How many judgments cite Duraiswamy Kumaraswamy v. PCIT?

50 judgments on BharatTax cite Duraiswamy Kumaraswamy v. PCIT (460 ITR 615), spanning 2024 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Duraiswamy Kumaraswamy v. PCIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 143(1), Section 90, Section 139(1), Section 154, Section 250, Section 91.

Duraiswamy Kumaraswamy v. PCIT

460 ITR 615High Court2024#2317 most cited

What is Duraiswamy Kumaraswamy v. PCIT authority for?

An assessee's claim for Foreign Tax Credit (FTC) cannot be rejected merely because Form 67 was filed after the due date under section 139(1), provided it is filed before the completion of assessment proceedings.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,314 Indian tax judgments — from 2024 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Duraiswamy Kumaraswamy · foreign tax credit · FTC · Form 67 · section 139(1) due date · belated filing · assessment proceedings · section 90 · section 91 · rejection of FTC claim · Madras High Court

Also reported as

156 Taxmann.com 445

Sections most often in play

Section 143(1)Section 90 Section 139(1)Section 154 Section 250 Section 91 Section 128 Section 90A

Issues it is cited on

section 295 foreign tax credit section 91 section 90a rectification under section 154 section 90 azadi bachao andolan section 90(2)section 119(2)(b)section 139(5)section 119(2)tax treaty

Judgments citing Duraiswamy Kumaraswamy v. PCIT

Vivek Tiwari, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Circle 3, Suri

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 163/KOL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 90

…decisions in support of the claim that filing of Form No. 67 is directory and not mandatory and therefore, the relief of foreign tax credit is allowable as Form No. 67 was available at the time of processing of the return: “i) Duraiswamy Kumaraswamy Vs. PCIT-460 ITR 615 (Madras) ii) Kuthoore Venkatasubramanian Vs. PCIT-168 taxmann.com 622 (Madras) iii) Venkatesh Krishnamoorti Vs. PCIT-169 taxmann.com 339 (Madras) iv) Rahul Anand Vs. ADIT, CPC-169 taxmann.com 281 (Kolkata ITAT) v) Surendra Goenka Vs. ADIT-169 taxmann.com 306 (Kolkata ITAT) vi) BGA Electrical (P.) Ltd. Vs. DCIT-169 taxmann.com 272 (Kolkata ITAT) v…

ACIT-8(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Reliance Retail Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the revenue is dismissed and cross objection by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4251/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal, Advocate, Shri NimeshFor Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT DR

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…ce Retail Ltd., AY 2018-19 denied. It is an undisputed fact that Form 67 is on record. We find that this issue is no longer res integra as held in favour of the assessee by the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in the case of Duraiswamy Kumaraswamy v. PCIT [2024] 460 ITR 615 (Mad) where in it held that where assessee claimed foreign tax credit (FTC) and filed Form-67 after due date specified for furnishing return under section 139(1) but before completion of assessment proceedings, rejection of assessee's FTC claim was not proper. Respectfully following the aforesaid jurisprudence, in the given set of facts, we remit…

Vipul Chandrakant Sawalwade, Pune vs. The ITO Ward 13(1), Pune

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 659/PUN/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune13 May 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr.Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamoreआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.659/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri Sanket JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh B Budruk

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250

…due date for filing the return u/s.139(1) of the 3 Vipul Chandrakant Sawalwade Act. Assessee was denied FTC solely on the ground of filing of Form No.67 belatedly. We observe that Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Duraiswamy Kumaraswamy v. PCIT (2024) 336 CTR 108 (Madras) has held that filing of Form No.67 read with Rule 128 of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 is only directory in nature and not mandatory. Similar view has also been followed by this Tribunal in the case of Preeti Das (supra) placing reliance of the judgment of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the case of Duraiswamy Kumaraswamy (supra) Finding of th…

Alok Kumar Jain, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(3)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 439/BANG/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 May 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Soundararajan K.Assessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Balaji V., CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, Jt.CIT (DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 246A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment year: 2019-20 Alok Kumar Jain, Vs. The Deputy Commissioner C/o. Blackstone Advisors India Private Ltd., of Income Tax, 5th Floor, Express Towers, Circle 3(3)(1), Nariman Point, Bangalore. Mumbai – 400 021. PAN: AJLPJ 1031E APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Balaji V., CA Respondent by : Ms. Neha Sahay, Jt.CIT (DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 05.05.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 08.05.2025 O R D E R Per Prashant Maharishi, Vice President 1.…

Aditya Somani, Hooghly vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 34(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1897/KOL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Apr 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar&Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey]

