MOOG MOTION CONTROLS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), BANGALORE

ITA 184/BANG/2024Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 May 2024AY 2019-2020Bench: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K (Vice President), SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2019-20 M/s. Moog Motion Controls Pvt. Ltd., Site No.42-43, Doraisanipalya Village, Opp. Oracle (Kalyani Magnum), Bilekahalli, Begur Hobli, Bengaluru – 560 076. PAN : AADCM 3828 J Vs. ACIT, Circle – 4(1)(1), Bengaluru. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. Srinivas K. P, CA Revenue by : Shri. V. Parithivel, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 20.03.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 08.019 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that filing Form 67 is a procedural requirement and not mandatory, and that the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) overrides the Act. The disallowance for employees' PF contribution was sustained based on the Supreme Court's decision in Checkmate Services.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed foreign tax credit under Section 90 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, but Form 67 was filed after the due date. The assessee also claimed a deduction for employees' contribution to Provident Fund, which was disallowed due to delayed remittance.

What were the issues?

Whether delay in filing Form 67 bars the claim for foreign tax credit, and whether disallowance for delayed PF contribution is valid.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 90,Section 36(1)(va),Section 2(24)(x),Section 139(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(13)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 : BANGALORE

Before: SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K & SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU

For Appellant: Shri. Srinivas K. P, CA
For Respondent: Shri. V. Parithivel, JCIT(DR)(ITAT)
Hearing: 20.03.2024Pronounced: 08.05.2024

Per Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member :

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, (DIN & Order No. ITBA/APL/S/250/2023-24/1058573293(1)) dated 08.12.2023, on the following grounds of appeal: 1. The learned CIT(A) grievously erred by denying the claim for credit in respect of foreign taxes paid to the extent of Rs. 4,86,566/- u/s 90 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. on the contention that Form 67 was not filed before the time limit specified u/s 139(1), without appreciating that the withholding tax certificates for which reli

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 →