ITAT Mumbai Judgments — April 2024

The ITAT held that while the assessee failed to appear, the CIT(A) also did not adjudicate the appeal on merits. In the interest of natural justice, the assessee should be given another opportunity. However, a cost of Rs. 1,000/- was imposed on the assessee for their conduct.

The Tribunal observed that the primary onus is on the assessee to prove the genuineness, identity, and creditworthiness of share applicants. Once discharged, the onus shifts to the department. In this case, the assessee discharged its onus, and the Assessing Officer failed to bring any evidence to show the transactions were not genuine.

The Tribunal held that delay in filing Form-67 is not a ground for denying foreign tax credit. Citing precedents, it was reasoned that Form-67 filing is a directory requirement, not mandatory, and does not lead to disallowance of credit. Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAA) provisions override the Act and Rules.