GURCHARAN SINGH,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-7(1), DELHI, DELHI
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the filing of Form 67 is directory and not mandatory. The assessee had subsequently complied with the filing requirement. The Tribunal allowed the assessee's claim for foreign tax credit, following its own precedent.
What were the facts?
The assessee appealed against an order denying a foreign tax credit claim of Rs. 2,83,170/-. The denial was based on the assessee not filing Form 67 before the due date during the section 143(1) processing.
What were the issues?
Whether the non-filing of Form 67 within the prescribed due date makes the foreign tax credit claim inadmissible, or if such compliance is directory in nature.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH: ‘B’ NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL
This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2019-20, arises against the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/Addl./JCIT(A)- 5, Chennai’s DIN and order no. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024- 25/1068136164(1), dated 29.08.2024, involving proceedings under section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).
Heard both the parties. Case file perused.
Suffice to say, it transpires during the course of hearing that both the learned lower authorities have denied the assessee’s foreign tax credit claim of Rs. 2,83,170/- under section 90 r.w.s. 90A of the Act for the sole reason that he had not filed/uploaded his corresponding Form 67 on or before the prescribed “due” date in the course of section 143(1) processing, dated 18th March, 2021 and upheld in the lower appellate discussion. This is what leaves the assessee aggrieved.
We have given our thoughtful consideration to the assessee’s and department’s vehement arguments reiterating their respective stands. It further emerges that the assessee had subsequently complied with the above Form 67 filing/uploading post facto the due date thereof as admitted by both the parties. And also, that this tribunal’s order dated 4th April, 2024 in the assessee’s case for succeeding assessment years 2020-21 has already accepted his case in principle against the department on the very issue, thereby holding that the above compliance of filing of Form 67 is directory than mandatory in nature. We thus adopt judicial consistency herein as well to allow the assessee’s impugned claim of foreign tax credit in very terms and direct the assessing
More judgments on Section 90
- Amar Rameshkumar Bhalodia, Rajkot vs The ACIT, Circle-1(1), RajkotITA 641/RJT/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2022-23
- Fireeye Ireland Limited, Ireland vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITITA 1431/DEL/2025[2022-2023]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2022-2023
- Archana Gupta, New Delhi vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 3123/DEL/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2022-23
- Shishir Dhatwalia, Hamirpur vs Circle 1(1) Jalpaiguri, JalpaiguriITA 2583/KOL/2025[2021-22]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2021-22
- Raghava Gupta Valiveti, Bangalore vs Income Tax Officer Ward 5(3)(4), BangaloreITA 2744/BANG/2025[2019-20]Status: Disposed28 Sept 2026AY 2019-20
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dwaraka Jewellers, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent, CGST And Central Excise, BhubaneswarOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S N D Waddar And Co vs. Sri Gaurav GuptaKarnataka · 30 Oct 2026
- Kanwar Enterprises Private Limited vs. The Joint Commissioner - State TaxTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Bangi Mines And Minerals vs. The State Of TelanganaTelangana · 30 Oct 2026
- M/S. Arka Business Solutions vs. Principal Commissioner Of CustomsTelangana · 30 Oct 2026