Ms. Brinda Ramakrishna v. ITO

Deloitte India Advisory Services Private Limited, Mumbai vs. National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi/CIT(A), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: The Revised Return, Therefore The Appellant Ought To Have Been Allowed Entire Foreign Tax Relief Of Rs. 2,82,44,841. 1.3 The Learned Nfac Ought To Have Appreciated That Rule 128 Of The Income Tax Rules, 1962 Does Not Provide For Disallowance Of Foreign Tax Relief In Case Of Filing Of Revised Form 67 Along With The Revised Return. 1.4 The Learned Nfac Ought To Have Granted The Balance Foreign Tax Relief Amounting To Rs. 1,34,86,569 Since The Appellant Has Filed The Revised Form 67 Before The Due Date Of Filing Of Revised Return Of Income.

…n or before the due date specified u/s. 139(1) which ld. CIT (A) has held that it is a mandatory requirement. Before us, ld. Counsel had cited various decisions of the Tribunal which in sum and substance are as under:- i. Ms. Brinda RamaKrishna v. ITO (2022] 193 ITD 840 (Bangalore ITAT) 5 M/s. Deloitte India Advisory Services Pvt. Ltd The assessee claimed FTC under section 90 in the revised return of income filed for the AY 2018-19 on 31 August 2018 but did not file Form 67 by oversight. On realizing the same, she filed Form 67 on 18 April 2020. The CPC disallowed the FTC claim, which was upheld by the appellat…

Pratap Teckchand Dadlaney, Mumbai vs. The Asstt. Director of Income Tax, Mumbai

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

…ief if the return is not filed within the prescribed time limit such as Section 80- IA(7). However such language is not used in Rule 128(9). Further reliance was placed on the decision of Coordinate Bangalore Benches in case of Ms. Brinda Rama Krisna Vs. ITO- 193 ITD 840 and 42 Hertz Software India (P) Ltd. vs. ACIT 139 Taxmann.com 448, Coordinate Mumbai Benches in case of Sonakshi Sinha Vs. CIT(A) 142 taxmann.com 414, Anuj Bhagwati Vs. DCIT in ITA No. 1844/Mum/2022 and Nirmala Murli Relwani Vs. ADIT in ITA No. 2094/Mum/2022. 5.3 It was submitted that similar contention were raised before the Ld. CIT(A) and relia…

Rohit Vijay Singh, Mumbai vs. DCIT/ACIT, CPC, Bangalore, Mumbai

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

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal, Hon'Blerohit Vijay Singh V. Dcit/Acit 6/603, Dhanalaxmi Building Centralized Processing Centre B-Wing, Mitha Nagar Bangalore M.G. Road, Goregaon (W) Mumbai - 400060 Ward 17(1)(1) Mumbai Kautilya Bhavan Pan: Balps2871R Bandra Kurla Complex Bandra(E), Mumbai - 400050 (Appellant) (Respondent)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER Rohit Vijay Singh v. DCIT/ACIT 6/603, Dhanalaxmi Building Centralized Processing Centre B-Wing, Mitha Nagar Bangalore M.G. Road, Goregaon (W) Mumbai - 400060 Ward 17(1)(1) Mumbai Kautilya Bhavan PAN: BALPS2871R Bandra Kurla Complex Bandra(E), Mumbai - 400050 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented by : Shri Bhupendra Shah Department Represented by : Shri A.N. Bhalekar Date of Hearing : 23.01.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 17.04.2023 O R D E…

Mr Ganesh Anandrao Ingulkar, Mumabi vs. Asstt.Director of Income Tax, CPC, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleganesh Anandrao Ingulkar V. Assistant Director Of Income-Tax Centralized Processing Center B/502, Shivram Park Income Tax Department Opp. Ashok Kedare Chowk Bengaluru, Karnataka-560500 Tembipada Road, Bhandup (W) Mumbai - 400078 Pan: Aappi6881C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented By : Shri Ketan Ved Department Represented By : Shri S.N. Kabra

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “SMC”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ganesh Anandrao Ingulkar v. Assistant Director of Income-tax Centralized Processing Center B/502, shivram Park Income Tax Department Opp. Ashok Kedare Chowk Bengaluru, Karnataka-560500 Tembipada Road, Bhandup (W) Mumbai - 400078 PAN: AAPPI6881C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee Represented by : Shri Ketan Ved Department Represented by : Shri S.N. Kabra Date of Hearing : 03.04.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 05.04.2023 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (AM) 1. This appeal is filed by the assessee ag…

Priya Savina Murzello, Mumbai vs. DCIT CPC, Bangalore

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

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI M. BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA no.3238/Mum./2022 (Assessment Year : 2019–20) Priya Savina Murzello Flat–C, 1st Floor, Joseph’s Corner ……………. Appellant 188–B, Perry’s Corner, Bandra (W) Mumbai 400 050 PAN – ANVPM5759J v/s Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax …………….Respondent Central Processing Centre Bangaluru 560 500 Assessee by : Shri Mukesh Trivedi Revenue by : Shri Indira Adakil Date of Hearing – 15/02/2023 Date of Order – 17/02/2023 O R D E R PER SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, J.M. The present ap…