← All Phrases

“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
87
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
62
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
50
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
37
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

DCIT -17 (1), Mumbai vs. Freyaz Kurush Shroff, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4212/MUM/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Apr 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Shri Anikesh Banerjee () Assessment Year: 2019-2020

For Respondent: Ms. Freyaz Kurush Shroff (
Section 139(1)

justified in directing the AO to allow the Foreign Tax Ld. CIT (A) is justified in directing the AO to allow the Foreign Tax Credit, without appreciating the fact that the assessee has failed to Credit, without appreciating the fact that the assessee has failed to Credit, without appreciating ... 1088/Bang/2022) ITO (2023) (ITA No. 1088/Bang/2022) directed the Assessing directed the Assessing Officer to give credit for the foreign tax credit a dit for the foreign tax credit as per Form No. 67 s per Form No. 67 ,which was filed on 01.04.2021 after due verification as per law. filed

Techbulls Software Services Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ITO., Ward-2(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 562/HYD/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Apr 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar(Through Virtual Mode) & Shri Madhusudan Sawdia, Accounant Member Assessment Year: 2020-21 Techbulls Software Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Services Private Limited, Ward – 2(1), Hyderabad. Hyderabad. Pan : Aadct9158N. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri R. Mohan Kumar, Advocate Revenue By: Shri Shakeer Ahamed, Sr.Ar Date Of Hearing: 18.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement: 29.04.2024

For Appellant: Shri R. Mohan Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shakeer Ahamed, Sr.AR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250

Therefore, the assessee company did not pay any tax along with the return filed. While processing the return under section 143(1) the Foreign Tax Credit of Rs.17,97,963/- was not allowed to the assessee company, probably for want of Form No.67. The assessee company filed a rectification petition ... enclosing Form no.67. The CPC passed order under section 154 on 22-08-2022 wherein again the Foreign Tax Credit claimed was not allowed and demand of Rs.22,66,320/- was raised. The present appeal is filed against the demand raised in the order passed under section 154. 4. Feeling

Saurabh Daga, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward 46(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 209/KOL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata29 Apr 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Pradip Kumar Choubey

Section 139(4)Section 154Section 250

assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A) is against upholding the order of the Assessing Officer (in short ld. 'AO') denying foreign tax credit to the assessee on the ground of belated filing of Form 67. 3. In order to appreciate the points urged in the instant appeal

DCIT, Circle-6, Jaipur, Ncrb vs. Amit Gupta, Taruchhaya Nagar, Jaipur

In the result, both the appeals of the department are dismissed

ITA 679/JPR/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur26 Apr 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: The Due Date Of Filing Of Return For The Purpose Of Seeking Foreign Tax Credit Is A Mandatory Condition. 3. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Allowing The Foreign Tax Credit Amount Of Rs.64,00,660/- Without Appreciating The Fact That The Assessee Neither Filed Return Nor Form 67 For Claiming Foreign Tax Credit Within Due Date Prescribed For The Relevant Year Which Is Due Date Prescribed For The Relevant Year Which Is In Contravention To The Provisions Of The Act.

For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani, CA &For Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT-DR
Section 139(4)Section 140ASection 143(1)Section 234ASection 90Section 91

Rules provides that filing of Form 67 on or before the due date of filing of return for the purpose of seeking foreign tax credit is a mandatory condition. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing the foreign ... tax credit amount of Rs.64,00,660/- without appreciating the fact that the assessee neither filed Return nor Form 67 for claiming foreign tax credit within due date prescribed for the relevant year which is due date prescribed for the relevant year which is in contravention to the provisions

Diwakar Aggarwal, New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-27(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 2804/DEL/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Apr 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri M.Balaganesh[Assessment Year : 2021-22] Diwakar Aggarwal, Vs Ito, 4, Shankarachaya Marg, Ward-27(1), Civil Lines, New Delhi-110009. New Delhi. Pan-Aaepa7812Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri S.Krishnan, Adv. Respondent By Shri Vivek Kumar Upadhyay, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 04.04.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 26.04.2024 Order Per Kul Bharat, Jm : The Present Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Passed By Ld.Cit(A), National Faceless Appeal Centre (“Nfac”), Delhi Dated 25.08.2023 For The Assessment Year 2021-22. 2. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal:-

