<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2024 (3) TMI 310 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450529</link>
    <description>A Mauritius resident holding a valid Tax Residency Certificate was entitled to treaty relief under Article 13(4) of the India-Mauritius DTAA for capital gains from shares acquired before 01.04.2017. The Tribunal noted that CBDT circulars and the Finance Ministry press release recognise the TRC as sufficient proof of residence and preserve grandfathering for pre-01.04.2017 investments. It further stated that treaty benefits cannot be denied merely on allegations of treaty shopping, shell structure, or lack of commercial substance when the limitation of benefits clause applies only prospectively and no fraud or illegality is shown. The capital gains were therefore not taxable in India.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 05 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 07 Mar 2024 09:40:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=746006" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (3) TMI 310 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450529</link>
      <description>A Mauritius resident holding a valid Tax Residency Certificate was entitled to treaty relief under Article 13(4) of the India-Mauritius DTAA for capital gains from shares acquired before 01.04.2017. The Tribunal noted that CBDT circulars and the Finance Ministry press release recognise the TRC as sufficient proof of residence and preserve grandfathering for pre-01.04.2017 investments. It further stated that treaty benefits cannot be denied merely on allegations of treaty shopping, shell structure, or lack of commercial substance when the limitation of benefits clause applies only prospectively and no fraud or illegality is shown. The capital gains were therefore not taxable in India.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450529</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>