Section 1Section 139Section 143(1)Section 154Section 234BSection 6Section 90

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, कोलकाता पीठ “ए’’, कोलकाता IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH: KOLKATA "ी राजेश कुमार, लेखा सट"य एवं "ी "द"प कुमार चौबे, "या"यक सद"य के सम" [Before Shri Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member &Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey, Judicial Member] I.T.A. No. 1897/Kol/2024 Assessment Year: 2021-22 Aditya Somani Vs. ITO, Ward-34(1), Kolkata (PAN: ASHPS 9490 H) ( अपीलाथ" ) Respondent / ""यथ" Appellant / Date of Hearing / सुनवाई 13.03.2025 क" "त"थ Date of Pronouncement/ 16.04.2025 आदेश उ"घोषणा क" "त"थ For the assessee / Shri Vishal Kalra, A.R "नधा"रती क" ओर से For the revenue / राज"व Smt. Monalisha P…

Sridharan Venkatanarayanan, Secunderabad vs. DCIT., Circle- 12(1), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 32/HYD/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Mar 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Manjunatha, G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.32/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19) Sri Sridharan Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Venkatanarayanan Income Tax, Circle 12(1) Secunderabad Hyderabad Pan:Bgaps6316N (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: C.A V. Balaji राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Dr. Sachin Kumar, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 24/03/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 27/03/2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: C.A V. BalajiFor Respondent: : Dr. Sachin Kumar, DR

Section 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 91

…ource and take a view inconformity with the established law discussed above.” Page 9 of 11 ITA 32 of 2025 Sridharan Venkatanarayanan 8. The Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Duraiswamy Kumaraswamy v. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, reported in 460 ITR 615 has also held in para 11 to 13 as under: “11. The law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in G.M.Knitting Industries (P) Ltd. (supra), which was referred above, would be squarely applicable to the present case. In the present case, the returns were filed without FTC, however the same was filed before passing of the final assessment order. The fil…

Anoosha Paruchuri, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2, Karimnagar

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 145/HYD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad20 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia

For Appellant: A. Sharren, AdvocateFor Respondent: : Shri Suresh Babu, SR-DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 90

…ly and not within the due date specified for furnishing the ROI u/s.139(1) of the Act. In support of her submission, the Ld. AR has relied upon the decision of CIT Vs. G M Knitting Industries (P) Ltd. 376 ITR 456 (SC) and Duraiswamy Kumaraswamy Vs. PCIT & Ors 460 ITR 615 (Mad) and submitted that the filing of Form no.67 is only directory requirement and delay in filing the same cannot be a ground for disallowance of FTC. Finally, the Ld. AR prayed before the bench to allow the FTC. 5. Per contra, the Learned Department Representative ("Ld. DR") submitted that, the assessee could not produce the evidence of filin…

Suresh Kumar Vobbilisetty, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, International Taxation-2, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1204/HYD/2024[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Mar 2025AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao, Vice-A N D Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1204/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22) Shri Suresh Kumar Vs. Income Tax Officer Vobbilisetty, (International Taxation)-2 Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Acgpv5441G (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Ca K Hemalatha राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Kumar Aditya, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 15/01/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 07/03/2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: CA K HemalathaFor Respondent: : Shri Kumar Aditya, DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 91

…and take a view inconformity with the established law discussed above.” Page 8 of 10 ITA No 1204 of 2024 Suresh Kumar Vobbilisetty 8. The Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Duraiswamy Kumaraswamy v. Principal Commissioner of Income- tax, reported in 460 ITR 615 has also held in para 11 to 13 as under: “11. The law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in G.M.Knitting Industries (P) Ltd. (supra), which was referred above, would be squarely applicable to the present case. In the present case, the returns were filed without FTC, however the same was filed before passing of the final assessment order. The fil…

Michael J Ponnambalam, Tirunelveli vs. ITO, Ward-1, Tirunelveli

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1/CHNY/2025[2021-22]Status: HeardITAT Chennai07 Mar 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Ss Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.3340/Chny/2024 & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.01/Chny/2025 िनधा:रण वष: /Assessment Years: 2020-21 & 2021-22 Michael J Ponnambalam, The Income Tax Officer, 7-40, Sannathi Street, Vs. Ward-1, Vadakangulam S.O., Tirunelveli. Tirunelveli – 627 116. [Pan: Hbjpp 5981C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Girish Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. M.D.Vijay Kumar, JCIT

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी यस यस िव"ने" रिव, "ाियक सद एवं "ी जगदीश, लेखा सद के सम' BEFORE SHRI SS VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAGADISH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.3340/Chny/2024 & आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.01/Chny/2025 िनधा:रण वष: /Assessment Years: 2020-21 & 2021-22 Michael J Ponnambalam, The Income Tax Officer, 7-40, Sannathi Street, Vs. Ward-1, Vadakangulam S.O., Tirunelveli. Tirunelveli – 627 116. [PAN: HBJPP 5981C] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथF की ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri Girish Kumar, Advocate HIथ…