Section 129Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 295(2)(ha)Section 90

National Faceless Appeal Centre ('NFAC") erred in not directing rectification of intimation u/s.143(1) dated 13.10.2022, wherein claim of Foreign Tax Credit u/s.90 had not been allowed to the Assessee. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the National Faceless Appeal Centre ('NFAC ... income u/s. 139(1) as required under Rule 128(9) of IT Rules, 1962, the AO-CPC has rightly disallowed the claim of Foreign Tax Credit while processing the return of income u/s. 143(1) in this case. 6.7. Moreover, in this case, there is no mistake apparent from record

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

process of reasoning.” 3. Suffice to say, the assessee’s sole substantive grievance herein challenges both the learned lower authorities action disallowing him Foreign Tax Credit “FTC” for the reason that he had filed the corresponding Form 67 belatedly than within the “due” date of filing return of income ... clinching 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

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

return of income for the assessment year under consideration on 16.07.2018, er consideration on 16.07.2018, however, omitted to claim owever, omitted to claim foreign tax credit. Subsequently, the assessee filed revised return foreign tax credit. Subsequently, the assessee filed revised return foreign tax credit. Subsequently, the assessee filed revised return ... wherein he claimed foreign tax credit (FTC) of wherein he claimed foreign tax credit (FTC) of wherein he claimed foreign tax credit (FTC) of Rs.3,33,695/- on salary income earned in Singapore on salary income earned in Singapore , which on salary income earned in Singapore subjected to tax both

Sukdev Sen, Navi Mumbai vs. ACIT, Cir. 61, Kolkata

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

ITA 78/KOL/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Apr 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar & Shri Sonjoy Sarma

Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 234BSection 234CSection 250Section 90Section 90(2)

erred in confirming the same. 2. That the Ld. AO erred in law as well as in facts in not allowing the Foreign Tax Credit of Rs. 21,89,828/- on the alleged ground of delayed filing of Form No. 67 as required by rule ... Assessment Year: 2017-18 Sukdev Sen same in as much as in view of the facts and circumstances of the case the said Foreign Tax Credit should have been allowed to the Appellant. 3. That the Ld. AO erred in law as well as in facts in not holding

Basudev Sharma, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-2(3), Alipurduar

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

ITA 256/KOL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 Apr 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Sonjoy Sarma & Shri Rakesh Mishra]

Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 90

assessee raised in the appeal is against the finding of ld. CIT(A) confirming the action of the CPC disallowing the foreign tax credit of Rs. 5,90,423/- claimed u/s 90 of the Act read with Article 22 of India-Bhutan agreement for avoidance of double taxation and prevention ... late filing of Form-67. 3. At the outset, ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the only reason for denying the alleged foreign tax credit was on account of late filing of Form-67. Apart from the said reason of late filing of Form-67 all other conditions required

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

Rule 128 of the Income Tax Rules which is titled as [“ statement of income from a Country or specified territory outside India and Foreign Tax Credit”] dt. 18/10/2021. In the said Form 67 in Column 5 name of the Country is shown as:- “ U.S.A”, source of income as :- “ Others”, specific ... details as:- Shares of Foreign entity, income from outside India as:- Rs. 34,19,156/-. Foreign Tax Credit claimed as :-Rs. 7,70,863/-, tax payable on such income under normal provisions in India shown as:- Rs. 11,60,845/-, Article number of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement

Mediratta Manav, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-3(3)(1), Bangalore

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 266/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Smt. Beena Pillai & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Navaneeth N Kini, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Muthu Shankar, Addl. CIT (DR)
Section 143(1)Section 90

year 2018- 19. 2. The only issue raised by the assessee is that the ld. CIT(A) erred in denying the claim of Foreign Tax Credit on the reasoning that the Form No. 67 was not filed within the due date. Page 2 of 4 3. In the present case ... assessee has claimed foreign tax credit u/s 90/91 of the Act amounting to Rs. 91,046/- in the return of income but the same was denied in the intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act as Form 67 was not filed within the due date i.e. 31/08/2018. On appeal

