SHRI ANMOL AVINASH MAHAJAN,NASHIK vs. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX, CPC, BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 627/PUN/2022Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 July 2023AY 2018-193 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the proviso to Section 143(1) regarding proposed adjustments was not followed. Therefore, the matter was remanded to the Assessing Officer/CPC to issue notice of proposed adjustment before processing the return.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed credit for foreign tax, but the CPC rejected it because Form No. 67 was filed after the due date for filing the return of income. The NFAC upheld this rejection, deeming the timely filing of Form No. 67 mandatory.

What were the issues?

Whether credit for foreign tax can be denied solely on the ground of late filing of Form No. 67, and if the procedure under the proviso to Section 143(1) was correctly followed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE

Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO & SHRI S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI

For Appellant: Shri Sanket M. Joshi
For Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Hearing: 19.07.2023Pronounced: 31.07.2023

ORDER

PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM:

1.

This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [‘NFAC’] dated 18.05.2022 for the assessment year 2018-19.

2.

Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant is an individual deriving income under the head “Salaries”. The appellant had filed the Return of Income for the assessment year 2018-19 on 29.08.2018 disclosing total income of Rs.27,25,040/-.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →