GOPAL KRISHNAN GOPINATH,CHENNAI vs. ASSESSING OFFICER INTERNATIONAL TAXATION, BSNL BUILDING GREAMS ROAD CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3878/CHNY/2025Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 February 2026AY 2020-2021Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO (Accountant Member), SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member)1 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The assessee filed Form 67 after the intimation under Section 143(1) was issued, which is beyond the due date of filing the return and much after the intimation order. Following the jurisdictional High Court's judgment, the claim of FTC is not allowable as Form 67 was filed late.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a resident of Chennai, earned salary income in the USA during FY 2019-20 (AY 2020-21) and claimed Foreign Tax Credit (FTC). The Form 16 from Infosys showed the FTC, and Form 67 was filed detailing foreign taxes paid.

What were the issues?

Whether the claim for Foreign Tax Credit (FTC) is allowable when Form 67 was filed after the intimation order under Section 143(1) was passed.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 89,Section 139(1),Section 143(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)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, ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI

Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO & SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI

Hearing: 17.02.2026

आदेश / O R D E R

PER MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM:

1.

This captioned Appeal filed by the Assessee is directed against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/Addl/JCIT (A)-1, Lucknow [CIT(A)] dated 15.10.2025 for Assessment Year 2020-21.

(AY 2020-21) Gopal Krishnan Gopinath (Vs) Assessing Officer International 2. Brief Facts of the case are that the appellant earned salary income in USA during FY 2019-20, relevant to AY 2020-21, from which tax was deducted at source by the US employer as per US tax laws. The appellant duly declared this foreign income in the return of income filed for AY 2020-21 and claimed appropriate Foreign Tax Credit. The Form 16 issued by Infosys clearly shows the Foreign Tax Credit in the annexure, though erroneously categorized under "Relief under Section 89" in the main form. Form 67 was subsequently filed providing complete details of foreign taxes paid, before the final processing of the return by CPC. No Revenue leakage to the Government of India as the foreign taxes paid were legitimate and properly documented.

3.

The main issue of the assessee is whether in the facts of the case credit for Foreign Tax Credit [for short FTC] as per Form 67 filed by the assessee is allowable?

4.

We find that this is covered against the assesee by the judgement of this jurisdictional High Court in the case of “Duraiswamy Kumaraswamy v. PCIT (2024) 296 Taxman 502/ 460 ITR 615 / 336 CTR 108(Mad.) (HC)”.

5.

In the present case, we find that the assessee submitted Form 67 only on 24.03.2025, however, the intimation u/S 143(1) was issued on 15.03.2021. Therefore, the assessee filed Form 67 much after (AY 2020-21) Gopal Krishnan Gopinath (Vs) Assessing Officer International due date of filing of return as specified u/S 139(1) of the Act and much after intimation order was passed.

6.

Therefore, respectfully following the judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court (supra), which held that if the FTC form 67 is filed before passing of the final assessment order, it can be allowed. However, in the present case, Form 67 was filed much beyond the intimation order. Hence, claim of FTC is not allowable.

7.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced on the 20th day of February 2026, in Chennai.

More judgments on Section 89

All 65 judgments and leading authorities on Section 89 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →