“foreign tax credit”

International TaxSection 90 / Rule 128Section 90 / Rule 128571 judgments

The decision most relied on for foreign tax credit is Chandra Kishore Jha v. Mahavir Prasad (8 SCC 266), cited in 163 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on foreign tax credit

Chandra Kishore Jha v. Mahavir Prasad

8 SCC 266 · 1999 · Supreme Court

163

citing judgments

If a statute or law prescribes that a thing must be done in a particular manner, then it must be done in that manner alone and in no other way. This principle mandates strict adherence to statutory procedures.

Wipro Ltd. v. DCIT

382 ITR 179 · 2016 · High Court

122

citing judgments

Foreign Tax Credit (FTC) is allowable even if no tax is paid in India on the corresponding income due to deductions under sections 10A or 10AA, or losses in other units. The scope of income eligible for deduction under Section 10AA includes interest on deposits and realized gains on forward contracts.

Ms. Brinda Ramakrishna v. ITO

135 Taxmann.com 358 · 2022 · ITAT

109

citing judgments

The filing of Form 67 for claiming Foreign Tax Credit (FTC) is a directory requirement, not mandatory. Rule 128(9) does not provide for disallowance of FTC due to delay in filing this form. Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements (DTAAs) override domestic law.

CIT v. ACE Multitaxes Systems (P.) Ltd.

317 ITR 207 · 2009 · High Court

107

citing judgments

For claiming relief under Chapter VI-A deductions like Section 80IB or 80IA, the audit report in Form 10CCB is not mandatory to be filed with the return of income, but can be submitted before the assessment is completed.

Sambhaji and Others v. Gangabai and Others

17 SCC 117 · 2008 · Supreme Court

citing judgments

Procedural law serves as an aid to justice, not an obstruction, and should not ordinarily be construed as mandatory; it is subservient to substantive justice.

42 Hertz Software India (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT

139 Taxmann.com 448 · 2022 · ITAT

citing judgments

The claim for Foreign Tax Credit cannot be denied solely due to a delay in filing Form-67, as the requirement for filing Form-67 under Rule 128(9) is considered directory and not mandatory. The provisions of a Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) prevail over the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Duraiswamy Kumaraswamy v. PCIT

460 ITR 615 · 2024 · High Court

citing judgments

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.

Sonakshi Sinha v. CIT

142 Taxmann.com 414 · 2022 · ITAT

citing judgments

The requirement to file Form 67 by the due date for claiming foreign tax credit is directory, not mandatory, if filed before the completion of assessment proceedings.

Judgments citing foreign tax credit

Shivank Dua, Uttar Pradesh vs. Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department, ITO Ward 1(2)(5), Meerut

Appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3077/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Nov 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara[Assessment Year: 2021-22

Section 139Section 154Section 250Section 90

that the same be held so now. 2 The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), (NFAC) Delhi has grossly erred in confirming disallowance of Foreign Tax Credit amounting to Rs. 70,501/- and demanded tax of Rs.64,532/-on the ground that Form 67 was not duly filed in due course ... rate of 7.486% which comes to £748.40 i.e., Rs. 70,501/- after applying exchange rate. The Appellant was eligible to avail Foreign Tax Credit under section 90 of the Act as per Rules of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement formed between two Contracting States i.e., United Kingdom and India. The income

Ratan Lal Bhura, Bhutan vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - 2(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 1719/KOL/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Nov 2024AY 2020-2021

Bench: Pradip Kumar Choubey & Sri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 139Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 90

date of 10.011.2021. The appellant has relied on the various judgments of ITAT Kolkata where it has been held that claim of Foreign Tax Credit cannot be denied merely for late filing of Form-67 as it is merely a procedural formality and not mandatory in nature. But, most respectfully ... considered the rival contention and perused the orders of the lower authorities. Short question in this appeal is whether assessee is entitled to foreign tax credit even when form number 67 required to be filed according to the provisions of rule 128 (9) of the Income Tax Rules

Suresh Bethavandu, Chennai vs. DCIT, Ncc-17(1), Chennai

In the result the appeal raised by the assesse is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2285/CHNY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.2285 /Chny/2024 निर्ाारण वर्ा /Assessment Years: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri V.Balaji, CA(virtual)For Respondent: Mr.Chinthapalli Meher Chand, JCIT

Section 250Section 90

/Chny/2024 :- 2 -: 2.0 The only issue in the case raised by the appellant through the grounds of appeal is regarding denial of its foreign tax credit relief u/s 90 amounting to Rs. 19,29,739/- by the AO on account of the same having been filed after the due date

Satishkumar Ekambaram, India vs. The Income-Tax Officer, Namakkal

The appeals stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2070/CHNY/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Nov 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm 1. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2069/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2018-19) & 2. आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.2070/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Shri Satishkumar Ekambaram Ito बनाम/ 461, Chakranagar Paramathi-Velur, Ward-2, Vs. Namakkal-638 182. Namakkal. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Bjzps-4367-P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : None " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Srinivasan (Addl.Cit)-Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 04-11-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 04-11-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench:

