SHAHID JAMAL ANSARI,HYDERABAD vs. ACIT., CIRCLE-12(1), HYDERABAD
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Hyderabad ‘ A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad
PER MANJUNATHA G., A.M :
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Addl/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1,
2
Shahid Jamal Ansari
Pune, dated 07.07.2025 of the and pertains to the assessment year 2023-24. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and has filed his return of income for A.Y. 2023-24 on 28-07-2023, declaring total income of Rs. 1,85,38,265/- and claimed Foreign Tax Credit (for short “FTC”) of Rs. 21,58,266/- in respect of taxes paid in the USA and France. The return of income filed by the assessee was processed and intimation under Section 143(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was issued on 04-03-
2024, denying credit for FTC on the ground that relevant Form No.
67 as required under Rule 128(9) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962
was not filed on or before the due date of filing return of income under Section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee has filed a petition under Section 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961
along with relevant Form No. 67 filed on 21-05-2024, and the A.O.
passed the order under Section 154 of the Act, on 10-01-2025 and denied FTC on the ground of delayed filing of Form No. 67 in terms of Rule 128(9) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. 3
Shahid Jamal Ansari
On appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) upheld the order passed by the A.O. under Section 154 of the Act, denying credit for FTC for not filing Form No. 67 on or before the due date. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is now in appeal before us. 5. The Learned counsel for the assessee Ms. Sai Keerthana, C.A. submitted that this issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of ITAT Hyderabad Benches in the case of Suresh Kumar Vobbilisetty Vs. ITO in ITA No.1204/Hyd/2024 dated 07.03.2025, where an identical issue of denial of FTC for non-filing of Form No. 67 on or before the due date of filing the return of income under Section 139(1) of the Act, has been considered and held that filing of Form No. 67 is directory in nature and if such form is filed before the A.O., then the A.O. ought to have considered the relevant Form No. 67 and allow the credit for FTC as per law. Therefore, she submitted that the A.O. may be directed to allow credit for foreign tax credit on the basis of Form No. 67 filed by the assessee.
4
Shahid Jamal Ansari
The Learned Senior A.R. for the Revenue Shri TV Vamshidhar, on the other hand, supporting the order of the Ld. CIT(A), submitted that, as per Rule 128(9) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, the assessee should file Form No. 67 on or before the due date for furnishing the return of income or before the end of the assessment year in which the return for such assessment has been furnished. In the present case, the assessee has furnished Form No. 67 on 21.05.2024, which is beyond the due date specified under Rule 128(9) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, and thus, the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly upheld the order passed by the A.O. denying credit for FTC, and thus, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) should be upheld. 7. We have heard both parties, perused the material on record, and had gone through the orders of the authorities below. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the assessee had filed a return of income for the assessment year under consideration on 27-08-2023, which is on or before the due date for filing the return of income under Section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. No doubt that the assessee has not filed the relevant Form
5
Shahid Jamal Ansari
No. 67 along with the return of income filed for the year under consideration. However, the assessee has filed Form No. 67
belatedly on 21-05-2024 and also filed an application under Section 154 of the Act for rectification of the order passed by the A.O. The A.O. denied credit for FTC only on the ground that there is a delay in filing Form No. 67. Otherwise, the A.O. did not dispute the fact that the assessee has paid taxes on income earned outside India i.e., the USA and France on which, the assessee is eligible to claim credit for taxes paid outside India.
Since the assessee has filed the relevant Form No. 67 and also filed an application under Section 154 of the Act for rectification of the order passed by the A.O., u/s 143(1) of the Act, in our considered view, the A.O. ought to have considered the relevant
Shahid Jamal Ansari in filing Form No. 67. The relevant findings of the Tribunal are as under :
-left space intentionally-
7
Order pronounced in the Open Court on 10th October, 2025. श्री विजय पाल राि
(VIJAY PAL RAO)
उपाध्यक्ष /VICE PRESIDENT (मंजूिधथ जी)
(MANJUNATHA G.)
लेखा सदस्य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Hyderabad, dated 10.10.2025. TYNM/sps
13
Shahid Jamal Ansari
आदेशकी प्रनतनलनप अग्रेनर्त/ Copy of the order forwarded to:-
निर्धाररती/The Assessee : Shri Shahid Jamal Ansari, Flat No.1905, A-Block, Aditya Empress Towers, Shaikpet, Golconda - 500008, Hyderabad, Telangana, India, Hyderabad. 2. रधजस्व/ The Revenue : The Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 12(1), Hyderabad. 3. The Addl CIT, Hyderabad / Pr.CIT, Hyderabad. 4. नवभधगीयप्रनतनिनर्, आयकर अपीलीय अनर्करण, हैदरधबधद / DR, ITAT, Hyderabad 5. गधर्ाफ़धईल / Guard file
आदेशधिुसधर / BY ORDER
Sr. Private Secretary
ITAT, Hyderabad