VIKAS KAPPOR,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT CIRCLE 70(1), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 77/DEL/2024Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 April 2024AY 2020-21Bench: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (Vice President), SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA (Accountant Member)3 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal ruled that the filing of Form 67 under Rule 128(9) is directory and not mandatory. Since the assessee had subsequently filed Form 67 with the Assessing Officer, the delay was considered a mere procedural irregularity. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer was directed to allow the FTC claimed by the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a resident individual, claimed Foreign Tax Credit (FTC) of Rs. 88,255 for income earned abroad in AY 2020-21. The claim was disallowed by the Centralized Processing Centre (CPC) under Section 143(1) as Form 67 was not filed along with the income tax return. The First Appellate Authority dismissed the assessee's appeal.

What were the issues?

Whether the non-filing of Form 67 along with the return of income is a mandatory requirement for claiming Foreign Tax Credit (FTC), or if subsequent filing is permissible as a procedural irregularity.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 90,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, DELHI BENCH “H”: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY & SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Narang, Adv
For Respondent: Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. DR
Hearing: 04.04.2024Pronounced: 09.04.2024

O R D E R PER SAKTIJIT DEY, V.P.:

This is an appeal by the assessee against order dated 16.11.2023 passed by the First Appellate Authority pertaining to the assessment year 2020-21.

2.

The short issue arising for consideration is in relation to non grant of Foreign Tax Credit (FTC) of Rs. 88,255/-. Briefly, the facts are, the assessee is a resident individual. For the assessment year under dispute assessee filed his return of income on 30.12.2020, wherein an amount of Rs. 3,67,741/- earned from sources

India was also included and corresponding FTC of Rs. 88,255/- was also claimed in terms of Section 90 of the Act.

2.1 While processing the return of income u/s 143(1) of the Act, the Centralized Processing Centre (CPC), disallowed assessee’s claim of FTC as the return of income was not accompanied with the declaration in form no. 67, claiming FTC.

Challenging such disallowance, assessee preferred appeal before the First Appellate Authority. However, the appeal was dismissed.

3.

We have considered rival submissions and perused materials on record.

Facts on record reveal that though the assessee did not file form no. 67 claiming FTC alongwith the return of income, however, the assessee did file Form no. 67 before the Assessing Officer on 10.02.2021. Therefore, it is a mere procedural irregularity on the part of the assessee. In any case of the matter, it is now well settled that filing of Form 67 in terms of Rule 128(9) is directory and not mandatory. In this context we may refer to following decisions:

- Ms. Brinda Ramakrishna v. ITO (2022) 135 taxmann.com 358; - Bhaskar Dutta Vs. DCIT dated 11.01.2023 - Sumedha Arora v. ITO ITA no. 1399/Del/2022 dated 15.03.2023 - Sonakshi Sinha v. CIT ITA no. 1704/Mum/2022 dated 20.09.2022

3.1 Following the consistent view expressed by the Tribunal in the aforesaid decisions, we direct the Assessing Officer to allow the FTC claimed by the assessee.

4.

In the result, the appeal is allowed.

Order pronounced in open court on 09.04.2024.

More judgments on Section 90

All 1,075 judgments and leading authorities on Section 90 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →