SUBRAMANIAN SREERAM,BANGALORE vs. CIT(APPEALS)-NFAC, NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE

ITA 1027/BANG/2022Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 December 2022AY 2021-2210 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that filing Form 67 is a directory, not mandatory, requirement and that the provisions of a Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) override the Act and Rules. Therefore, the foreign tax credit should be allowed.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed foreign tax credit but inadvertently failed to file Form 67 by the due date. The form was filed belatedly, and the tax authorities disallowed the credit, citing non-compliance with Rule 128(9).

What were the issues?

Whether belated filing of Form 67 disentitles the assessee from claiming foreign tax credit, and if DTAA provisions override procedural requirements under the Income Tax Rules.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 90,Section 91

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(13)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH : BANGALORE

Before: SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN & Ms. PADMAVATHY S

For Appellant: Shri Navneet N. Kini, CA
For Respondent: Shri Manjunath Karkihalli, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Hearing: 06.12.2022Pronounced: 08.12.2022

Per Padmavathy S., Accountant Member This appeal is against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 09.09.2022 for the assessment year 2021-22. 2. The assessee raised the following grounds:-

“1. Foreign tax credit has been disallowed on the grounds that filing of form 67 within due date is a pre-condition for claiming foreign tax credit. This assumption is not in line with the decision of this Honourable tribunal in the case of Ms. Brinda Ramakrishna, ITA No. 454/Bang/2021 vide its order dated 17-Nov-2021. 2. Non-speaking order - Rule 128(8) prescribes d

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 →