Well, i understood it thus. There were first the Anti avoidance rules called the GAAr rules which were intended to catch those who benefit from the treaty in Mauritius without belonging to Mauritius per se , with a token presence not backed by assets or business i.e. Offshore investors. These offshore investors have been targeted.
Two, in the clarification on Overseas M&A transaction involving india assets, the intention is not to cover P Notes because underlying equities are Indian Assets. So that piece was unnecessary walk in the park while the trucks were running up and down and you could have all avoided the noise.
The real rule details would thus clarify how Portfolio and FDI investor would be welcomed and how revenue leakage from Maurtitus a s a treaty participant, which remains the key example, would be taken care of now that the new treaty signed has included only token changes at the behest of the Mauritius government. And no clarifications are available yet. We are looking.
- FDI worth Rs.1,034 cr cleared (thehindu.com)
- Capital gains, everyone else loses (thehindu.com)
- Country Profiles: Mauritius (trifter.com)
- IMF Executive Board Concludes 2012 Article IV Consultation with Mauritius (appablog.wordpress.com)