Vikash Daga, Gurghaon vs. DCIT, Circle 3(1), Gurgaon

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

ITA 1812/DEL/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2018-19 Vikash Daga, Vs Dcit, D-022, The Belaire, Circle 3(1), Golf Course Road, Gurgaon. Dlf V, Gurgaon, Haryana – 122 002. Pan: Adipd4214E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sanjeev Kachhal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Sumesh Swani, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 24.01.2024 Date Of Pronouncement : 18.04.2024 Order Per Anubhav Sharma, Jm: This Appeal Is Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 08.05.2023 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred As Ld. First Appellate Authority Or In Short Ld. ‘Faa’) In Appeal No.Nfac/2017-18/10084687 Arising Out Of The Appeal Before It Against The Order Passed U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 144B Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred As ‘The Act’), By The Ito, National Faceless Assessment Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As The Ld. Ao).

For Appellant: Shri Sanjeev Kachhal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sumesh Swani, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 90

circumstances of the case, the learned AO has erred both on facts and in law in passing the order without considering the foreign tax credit merely due to a procedural lapse of filing of Form 67 is clear violation of the principle of natural justice. 3. That on the facts ... learned AO has erred both on facts and in law in making the disallowance of Rs. 43,07,855/-on account of foreign tax credit claimed by the assessee in respect of taxes paid in the USA and availed the relief from the double taxation as per the treaty between

Deepak Shimoga Padmaraju, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-5(3)(5), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 239/BANG/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Apr 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri George George Kshri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2021-22

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal, Advocate byFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R Gale, Standing Counsel for Department
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(1)(a)Section 90

ITBA/APL/S/250/2023- 24/1058769726(1) for the assessment year 2021-22. 2. The sole issue raised in this appeal is for denying the foreign tax credit (FTC) as claimed by the assessee for delay in filing Form No.67 of Rs.5,93,444/- which was filed on 22/10/2022, after the due date ... extended due date for filing return was on 31/12/2021. While processing the return u/s 143(1)(a) of the Act on 05/07/2022, the foreign tax credit (FTC) was denied by the CPC, Bangalore. The assessee shown salary income of Rs.16,52,452/- and income from other sources is Rs.22

Asan Meera Sahib, Tirunelveli vs. ITO, Ward-1, Tirunelveli

The appeal stand allowed

ITA 58/CHNY/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai16 Apr 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM AND HON’BLE SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri G. Tarun (Advocate)-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar (JCIT)-Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(1)

matter of an intimation issued by CPC u/s 143(1) of the Act on 21-09-2022 denying Foreign Tax Credit of Rs.3,86,724/- for want of filing of Form 67 along with the return of income. The assessee filed this Form ... confirmed the denial of Foreign Tax Credit considering the provisions of Rule 128 (8) & (9) which mandate the assessee to file this form along with the return of income. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 2. We find that this issue has been decided in assessee

Janani Ravi Ramaswamy, Bangalore vs. ITO Ward 24(2)(1), Mumbai

The appeal stand allowed

ITA 83/CHNY/2024[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai15 Apr 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am & Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri, Jm आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.83/Chny/2024 (िनधा9रणवष9 / Assessment Year: 2019-20) Janani Ravi Ramaswamy Ito A-1102, Mantri Espana, Ward-24(2)(1) बनाम/ Vs. 67, Kariyammanaagrahar, Mumbai Bangalore, Bellandur So -560 103. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Adwpr-8702-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri Siddesh Nagaraj Gaddi (Ca)-Ld.Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar (Jcit)-Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 16-04-2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 16-04-2024 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal ()

For Appellant: Shri Siddesh Nagaraj Gaddi (CA)-Ld.ARFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar (JCIT)-Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(1)

matter of an intimation issued by CPC u/s. 143(1) of the Act on 16-02-2021 denying Foreign Tax Credit of Rs.9,97,696/- for want of filing of Form 67 along with the return of income. The assessee filed this Form ... confirmed the denial of Foreign Tax Credit considering the provisions of Rule 128 (8) & (9) which mandate the assessee to file this form along with the return of income. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 2. We find that this issue has been decided in assessee