Michael J Ponnambalam, Tirunelveli vs. ITO, Ward-1, Tirunelveli

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3340/CHNY/2024[3340]Status: HeardITAT Chennai07 Mar 2025

For Appellant: Shri Girish Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Dr. M.D.Vijay Kumar, JCIT

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)

Suhail Amin Nathani, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 16(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 6952/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Vp & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Am Suhail Amin Nathani Asst. Cit 801, 8Th Floor, Prabhu Kutir, Aaykar Bhavan, R. No. 446, Vs. 15, Altamount Road, Mumbai-400 026 M. K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 Pan/Gir No. Acapn 0531 D (Appellant) : (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Gautam Thacker Respondent By : Shri Bhangepatil Pusharaj Ramesh Date Of Hearing : 27.02.2025 Date Of Pronouncement : 27.02.2025

For Appellant: Shri Gautam ThackerFor Respondent: Shri Bhangepatil Pusharaj Ramesh

Section 143(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, VP AND SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, AM Suhail Amin Nathani Asst. CIT 801, 8th Floor, Prabhu Kutir, Aaykar Bhavan, R. No. 446, Vs. 15, Altamount Road, Mumbai-400 026 M. K. Road, Mumbai-400 020 PAN/GIR No. ACAPN 0531 D (Appellant) : (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Gautam Thacker Respondent by : Shri Bhangepatil Pusharaj Ramesh Date of Hearing : 27.02.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 27.02.2025 O R D E R Per Saktijit Dey, VP: This is an appeal by the assessee against order dated 16.10.2024, passed by the learned Commissioner of Income T…

Excelsoft Technologies Limited, Mysore vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Mysore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2191/BANG/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore13 Jan 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Bibhuti Ram Krishna, CAFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, Jt.CIT (DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 90

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment year: 2020-21 Excelsoft Technologies Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner 1-B, Hootagalli Industrial Area, of Income Tax, Mysore – 570 018. Circle 1(1), PAN: AAACE 7999R Mysore. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Bibhuti Ram Krishna, CA Respondent by : Shri V. Parithivel, Jt.CIT (DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 19.12.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 13.01.2025 O R D E R Per Prashant Maharishi, Vice President 1. This appeal is filed by Excelsof…

Loveen Babu Vuppala, Secunderabad vs. ITO., Ward-9(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1121/HYD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Dec 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1121/Hyd/2024 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2021-22) Loveen Babu Vuppala Vs. Income Tax Officer Secunderabad Ward-9(1) [Pan : Alppv1796E] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Ms.Aluru V Sai Sudha, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By:: Shri R.Kumaran, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 19/12/2024 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 30/12/2024 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 30.08.2024 Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Ld.Cit(A)], Kolkata, Pertaining To A.Y.2021-22 On The Following Grounds : 1. The Cit(A) Erred In Not Condoning The Delay & Not Admitting The Appeal 2. The Cit(A) Erred In Holding That There Was No Sufficient Cause For Condoning The Delay In Filing The Appeal

For Appellant: Ms.Aluru V Sai Sudha, ARFor Respondent: : Shri R.Kumaran, DR

Section 119(2)(b)Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 234A

…sary documents from foreign country and file Form- 67 along with ROI. But, the petitioner uploaded the Form-67 on 08.10.2022. The reasons stated by the petitioner appears to be reasonable and genuine and further this Court in a similar case reported in (2024) 460 ITR 615 (Duraiswamy Kumaraswamy vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax and Other) passed the following order. “9. In the present case, the petitioner initially worked at Kenya and subsequently, he became the resident of India from the assessment years 2018-2019 and 2019-2020. The petitioner admitted the fact that he has filed his return in India on Aug…

Nihilent Limited, Pune vs. PCIT-2, Pune

ITA 929/PUN/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ravi Prakash

Section 139Section 263Section 90

…g the relevant facts on record and more particularly, the law settled regarding interpretation of Rule 128 of the Income Tax Rules being directory then mandatory in nature, has not been considered. Learned counsel further quotes D. Kumaraswami Vs. PCIT (2024) 460 ITR 615 (Mad.) that the issue is already settled against the department to this clinching fact. 4. Learned CIT-DR on the other hand had draws strong support from the PCIT impugned revision directions on the ground that it has come on record that the assessee’s claim of Rs.95,32,362/- hereinabove (supra) was neither considered nor examined in the Assessi…

Nihilent Limited, Pune vs. PCIT, Pune

ITA 928/PUN/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil S. PathakFor Respondent: Shri Ravi Prakash

