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

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

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 90(2) of the Act, each provision of\nthe Act should be considered separately and therefore for determining 'total\nincome', the income under head \"Capital gains\" has to be first determined\nconsidering the provisions of the Act or the treaty. whichever is more beneficial\nand once it is determined that the grandfathered gains are not chargeable to\ntax

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

capital gain and brought the same to tax. 6. Aggrieved by the additions in the assessment order, the assessee filed appeal before ld. CIT(A). Before ld. CIT(A), the assessee filed detailed written submission against both the additions. The submission of assessee on disallowance under section 14A are recorded on page no. 9

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.

capital gains under section 112 of the Act?” 9. While answering the question referred to, ld. Special Bench, as per the majority

ACIT 421 MUMBAI, MUMBAI CITY vs. SAMIR NARAIN BHOJWANI, MUMBAI

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

capital gain for the purpose of Section 50 and such deeming\nfiction is with regard to applicability of Section 48 & 49. The decision of the Hon'ble\nSupreme Court cannot be a binding precedent on the issue which was not there at all.\nIt is axiomatic that the decision cannot be relied upon which was not the issue or\ncontext

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

capital gain for the purpose of Section 50 and such deeming fiction is with regard to applicability of Section 48 & 49. The decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court cannot be a binding precedent on the issue which was not there at all. It is axiomatic that the decision cannot be relied upon which was not the issue or context

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)

9. We have considered the rival submissions and have perused the material on record. 10. The solitary issue that arise for consideration is whether Short Term Capital Loss from STT paid transactions can be set off against Short Term Capital Gains arising from Non-STT paid transactions prior to setting off the available Short Term Capital Gains arising from

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)

9. We have considered the rival submissions and have perused the material on record. 10. The solitary issue that arise for consideration is whether Short Term Capital Loss from STT paid transactions can be set off against Short Term Capital Gains arising from Non-STT paid transactions prior to setting off the available Short Term Capital Gains arising from

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

9 raised in assessee's appeal are\nallowed for statistical purposes.\n\n41. Ground no.10, raised in assessee's appeal, pertains to the initiation of\npenalty proceedings under section 270A of the Act, which is premature in\nnature. Therefore, the said ground is dismissed.\n\n42. In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

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

capital gains earned\non the transaction of sale of share subjected to STT. Accordingly, the assessee\nwas asked to show cause as to why the set-off of lower taxable loss should\nnot be denied with higher taxable gains, as the IT Rules have provided\nseparate columns for set-off and carry-forward of losses. In response, the\nassessee submitted

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

9 raised in assessee's appeal are\nallowed for statistical purposes.\n\n41. Ground no.10, raised in assessee's appeal, pertains to the initiation of\npenalty proceedings under section 270A of the Act, which is premature in\nnature. Therefore, the said ground is dismissed.\n\n42. In the result, the appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical\npurposes

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

capital gains earned\non the transaction of sale of share subjected to STT. Accordingly, the assessee\nwas asked to show cause as to why the set-off of lower taxable loss should\nnot be denied with higher taxable gains, as the IT Rules have provided\nseparate columns for set-off and carry-forward of losses. In response, the\nassessee submitted

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

9,753,334) B] Long term capital gains' (loss) B] Long term 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

ISHARES MSCI EM IMI ESG SCREENED UCITS ETF,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 ₹ 13,466,801/– therefore the net short-term capital gain earned by the assessee for the year was ₹ 9

ISHARES MSCI EM UCITS ETF USD ACC,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 ₹ 13,466,801/– therefore the net short-term capital gain earned by the assessee for the year was ₹ 9

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 ₹ 13,466,801/– therefore the net short-term capital gain earned by the assessee for the year was ₹ 9

ISHARES MSCI INDIA UCITS ETF,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 ₹ 13,466,801/– therefore the net short-term capital gain earned by the assessee for the year was ₹ 9

ISHARES MSCI EM UCITS ETF USD DIST ,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 ₹ 13,466,801/– therefore the net short-term capital gain earned by the assessee for the year was ₹ 9

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

capital gain index for the year of the sale should be applied. The Ld.CIT(A), however, in view of the clear d.CIT(A), however, in view of the clear provisions of section 45(2) of the Act for indexed cost of the provisions of section 45(2) of the Act for index provisions of section