“Tiger Global did not prove that Mauritius failed as a treaty platform.”

That’s the central conclusion explored in our Managing Director Kamal Hawabhay’s newly published article in Bizweek — and it challenges many of the assumptions circulating after the Indian Supreme Court’s decision.

Rather than testing the India–Mauritius treaty on its merits, the ruling prioritised domestic anti-avoidance rules, raising critical questions about treaty sequencing, GAAR overrides, substance, and exit certainty for global investors.

What does this mean for:
• Private equity and sovereign funds
• Africa–Asia investment structures
• Mauritius as an International Financial Centre
• Treaty certainty versus tax sovereignty

The article breaks down the judgment, the legal reasoning behind it, and why Mauritius remains relevant precisely because treaty certainty still matters when abuse is not established.

Click here to read the full article and understand what the Tiger Global case really signals for cross-border investment structures.