APARNA GIRISH HEBBANI,AUSTRALIA vs. INT TAX WARD 2(2)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

ITA 5061/MUM/2025Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 January 2026AY 2019-20Bench: SHRI PAWAN SINGH (Judicial Member), SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL (Accountant Member)1 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that Rule 128(9) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, requiring the filing of Form-67 before the due date for furnishing the return of income, is procedural and directory, not mandatory. The denial of FTC solely on the ground of delay in filing Form-67 would lead to unjust double taxation, contrary to the DTAA and Section 90 of the Act.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a non-resident Indian teaching in Australia, claimed foreign tax credit (FTC) for taxes paid in Australia on income also taxed in India. She filed Form-67 late due to technical glitches and travel restrictions due to COVID-19, which led to the denial of FTC by the assessing officer and CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the delay in filing Form-67, due to genuine hardship and technical glitches, can be a ground to deny the claim of Foreign Tax Credit (FTC)?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 90,Section 154,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(4)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, “I” BENCH MUMBAI

Before: SHRI PAWAN SINGH & SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL

Hearing: 15.10.2025Pronounced: 06.01.2026

PER GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

This appeal filed by assessee is against the order of CIT (A) 56, Mumbai vide ITBA/APL/S/250/2023-24/1061197750(1), dated 20.02.2024 passed against the assessment order by Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax – Centralized Processing Centre (CPC), Bengaluru, u/s. 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”), dated 15.01.2022 for Assessment Year 2019-20. 2. Grounds taken by assessee are reproduced as under:

2 Aparna Girish Hebbani AY 2019-20 “1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeais) [CIT(A)] erred in upholding the deniat of F

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 →