SATHYANARAYANAN PADMANABHAN,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 436/CHNY/2023Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 May 2023AY 2018-192 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that filing of Form 67 is directory and not mandatory. The assessee was directed to furnish Form 67 to the AO for verification and grant of tax credit if found in order.

What were the facts?

The assessee was denied foreign tax credit for Rs. 1,86,365/- because Form 67 was not furnished along with the return of income. The delay in filing Form 67 was minor.

What were the issues?

Whether the non-furnishing of Form 67 along with the return of income renders the foreign tax credit inadmissible, considering the delay was minor.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 139(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

माननीय +ी वी. दुगा1 राव, �ाियक सद2 एवं माननीय +ी मनोज कुमार अ7वाल ,लेखा सद2 के सम9। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ (िनधा1रणवष1 / Assessment Year: 2018-19) Shri Sathyanarayanan Padmanabhan ACIT बनाम/ F2, B Block, Doshi Trinity Park Chennai. 178, Vengai Vasal Main Road, Vs. Santhosapuram, Chennai-600 073. �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.AKSPP-5380-N (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) : ("#थ� / Respondent) अपीलाथ�कीओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri PMN.Bhagavath Krishnan (Advocate) – Ld.AR "#थ�कीओरसे/Respondent by : Shri P.Sajit Kumar (JCIT) – Ld. Sr. DR सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date of Hearing : 29-05-2023 घोषणाकीतारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 29-05-2023 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. The sole grievance of the assessee in captioned appeal is denial of foreign Tax Credit for Rs.1,86,365/-. The same has been denied on the ground that Form 67 as required under Rule 128(9) was not furnished along with return of income u/s 139(1). The registry has noted minor delay of 5 days in the appeal which stand condoned considering the period of delay.

2.

We find that similar issue has been adjudicated by co-ordinate bench of this Tribunal in assessee’s favor in the case of Shri Prakash Varadarajulu vs. DCIT (ITA No.990/Chny/2022 order dated 16-02- 2023) wherein it has been held that filing of Form 67 is directory and not mandatory. Taking consistent view, we direct the assessee to furnish Form 67 to Ld. AO who shall verify the same. If the same is found n order, tax credit shall be granted to the assessee.

3.

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 29th May, 2023.

More judgments on Section 139(1)

All 8,117 judgments and leading authorities on Section 139(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →