HARIHARAN KRISHNAN,MYSURU vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(1), MYSURU

ITA 2759/BANG/2025Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 September 2026AY 2019-20205 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the requirement of filing Form 67 within the prescribed time is directory, not mandatory. A substantive claim for FTC cannot be denied solely due to the delay in filing the form, especially when the form is subsequently furnished.

What were the facts?

The assessee, employed with Infosys, was deputed to the USA and paid taxes there. Upon returning, the assessee claimed Foreign Tax Credit (FTC) in the revised return but failed to file Form 67 within the prescribed time. The FTC claim was denied by the AO and CIT(A) due to the delayed filing of Form 67.

What were the issues?

Whether the claim for Foreign Tax Credit (FTC) can be denied merely on account of delay in filing Form 67, despite the substantive claim being otherwise allowable.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 90

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BANGALORE BENCHES, BANGALORE

Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED & SHRI KESHAV DUBEY

PER SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

The present appeal filed by the assessee pertaining to A.Y. 2019-20 is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (hereafter, the learned CIT(A)) under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereafter, the Act) vide order dated 15.09.2025. 2. In the memo of appeal, the assesse

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 90

All 1,075 judgments and leading authorities on Section 90 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →