When asking about possibilities, one always has to cede that yes, theoretically it's possible that our understanding is wrong and that X is a possibility, that being said, the battle of Hydaspes is probably(high 99.9...% I'd say) NOT one of these cases. The primary reason for this is the massive casualty disparity. It's not something small, but arguably 20:1 in favor of Alexander, a number supported by(admittedly second-hand) primary sources via Arrian and others and modern scholarly judgement. It's technically true that the battle resulted in a Pyrrhic victory since Alexander immediately left afterwards and arguably the area retained a very high level of autonomy for several decades more. That being said, it would hardly count as a defeat in any sense of the word, and the aftermath of that battle was considered by contemporary sources to be a sound and expected victory (though we must always consider that these sources are quite biased in favor of Alexander, and the second hand sources that gave us our versions are possibly even more so). This claim that the Battle of the Hydaspes was a victory for India is sadly representative of the current state of Indian historiography - a topic on which I am admittedly quite opinionated. Indian Historiography at the moment is extremely infected with nationalism, largely as the result of the current person being in charge having a blatant agenda and not having any historical training.