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.

50

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

Issues it is cited on

section 295foreign tax creditsection 91section 90arectification under section 154section 90azadi bachao andolansection 90(2)section 119(2)(b)section 139(5)section 119(2)tax treaty

Judgments citing Duraiswamy Kumaraswamy v. PCIT

Nirav D. Udani( Executor to the Estate of Late Shri Jitendra Hatiben Udani), Mumbai vs. Int Tax Ward 4(3)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 296/MUM/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Smt. Renu Jauhariassessment Year: 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Anuj Kishnadwala, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Nagnath Pasale, D.R
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 90

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SMT. RENU JAUHARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2019-20 Shri Nirav D. Udani (Executor Asst. DIT, CPC, to the Estate of Late Shri Bengaluru, Jitendra Hatiben Udani) INT Tax Ward 4(3)(1), 143-A Mittal Court, Vs. Room No.1625, 16th Floor, Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400021 Air India Building, PAN: AAAPU8613P Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400021 (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Anuj Kishnadwala, A.R. Revenue by : Shri Nagnath Pasale, D.R. Date of Hearing : 27 . 05 . 2024 D…

Vaibhav Singhal, Bangalore vs. ITO Ward 3(3)(5), Saharanpur

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

ITA 3585/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 May 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Sudhir Pareekvaibhav Singhal, Vs. Ito, Ward 3(3)(5), 102, Golden Paradise, Saharanpur. 2Nd Cross Street, Hennur Bande Bus Stop, Bangalore – 560 043 (Karnataka). (Pan : Dawps9391K) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri S.P. Chitambram, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.05.2024 Date Of Order : 29.05.2024 Order Per Shamim Yahya: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) Dated 12.10.2023 For The Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. Grounds Of Appeal Taken By The Assessee Read As Under :- “1. The Appellants Objects To The Order Dated 12 October 2023 Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’) Issued By The Commissioner Of Income- Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (Nfac) For The Aforesaid Assessment Year On The Following Grounds: 2. Denial Or Claim Of Foreign Tax Credit U/S 90 Of The Act

For Appellant: Shri S.P. Chitambram, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 234CSection 250Section 90

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘H’ : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI SUDHIR PAREEK, JUDICIAL MEMBER Vaibhav Singhal, vs. ITO, Ward 3(3)(5), 102, Golden Paradise, Saharanpur. 2nd Cross Street, Hennur Bande Bus Stop, Bangalore – 560 043 (Karnataka). (PAN : DAWPS9391K) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri S.P. Chitambram, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 07.05.2024 Date of Order : 29.05.2024 ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. CIT (Appeals)/National Face…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4, Nagpur vs. Prabha Nageshwar Rachakondawar, Nagpur

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 85/NAG/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 May 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri Abhay Y. Marathe, Sr. DR
Section 154Section 90

…ax credit to the assessee despite the fact that the latter had belatedly filed the corresponding Form- 67 under Rule 128 of I.T. Rules, 1963. I notice in this factual 6 ITA.No.85/NAG./2023 backdrop that case law in light of Duraiswamy Kumaraswamy vs. PCIT 460 ITR 615 (Madras) has already held the foregoing Rule 128 of I.T. Rules is directory only than mandatory in nature. This is indeed coupled with the fact that assessee had duly filed her Form-67 on 28.12.2021 well before sec.154 order in question dated 10.03.2022. Faced with this situation, I hardly see any merit in the Revenue’s instant sole substanti…

Moog Motion Controls Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-4(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 184/BANG/2024[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 May 2024AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2019-20 M/S. Moog Motion Controls Pvt. Ltd., Acit, Site No.42-43, Doraisanipalya Circle – 4(1)(1), Village, Vs. Bengaluru. Opp. Oracle (Kalyani Magnum), Bilekahalli, Begur Hobli, Bengaluru – 560 076. Pan : Aadcm 3828 J 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 : 08.05.2024

For Appellant: Shri. Srinivas K. P, CAFor Respondent: Shri. V. Parithivel, JCIT(DR)(ITAT)
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 90

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2019-20 M/s. Moog Motion Controls Pvt. Ltd., ACIT, Site No.42-43, Doraisanipalya Circle – 4(1)(1), Village, Vs. Bengaluru. Opp. Oracle (Kalyani Magnum), Bilekahalli, Begur Hobli, Bengaluru – 560 076. PAN : AADCM 3828 J 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 : 08.05.2024 O R D E R Per Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Membe…

Aniruddha Raju Patki, Pune vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-13(2), Pune

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 232/PUN/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune02 May 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: -None-For Respondent: Shri Manish Mehta
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE “SMC” BENCH : PUNE BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.No.232/PUN./2024 Assessment Year 2019-2020 Shri Aniruddha Raju Patki, B-10, Shri Krishna Icon The Income Tax Officer, Housing Society, Near Iskon vs. Ward – 13 (2), Aayakar Sadan, Temple, Ravet Pradhikaran, Pune – 411 037. Pune – 412 101. Maharashtra. Maharashtra. PAN BXOPP1546A (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : -None- For Revenue : Shri Manish Mehta Date of Hearing : 19.03.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 02.05.2024 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. : This assessee’s appeal for assessment…

Mrunmayee Nandan Bhawkar, Pune Maharashtra vs. The ITO, Ward 14(3), Pune, Pune Maharashtra

