DHRITIMAN ROY,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(2)(1), BENGALURU

ITA 542/BANG/2025Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 September 2025AY 2019-20Bench: SHRI WASEEM AHMED (Accountant Member), SHRI KESHAV DUBEY (Judicial Member)20 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that Rule 128(9) is directory, not mandatory, and that the assessee cannot be deprived of FTC due to a procedural lapse. The Tribunal also noted that DTAA provisions override the Act and Rules cannot be contrary to the Act.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed Foreign Tax Credit (FTC) of Rs. 7,83,371/- in his revised return of income for AY 2019-20. The claim was denied by the CPC and the CIT(A) on the grounds that Form 67 was not filed before the due date of filing the return, deeming Rule 128(9) mandatory.

What were the issues?

Whether the non-filing of Form 67 before the due date of filing the return of income bars the claim of Foreign Tax Credit, and if Rule 128(9) is mandatory or directory.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 90,Section 139(1),Section 139(5),Section 143(1),Section 234B,Section 234C

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(11)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, “SMC’’ BENCH: BANGALORE

Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED & SHRI KESHAV DUBEY

For Appellant: Shri S.P. Chidambaram, AR
For Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel for Revenue
Hearing: 17.06.2025Pronounced: 11.09.2025

PER KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against the order of the ADDL/JCIT(A), Indore dated 21.01.2025 vide DIN & Order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2024-25/1072365589(1) passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”) for the assessment year 2019-20. 2. The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:

“1. The Appellant objects to the order dated 21 January 2025 under Section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act') issued by the Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Indore ['CIT(A)'] and the Intimat

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 →