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

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

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

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 is not taxable

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

249 ITR\n517 (SC) and CIT vs. Manmohan Das 59 ITR 699(SC) and also after considering\nCBDT Circular No.22 of 1944 dated 29/07/1944 held that the assessee is justified\nin claiming carry forward of brought forward losses of the earlier years to the\nsubsequent years and at the same time upheld assessee's claim of capital gains\nas exempt

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

249 ITR\n517 (SC) and CIT vs. Manmohan Das 59 ITR 699(SC) and also after considering\nCBDT Circular No.22 of 1944 dated 29/07/1944 held that the assessee is justified\nin claiming carry forward of brought forward losses of the earlier years to the\nsubsequent years and at the same time upheld assessee's claim of capital gains\nas exempt

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

249 ITR\n517 (SC) and CIT vs. Manmohan Das 59 ITR 699(SC) and also after considering\nCBDT Circular No.22 of 1944 dated 29/07/1944 held that the assessee is justified\nin claiming carry forward of brought forward losses of the earlier years to the\nsubsequent years and at the same time upheld assessee's claim of capital gains\nas exempt

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

249 ITR\n517 (SC) and CIT vs. Manmohan Das 59 ITR 699(SC) and also after considering\nCBDT Circular No.22 of 1944 dated 29/07/1944 held that the assessee is justified\nin claiming carry forward of brought forward losses of the earlier years to the\nsubsequent years and at the same time upheld assessee's claim of capital gains\nas exempt

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

249 ITR\n517 (SC) and CIT vs. Manmohan Das 59 ITR 699(SC) and also after considering\nCBDT Circular No.22 of 1944 dated 29/07/1944 held that the assessee is justified\nin claiming carry forward of brought forward losses of the earlier years to the\nsubsequent years and at the same time upheld assessee's claim of capital gains\nas exempt

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

249 ITR\n517 (SC) and CIT vs. Manmohan Das 59 ITR 699(SC) and also after considering\nCBDT Circular No.22 of 1944 dated 29/07/1944 held that the assessee is justified\nin claiming carry forward of brought forward losses of the earlier years to the\nsubsequent years and at the same time upheld assessee's claim of capital gains\nas exempt

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

249 ITR\n517 (SC) and CIT vs. Manmohan Das 59 ITR 699(SC) and also after considering\nCBDT Circular No.22 of 1944 dated 29/07/1944 held that the assessee is justified\nin claiming carry forward of brought forward losses of the earlier years to the\nsubsequent years and at the same time upheld assessee's claim of capital gains\nas exempt

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

249 ITR\n517 (SC) and CIT vs. Manmohan Das 59 ITR 699(SC) and also after considering\nCBDT Circular No.22 of 1944 dated 29/07/1944 held that the assessee is justified\nin claiming carry forward of brought forward losses of the earlier years to the\nsubsequent years and at the same time upheld assessee's claim of capital gains\nas exempt

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

249 ITR\n517 (SC) and CIT vs. Manmohan Das 59 ITR 699(SC) and also after considering\nCBDT Circular No.22 of 1944 dated 29/07/1944 held that the assessee is justified\nin claiming carry forward of brought forward losses of the earlier years to the\nsubsequent years and at the same time upheld assessee's claim of capital gains\nas exempt

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

249 ITR\n517 (SC) and CIT vs. Manmohan Das 59 ITR 699(SC) and also after considering\nCBDT Circular No.22 of 1944 dated 29/07/1944 held that the assessee is justified\nin claiming carry forward of brought forward losses of the earlier years to the\nsubsequent years and at the same time upheld assessee's claim of capital gains\nas exempt

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

4) of the India Mauritius DTAA and therefore, assessee opted over the India Mauritius DTAA and therefore, assessee opted over the India Mauritius DTAA and therefore, assessee opted over the invoking of said provisions. However, in respect of short term of said provisions. However, in respect of short term of said provisions. However, in respect of short term capital loss

THE BOMBAY DYEING & MANUFACTURING COMPANY LTD.,,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, C--2(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () - A.Y 2014-15 - A.Y 2015-16 Asst. Commissioner Of M/S Bombay Dyeing & Income-Tax 2(1)(1), Mumbai, Manufacturing Co. Ltd Room No.561, 5Th Floor, Vs. Neville House, Jn Herdia Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 001 Pan No. Aaact 2328 K Appellant Respondent - A.Y 2014-15 - A.Y 2015-16 M/S Bombay Dyeing & Dy. Commissioner Of Income- Manufacturing Co. Ltd Tax 2(1), Mumbai, Room Neville House, Jn Herdia No.561, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Vs Marg, Ballard Estate, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai- Mumbai-400 001 400 020 Pan No. Aaact 2328 K Appellant Respondent