M/S. Tega Industries Limited, Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., Circle-11(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 539/KOL/2022[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Apr 2024AY 2018-2019

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri S.P. Chidambaran, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rakesh Kumar Das, CIT, D/R
Section 144C(5)Section 234BSection 234CSection 80JSection 91

appeal on this issue) 9. Short grant of TDS Credit (Refer our detailed grounds of appeal on this issue) 10. Non grant of Foreign Tax Credit under section 91 of the Act (Refer our detailed grounds of appeal on this issue) 11. Erroneous Levy of Interest under section 234B

Income Tax Officer Ncw 19(4), Chennai vs. Chengam Durga, Chennai

The appeal stand dismissed

ITA 1491/CHNY/2023[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Apr 2024AY 2021-2022

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1491/Chny/2023 (िनधा*रण वष* / Assessment Year: 2021-22) Ito Smt. Chengam Durga बनाम Non-Corporate Ward-19(4) 50, Kasi Estate, Ashok Nagar, / Vs. Chennai. Jafferkhanpet, Chennai-600 083. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Achpd-0525-G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri D. Hema Bhupal (Jcit)-Ld. Sr. Dr " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Shri K.R.Sudersan (Ca) -Ld. Ar सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 08-04-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 08-04-2024

For Appellant: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT)-Ld. Sr. DRFor Respondent: Shri K.R.Sudersan (CA) -Ld. AR
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 90

condonation of CBDT/Central Govt. cannot be taken away by any other person. As is evident, the revenue is aggrieved by grant of foreign tax credit (FTC) despite the fact that Form No.67 was not filed by the assessee within due date of filing of return of income. Having heard rival

Gurcharan Singh, Delhi vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-7(1), Delhi

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

ITA 380/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Apr 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyagurcharan Singh, Vs. Ito, Ward 7 (1), 12/161, Malviya Nagar, Delhi. New Delhi – 110 017. (Pan : Aakps0492G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate Shri Somil Aggarwal, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 01.04.2024 Date Of Order : 04.04.2024

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143Section 250

Addl.CIT/JCIT (A)-5, Chennai dated 24.01.2024 for the assessment year 2020-21. 2. The sole issue in this case is denial of Foreign Tax Credit (FTC) of Rs.6,20,920/- by the CPC while processing the ITR filed by the assessee under section 143 (1) of Income-tax ... payers like that of the Appellant, it is brought on record that filing of Form no.67 is mandatory to claim the benefit of Foreign Tax Credit. 4.3 Taxes are paid in an alien nation, the particulars of which can never be verified by the Income tax Authorities

Isha Mago, Delhi vs. Assessing Officer, Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 173/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Apr 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2018-19

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)

grounds of appeal: “1. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in confirming the IT order not allowing the foreign tax credit of Rs 664166 on the ground that assessee has filed Form -67 beyond the due date in respect of claim of foreign tax credit ... That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in confirming the denial of Foreign Tax Credit by the Ld. AO on the ground that the Assessee has filed Form-67 beyond the due date in respect of the claim of foreign credit. 2 3. That

DCIT - Circle - 4(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Bytescale Technologies Pr Ivate Limited, Mumbai

Accordingly, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the CIT(A). Ground No. 3 raised by the Revenue is, therefore, dismissed

ITA 2740/MUM/2023[2018]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Apr 2024

Bench: SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh ShahFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar Ambastha
Section 10ASection 143(3)Section 2Section 27Section 90

trading activity. 3. On the facts and in circumstance of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) is justified in allowing foreign tax credit u/s. 90 of the Act, ignoring the fact that the assessee has failed to produce separate books of accounts as maintained for its branch ... India the credit for taxes of INR 26,21,694/- paid in Singapore. However, the Assessing Officer denied the aforesaid claim of foreign tax credit. Being aggrieved, the Assessee carried the issue in appeal before 10. CIT(A). Vide order, dated 06/06/2023, the CIT(A) granted partial relief