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 412/PUN/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Apr 2024AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara

For Appellant: Shri C.H. NaniwadekarFor Respondent: Shri Manish Mehta
Section 139(1)Section 154Section 90

…ching fact herein, I am of the considered opinion that both the learned lower authorities could not have rejected the assessee’s impugned Foreign Tax Credit claim for the above stated sole ground. Case law Duraiswamy Kumaraswamy Vs. Pr. CIT reported in (2024) 460 ITR 615 (Mad.) had already settled the issue that Rule 128 of the Income Tax Rules prescribing Form 67 hereinabove, is directory and not mandatory in nature. Faced with this situation, I hereby accept the assessee’s instant sole substantive grievance in principle and direct the CPC, Bangalore to finalize assessee’s afresh computation in above terms as pe…

Vipul Vasant Patil, India vs. CPC, Assistant Director of Income Tax, Centralized Processing System of Income Tax Department

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

ITA 3974/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Rahul Chaudhary () Assessment Year: 2018-19 Vipul Vasant Patil, The Asst. Director Of Heramb Kophrad Income-Tax, Centralized Umbergothan, Agashi, Vs. Processing Centre, Income Virar (W) Tax Department, Palghar-401 301. Bengaluru-560 500. Pan No. Apjpp 7462 H Appellant Respondent : Mr. Abdulkadir Jamsadwala Assessee By Revenue By : Ms. Rajeshwari Menon, Dr

For Respondent: Mr. Abdulkadir Jamsadwala
Section 139(1)Section 234BSection 90

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “F” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) AND SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Vipul Vasant Patil, The Asst. Director of Heramb Kophrad Income-tax, Centralized Umbergothan, Agashi, Vs. Processing Centre, Income Virar (W) Tax Department, Palghar-401 301. Bengaluru-560 500. PAN NO. APJPP 7462 H Appellant Respondent : Mr. Abdulkadir Jamsadwala Assessee by Revenue by : Ms. Rajeshwari Menon, DR : 15/04/2024 Date of Hearing Date of pronouncement : 25/04/2024 ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM This appeal by the assessee is…

Ashish Sood, Zirakpur vs. The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Chandigarh

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

ITA 747/CHANDI/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Apr 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV (Accountant Member), SHRI. PARESH M. JOSHI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Tejmohan Singh, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Amanpreet Kaur, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 250Section 253Section 90

…e Trib)  Sonakshi Sinha Vs. CIT(A) reported in 142 taxmann.com 414 (Mumbai Trib)  AnujBhagwatiVs. DCIT in ITA No. 1844/Mum/2022 dt. 20/09/2022  NirmalaMurliRelwaniVs. ADIT in ITA No. 2094/Mum/2022 dt. 01/12/2022  DuraiswamyKumaraswamy Vs. PCIT reported in 460 ITR 615 (Madras) 10.1 The Ld. Counsel for the Assessee also assailed the impugned order of the Ld. CIT (A) dt. 28/11/2023 on the ground that by the notice under section 250 of the Act, dt. 23/10/2023 of Ld. CIT (A), the assesse was called upon to file counter arguments and grant of opportunity to submit objections which read as under: ANNEXURE “Counter…

Vipul Parimal Thakore, Mumbai vs. ADIT, CPC, Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3595/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Feb 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri.Anuj Krisnadwala.ARFor Respondent: Smt.Usha Gaikwad.Sr. DR
Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 234ASection 90

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 3595 & 3597/Mum/2023 (A.Y:2020-21 & A.Y:2022-23) Vipul Parimal Thakore, Vs. ADIT-CPC, 307,Beach Haven 1, Kautilya Bhavan, Juhu Tara Road, Bandra KurlaComplex, Juhu S.O, Mumbai-400051. Mumbai-400049. PAN/GIR No. : AAOPT7541H Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Shri.Anuj Krisnadwala.AR Respondent by : Smt.Usha Gaikwad.Sr. DR Date of Hearing 12.02.2024 Date of Pronouncement 13.02.2024 आदेश / O R D E R PER BENCH: These are the two appeals filed by the assessee ag…

Mr John Arunkumar Diaz, Mumbai vs. DCIT 19 (1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3647/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri Gagan Goyaljohn Arunkumar Diaz Vs. Dcit-19(1), 8A, Saahil, Room No. 203, 2 Nd Floor, 14 Altamount Road, Matrumandir, Tardeo, Mumbai-400026 Mumbai-400007 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ Pan/Gir No: Aecpd6518C Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri.Mahesh Rajora.ARFor Respondent: Smt.Usha Gaikwad.Sr.DR
Section 139(1)Section 44ASection 90

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER John Arunkumar Diaz Vs. DCIT-19(1), 8A, Saahil, Room No. 203, 2 nd Floor, 14 Altamount Road, Matrumandir, Tardeo, Mumbai-400026 Mumbai-400007 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./ PAN/GIR No: AECPD6518C Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Shri.Mahesh Rajora.AR Respondent by : Smt.Usha Gaikwad.Sr.DR Date of Hearing 14.02.2024 Date of Pronouncement 15.02.2024 आदेश / O R D E R PER PAVANKUMAR GADALE : The appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of National Faceless Appeal Cent…