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Srinivasan (Addl.CIT)-Ld. Sr. DR

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

BENCH: 1. Aforesaid appeals by assessee for Assessment Years (AY) 2018- 19 & 2019-20 have identical issue i.e., allowance of foreign tax credit (FTC). At the time of hearing, none appeared for assessee and accordingly, the appeals were heard with the able assistance of departmental representative. 2. The appeal ... matter of an intimation issued by CPC, Bengaluru u/s 143(1) on 10-06-2020 denying Foreign Tax Credit of Rs.9.59 Lacs as claimed by the assessee u/s 90. The same was denied for want of filing of requisite Form 67 along with return of income. 3. It emerges that

Satishkumar Ekambaram, India vs. The Income-Tax Officer, Namakkal

The appeals stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2069/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Srinivasan (Addl.CIT)-Ld. Sr. DR

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

Income Tax Officer ( International Taxation ) Ward Coimbatore, Coimbatore vs. Vijayakumar Murthy, Erode

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 1588/CHNY/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Nov 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giriआयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1588/Chny/2024 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2020-2021) The Income Tax Officer, Vs. Vijayakumar Murthy, International Taxation, 110/3, Mudaliyaar Thottam, Ward, Vinayagar Koil Street-1, Coimbatore 641 018. Modapalayam Railway Colony, Tamil Nadu 638 002. [Pan: Aexpv 8817R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Ms. Preeti Goel (Virtual) ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri. Ashwin D. Gowda, Irs, Addl.Cit. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 23.10.2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 04.11.2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Manu Kumar Giri ()

For Appellant: Ms. Preeti Goel (Virtual)For Respondent: Shri. Ashwin D. Gowda, IRS, Addl.CIT

Section 10(14)(i)Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 5Section 6(1)Section 69ASection 90

No.2911/Mds/2016 dated 05.08.2016) was held to be factually distinguished on the ground that in that case the assessee was claiming foreign tax credit relief for taxes paid on doubly taxed income which was not the case in that appeal. In para-7, the bench found the issue to be covered ... offered to tax in UK. The salary reconciliation statement has been placed by Ld. AR on record. The assessee has not claimed any foreign tax credit in any of the jurisdiction. The UK tax has been paid by the foreign entity i.e., M/s Ford Motor

Suzlon Energy Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT(OSD) Circle-8, Ahmedabad

In the result the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1621/AHD/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Oct 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 90

asst. years, thus there is no dispute by TPO in respect of the royalty income. However, the assessee company failed to claim the Foreign Tax Credit [herein after referred as FTC] under section 90 of the Act while filing the Return of Income as the Tax With-holding Certificates ... legal provisions concerning tax deduction exemption or other tax incentives in India. 5.2. It is to be noted that CBDT introduced Foreign Tax Credit (FTC) Rules vide Notification No.54 of 2016 dated June 27, 2016 which came into effect from 01-04-2017. Further Rule 128 of the Income-tax

The DCIT, Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Suzlon Energy Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result the appeal filed by the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1517/AHD/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad29 Oct 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri T.R. SENTHIL KUMAR (Judicial Member), Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokar (Accountant Member)

Section 143(3)Section 90

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

credit of any foreign tax can be allowed on furnishing proof of deduction (where tax has been deducted) in support of claim of Foreign Tax Credit under section 90/91", it is observed that this contention is not backed by any provision of law or the IT Rule 128. Specific requirement ... course of hearing that the Assessing Officer’s impugned regular assessment had rightly accepted the assessee’s Form No. 67 claiming the prescribed Foreign Tax Credit and therefore, the revision directions in question are not sustainable in law since based on total non-application of mind and without A.Ys

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

Ram Avadhanulu Jonnavithula, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(3)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 1645/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Navneeth N. Kini, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 90

condoning the delay in filing the appeal and dismissing the appeal on the issue of claim of foreign tax credit. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the assessee field return of income on 05.8.2017 declaring gross total income of Rs.90,04,118. Intimation was issued ... Page 2 of 10 wherein foreign tax credit of RS.7,27,493 was disallowed against which the assessee filed appeal before the ld. First Appellate Authority (FAA) on 10.04.2024 with a delay of 1809 days. 3. During the appellate proceedings the assessee submitted the reasons for delay in filing appeal

Vamsi Krishna Ayyalasomayajula, Telangana vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(3)(4), Bangalore

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

ITA 1469/BANG/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Smt. Vaidehi G., CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neha Sahay, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 6(1)Section 90(2)

Centralized Processing Centre (`CPC') u/s Page 2 of 8 143(1) of the Income Tax Act 1961 (`the Act') in respect of foreign tax credit of INR 7,05,587 against the federal taxes paid by the appellant in the USA on the doubly taxed USA sourced income ... income u/s. 139(4) on 22.12.2017 declaring total income of Rs.63,11,720 and tax liability was Rs.12,51,990 after claiming Foreign Tax Credit (FTC) of Rs.7,05,587 on income earned from USA and TDS was deducted from salary by the employer, i.e., Microsoft Global Services

