax payer. This is because section 90(2) is clear\nto mean that Government of India entered into DTAA with the Government of\nMauritius, according to which the capital gains

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

13(4) of India Mauritius DTAA, it is\nclear that non taxability of the capital gains in India prior to 01/04/2017 cannot\nact to the disadvantage of the tax payer. This is because section 90(2) is clear\nto mean that Government of India entered into DTAA with the Government of\nMauritius, according to which the capital gains

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

13(4) of India Mauritius DTAA, it is\nclear that non taxability of the capital gains in India prior to 01/04/2017 cannot\nact to the disadvantage of the tax payer. This is because section 90(2) is clear\nto mean that Government of India entered into DTAA with the Government of\nMauritius, according to which the capital gains

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

13(4) of India Mauritius DTAA, it is\nclear that non taxability of the capital gains in India prior to 01/04/2017 cannot\nact to the disadvantage of the tax payer. This is because section 90(2) is clear\nto mean that Government of India entered into DTAA with the Government of\nMauritius, according to which the capital gains

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

8. In the case of Flagship Indian Investment Co (Mauritius) agship Indian Investment Co (Mauritius) Ltd.(supra), the assessee had claimed benefit of Article Ltd.(supra), the assessee had claimed benefit of Article -13 of the 13 of the DTAA in respect of DTAA in respect of 'Capital Gains' and had sought to carry forward 'Capital Gains' and had sought

ISHARES EMSC MAURITIUS CO ,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (INTERNATIONAL TAXATION )-2(2)(2), MUMBAI

In the result appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail, Jm

section 111A of the act of ₹ 8,771,564/– and other short-term capital gain of ₹ 14,499,155/– totaling to ₹ 23,270,719/–. The assessee has also short-term capital loss for the current year of ₹ 13