Goldman Sachs Mauritius Nbfc ... vs Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax – ... on 17 February, 2026
From the perusal of the judicial pronouncements relied on by ld
AR we notice that the coordinate bench has laid down the ratio that
where the treaty provisions are beneficial as compared to the provisions
of the Act the taxpayer has right to rely on the treaty provisions and
that the question of touching the brought forward does not arise in
subsequent AYs once the eligibility to carry these losses forward was
determined in the year they were suffered, For AY 2016-17, the
assessee has chosen to be governed by Treaty provisions thereby
claiming the capital gain as exempt since it is more beneficial. The
assessee in AY 2014-15 has chosen to be governed by the Act since it
was more beneficial and accordingly has claimed the carried forward of
the capital loss in said AY. The coordinate bench has allowed the
carried forward from AY 2014-15 and the relevant observations of the
coordinate bench is extracted in the earlier part of this order. Further if
AO's view is to be accepted then it would mean that to the extent of the
loss set off against the current year gain, the gain is brought to tax
under the Act which is not correct. From the perusal of Article - 13, the
India-Singapore DTAA we notice that both are similarly worded and
accordingly, we see merit in the submission of the Id.AR that the ratio
laid down by the Co-ordinate bench in the above case are applicable to
the assessee also. In view of this discussion we hold that the lower
authorities are not correct in setting off the brought forward STCL of AY
2014-15 against the STCG of the AY 2016-17 thereby denying the
benefit of carry forward. The grounds raised by the assessee in this
regard are allowed."