Chirasree Dasgupta, Kolkata vs. I.T.O., Ward - 33(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 1727/KOL/2024[2020-2021]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata21 Oct 2024AY 2020-2021

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Sanjay Awasthi

Section 250

sole issue raised by the assessee through these grounds of appeal is relating to the non-grant of Foreign Tax Credit (FTS) of Rs.5,19,775/- instead of allowing FTC of Rs.5,402/- only. 3. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the Assessing Officer ( in short

Asst Commissioner of Income Tax-16(2), Mumbai vs. Azb and Partners, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3382/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Sunil M. LalaFor Respondent: Shri Ram Krishna Kedia, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 250Section 90

required to be withheld, as it was in the nature of independent personal services and accordingly, the AO had denied the foreign tax credit claimed by the assessee under section 90 of the Act. Further, the AO had also rejected the alternative claim of the assessee of reducing the turnover ... extent of the foreign tax credit, as the assessee had received the net amount in India. In that case, Hon’ble Tribunal had discussed the provisions of the relevant DTAAs & then pondered over the core issue as below: “Essentially, therefore, it is open to the Assessing Officer to take

Asst Commissioner of Income Tax- 16(2), Mumbai vs. Azb and Partners, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3381/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Oct 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Sunil M. LalaFor Respondent: Shri Ram Krishna Kedia, Sr. DR

Section 143(2)Section 250Section 90

Puneet Singh Mehndiratta, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-70(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2778/DEL/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Vimal Kumarpuneet Singh Mehndiratta, Vs. Dcit, 14/4, Ground Floor, West Circle-70(1), Patel Nagar, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan:Aizpm6096K

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Ravi Kant Choudhary, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)

raised several grounds, the only effective issue to be decided in this appeal is with regard to non denial of grant of foreign tax credit of Rs. 98,852/- by the lower authorities. 3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. The assessee ... accordingly came forward to offer the differential sum of Rs. 8,14,961/- in the revised computation of income. The assessee claimed foreign tax credit of Rs. 4,03,420/- in respect of taxes paid in USA for the salary income which was allowed by the AO in the scrutiny

Senthil Nathan Ramakrishna Babu, Chennai vs. ITO, Circle 17(7), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1990/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Section 139(1)

emerges that the assessee filed Form 67 with revised return of income as filed on 30-03-2019 to lay claim on the foreign tax credit. However, Ld. CIT(A) upheld the intimation on the ground that Form 67 as required under Rule 128(9) was not furnished along with ... directory as pleaded by the assessee. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 3. We find that the issue of foreign tax credit is covered in assessee's favor by the decision of this Tribunal in the case of ITO vs. Smt. Chengam Durga (ITA No.1491/Chny/2023 dated

Ramesh Babu Jasti, Gandipet vs. ITO., Ward-12(6), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 761/HYD/2024[AY 2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Oct 2024

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri K. Narasimha Charyआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.760 & 761/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2020-21 & 2021-22) Shri Ramesh Babu Jasti Vs. Income Tax Officer Gandipet Ward – 12(6) Pan:Amepj2611C Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri K.Abhiroop Bhargav, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Vamsi Krishna, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 07/10/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 07/10/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri K.Abhiroop Bhargav, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Vamsi Krishna, DR

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 90

income of Rs.95,92,944/- which includes salary received from outside India for employment with Mastech Digital Technologies Inc, USA and also claimed foreign tax credit of Rs.11,28,012/- as per section 90 of the I.T. Act, 1961 and Article 25(2)(a) of the Indio-USA Double Taxation ... return of income filed by the assessee was processed u/s 143(1) and intimation was issued, where the Assessing Officer CPC denied foreign tax credit for belated filing of the Form 67 in terms of Rule 128(9) of the I.T. Rules, 1962. The appellant has filed a petition

Ramesh Babu Jasti, Gandipet vs. ITO., Ward-12(6), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 760/HYD/2024[AY 2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad07 Oct 2024

For Appellant: Shri K.Abhiroop Bhargav, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Vamsi Krishna, DR

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 139(4)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 90

Sandeep Jain, Jaipur vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 178/JPR/2023[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Oct 2024AY 2017-2018

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Amit Mudra (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri Anup Singh (Addl. CIT)

Section 139(5)Section 143(2)Section 90

total income of Rs. 1,11,72,770/-. In the original ITR the income from foreign entities are declared on receipt basis and foreign tax credit under section 90 was claimed for US federal taxes only amounting to Rs. 9,39,445/-. Meanwhile the assessee got the income tax return ... revised return the income was declared on accrual basis based on income declared in US income tax return. Further in the revised return foreign tax credit of federal tax as well as state taxes is claimed amounting to Rs. 12,80,044/-. The case was selected for scrutiny. The learned