Section 139Section 263Section 90

Anant Kashinath Kakatkar, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1305/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Oct 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri S.S. Godaraassessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri B.D. BhideFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P Murkunde

Section 115BSection 119(2)(b)Section 143(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2019-20 Anant Kashinath Kakatkar DCIT, Circle-5, Pune 634/9A/3, Bhagwan Smruti Society, Vs. Bibwewadi, Pune – 411037 PAN: ABKPK9556G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri B.D. Bhide Department by : Shri Ramnath P Murkunde Date of hearing : 17-10-2024 Date of pronouncement : 25-10-2024 O R D E R PER R. K. PANDA, VP : This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 29.03.2024 of the Addl./JCIT(A), Panchkula relating to assessment y…

Sanjeev Mehta, New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-70(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 353/DEL/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Sept 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Anubhav Sharma, Judicialmember Sa No.49/Del./2024 (In Ita No.353/Del/2024) (Assessment Year : 2019-20) & Sanjeev Mehta Vs. Acit, Circle 70(1), G-1, Vishwa Apartment, New Delhi. 3, Shankaracharya Marg, Civil Lines, New Delhi – 110 054. (Pan: Aaapm5622L) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Ms. Prem Lata Bansal, Adv. Revenue By : Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. Dr. Date Of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date Of Order : 13.09.2024 O R D E R Per S. Rifaur Rahman, Am : This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) (For Short ‘Ld. Cit (A)’)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac), Delhi Dated 20.03.2023 For The Assessment Year 2019-20. 2 Since We Have Disposed Off The Appeal In The Instant Case By This Order, The Stay Application Filed By The Assessee Has Become Infructuous, Hence Dismissed.

For Appellant: Ms. Prem Lata Bansal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. DR

Section 250Section 253(5)Section 5

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “G”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIALMEMBER SA No.49/Del./2024 (in ITA No.353/Del/2024) (Assessment Year : 2019-20) AND Sanjeev Mehta vs. ACIT, Circle 70(1), G-1, Vishwa Apartment, New Delhi. 3, Shankaracharya Marg, Civil lines, New Delhi – 110 054. (PAN: AAAPM5622L) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Ms. Prem Lata Bansal, Adv. REVENUE BY : Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. DR. Date of Hearing : 04.07.2024 Date of Order : 13.09.2024 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM : This appeal is filed by the assessee against the…

Faisul Ramon Nagel, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, International Tax Ward 3(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, ITA No.1248/Mum/2024 is allowedfor statistical purpose

ITA 1248/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Nimesh VoraFor Respondent: Shri Anil Sant, Addl. CIT DR

Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 154oSection 244ASection 250Section 90

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “I”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA 1248/Mum/2024 (Assessment year: 2020-21) Faisul Ramon Nagel vs ITO, International Tax Ward 3(3)(1), 9th Floor, Maker Chambers Mumbai, Room No.1615, 16th Floor, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 Air India Building, Mumbai 0021 Pan : CDAPN2575C APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Nimesh Vora Respondent by : Shri Anil Sant, Addl. CIT DR Date of hearing : 26/06/2024 Date of pronouncement : 27/ 06/2024 O R D E R PER ANIKESH BANERJEE, J.M: Instant appeal…

Meghna Das, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-49(1), Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 415/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: HeardITAT Delhi20 Jun 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaassessment Year 2020-21

For Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr.DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 90

…dicial dicta and therefore, requires to be reversed and claim of foreign tax credit should be allowed to the assessee. For the completeness of arguments, the ld. counsel referred to the judgment rendered in the case of Duraiswamy Kumaraswamy vs. Pr.CIT (2024) 460 ITR 615 3 and (Mad.) and Sumedha Arora vs. ITO (2023) 154 taxmann.com 535 (Del). 3.2 The ld. counsel for the assessee thus sought appropriate relief in the matter. 4. The ld. DR for the Revenue relied upon the action taken by the Revenue Authorities. 5. I have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the first appellate order as well as…

Maya Kapoor, Gurgaon vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(4), Gurgaon

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 783/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Gupta, Adv. and Shri Deepesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. Dr

Section 139Section 143(1)Section 154Section 90

…authorities. 7. During submissions, following Judgments and orders f Co- ordinate Benches of ITAT have been referred by Ld. AR, for ease of reference the relevant operative part are held as under: • In the case of Duraiswamy Kumaraswamy vs. PCIT, (2024), 460 ITR 615 (Mad.) held as under: “11. The law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in G.M.Knitting Industries (P) Ltd. (supra), which was referred above, would be squarely applicable to the present case. In the present case, the returns were filed without FTC, however the same was filed before passing of the final assessment order. The filing of FTC in Page…