4,539,004 711 32,373,318 677,189,263 644,916.945 644,916.945 per ICC- new Scal worki ng) Two 143,220 13,176,782 13,176,782 785 103,437,739 1,965,888.396 1,862,450.658 1,862,450.658 ICC- Scal M/s Bombay Dyeing & Manufacturing Co. Ltd. M/s Bombay Dyeing & Manufacturing

ACIT CIRCLE-2(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S BOMBAY DYEING & MANUFACTURING CO. LTD. , MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () - A.Y 2014-15 - A.Y 2015-16 Asst. Commissioner Of M/S Bombay Dyeing & Income-Tax 2(1)(1), Mumbai, Manufacturing Co. Ltd Room No.561, 5Th Floor, Vs. Neville House, Jn Herdia Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 001 Pan No. Aaact 2328 K Appellant Respondent - A.Y 2014-15 - A.Y 2015-16 M/S Bombay Dyeing & Dy. Commissioner Of Income- Manufacturing Co. Ltd Tax 2(1), Mumbai, Room Neville House, Jn Herdia No.561, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Vs Marg, Ballard Estate, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai- Mumbai-400 001 400 020 Pan No. Aaact 2328 K Appellant Respondent

4,539,004 711 32,373,318 677,189,263 644,916.945 644,916.945 per ICC- new Scal worki ng) Two 143,220 13,176,782 13,176,782 785 103,437,739 1,965,888.396 1,862,450.658 1,862,450.658 ICC- Scal M/s Bombay Dyeing & Manufacturing Co. Ltd. M/s Bombay Dyeing & Manufacturing

THE BOMBAY DYEING & MANUFACTURING COMPANY LTD.,,MUMBAI vs. DCIT, C--2(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () - A.Y 2014-15 - A.Y 2015-16 Asst. Commissioner Of M/S Bombay Dyeing & Income-Tax 2(1)(1), Mumbai, Manufacturing Co. Ltd Room No.561, 5Th Floor, Vs. Neville House, Jn Herdia Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 001 Pan No. Aaact 2328 K Appellant Respondent - A.Y 2014-15 - A.Y 2015-16 M/S Bombay Dyeing & Dy. Commissioner Of Income- Manufacturing Co. Ltd Tax 2(1), Mumbai, Room Neville House, Jn Herdia No.561, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Vs Marg, Ballard Estate, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai- Mumbai-400 001 400 020 Pan No. Aaact 2328 K Appellant Respondent

4,539,004 711 32,373,318 677,189,263 644,916.945 644,916.945 per ICC- new Scal worki ng) Two 143,220 13,176,782 13,176,782 785 103,437,739 1,965,888.396 1,862,450.658 1,862,450.658 ICC- Scal M/s Bombay Dyeing & Manufacturing Co. Ltd. M/s Bombay Dyeing & Manufacturing

ACIT CIRCLE-2(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S BOMBAY DYEING & MANUFACTURING CO. LTD. , MUMBAI

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () - A.Y 2014-15 - A.Y 2015-16 Asst. Commissioner Of M/S Bombay Dyeing & Income-Tax 2(1)(1), Mumbai, Manufacturing Co. Ltd Room No.561, 5Th Floor, Vs. Neville House, Jn Herdia Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 001 Pan No. Aaact 2328 K Appellant Respondent - A.Y 2014-15 - A.Y 2015-16 M/S Bombay Dyeing & Dy. Commissioner Of Income- Manufacturing Co. Ltd Tax 2(1), Mumbai, Room Neville House, Jn Herdia No.561, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Vs Marg, Ballard Estate, Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai- Mumbai-400 001 400 020 Pan No. Aaact 2328 K Appellant Respondent

4,539,004 711 32,373,318 677,189,263 644,916.945 644,916.945 per ICC- new Scal worki ng) Two 143,220 13,176,782 13,176,782 785 103,437,739 1,965,888.396 1,862,450.658 1,862,450.658 ICC- Scal M/s Bombay Dyeing & Manufacturing Co. Ltd. M/s Bombay Dyeing & Manufacturing

PRASHANT KOTHARI,SINGAPORE vs. CIT A (57) MUMBAI, OFFICE OF COMMISSIONER OF APPEALS MUMBAI

In the result, the additional ground of\nappeal is allowed

249 ITR 517 (SC) and CIT vs. Manmohan Das 59 ITR 699(SC) and also after\nconsidering CBDT Circular No.22 of 1944 dated 29/07/1944 held that the assessee\nis justified in claiming carry forward of brought forward losses of the earlier years\nto the subsequent years and at the same time upheld assessee's claim of capital\ngains as exempt

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 ()

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