Last October, the Supreme Court upheld the validity of a circular issued by the Indian Central Board of Direct Taxes, which stated that a certificate of residence issued by the Mauritian authorities constituted sufficient evidence of residence in the jurisdiction to allow a firm or investor to take advantage of the provisions of the bilateral DTA between India and Mauritius.

However, earlier this year, one of the petitioners in the earlier public interest litigation against the circular, former commissioner of income tax Shiv Kant Jha, filed a petition with the Supreme Court, alleging that there had been a gross miscarriage of justice.

Mr Jha argued that the Court's earlier decision sanctioned the concept of 'treaty shopping', and would allow non-Mauritian businesses to assume residence in the jurisdiction solely in order to take advantage of its tax treaty with India. The Supreme Court has rejected this view.