← 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

Vanangamudi Vairamani Pandiyan, Chennai vs. ACIT, Central Circle-1(1), Chennai

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

ITA 2895/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai01 Jul 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K

For Appellant: Shri P.M. Kathir, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri C.P. Solomon, JCIT
Section 139(1)Section 147Section 148Section 151ASection 250

erred in merely stating that credit to taxes paid must be given as per law without specifically directing the AO to allow the foreign tax credit which the AO had failed to do so. 8. Any other ground raised at the time of hearing. 3. Brief facts of the case ... submitted that pursuant to the notice issued u/s.148 of the Act, assessee had filed return of income and also Form No.67 for claiming Foreign Tax Credit (FTC). It was submitted that the reassessment was completed :- 4 -: subsequently and assessee was entitled to FTC. The CIT(A) however rejected the contentions

Vishal Negi, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle-8(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 95/HYD/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jun 2025AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri Manjunatha, G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.95/Hyd/2025 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2022-23) Shri Vishal Negi Vs. Dy. Cit Hyderabad Circle 8 (1) Pan: Abkpn5497R Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri Nikhilesh Kataria, Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr.Ar सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 25/06/2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 30/06/2025 आदेश/Order Per Manjunatha, G. A.M This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated, 18/11/2024 Of The Learned Cit (A)/Addl./Jcit(A) Udaipur Relating To A.Y. 2022-23. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That, The Appellant, An Individual, Filed His Return Of Income For The A.Y 2022-23 On 30/07/2022 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.89,74,680/- & Claimed Foreign Tax Credit Of Rs.49,65,499/-. The Return Of Income

For Appellant: Shri Nikhilesh Kataria, CAFor Respondent: : Shri Gurpreet Singh, Sr.AR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)

individual, filed his return of income for the A.Y 2022-23 on 30/07/2022 declaring total income of Rs.89,74,680/- and claimed foreign tax credit of Rs.49,65,499/-. The return of income Page 1 of 6 ITA No 95 of 2025 Vishal Negi Hyderabad filed by the assessee ... appeal, the learned CIT (A) sustained the additions made by the Assessing Officer towards disallowance of Foreign Tax Credit on the ground that, filing of Form 67 within the due date specified u/s 139(1) of the Act is mandatory and since the assessee has filed Form 67 on 15/12/2022

Nanda Kishore Ravula, Hyderabad vs. ADIT (International Tax)-2, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 552/HYD/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Manjunatha G. & Shri Ravish Soodआ.अपी.सं /Ita No.552/Hyd/2025 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year: 2020-21) Nanda Kishore Ravula Vs. Adit (International Hyderabad Tax)-2 [Pan :Agupr0664F] Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) निर्धाररती द्वधरध/Assessee By: Shri Nikhill Tiwari, Ar रधजस् व द्वधरध/Revenue By: Shri Gurpreet Singh, Dr सुिवधई की तधरीख/Date Of Hearing: 26/06/2025 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of 30/06/2025 Pronouncement: आदेश / Order Per. Manjunatha G., A.M: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 21.01.2025 Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Ld.Cit(A)], National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, Pertaining To A.Y.2020-21. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee, An Individual, Filed His Original Return Of Income For The A.Y.2020- 21 On 15.12.2020, Declaring Total Income Of Rs.1,08,11,550/-. Subsequently, The Assessee Filed Revised Return Of Income On 30.03.2021 & Claimed Foreign Tax Credit (“Ftc”) Of 2 Nanda Kishore Ravula

For Appellant: Shri Nikhill Tiwari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Gurpreet Singh, DR
Section 139(1)Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 154Section 91

declaring total income of Rs.1,08,11,550/-. Subsequently, the assessee filed revised return of income on 30.03.2021 and claimed Foreign Tax Credit (“FTC”) of 2 Nanda Kishore Ravula Rs.21,57,343/-. The return of income filed by the assessee has been processed by the AO(CPC) and intimation ... case of the assessee there was a TDS deducted by the Foreign Government to the extent of Rs.95,539/- which was claimed as Foreign Tax Credit in accordance with section 91 of the I.T. Act, 1961. The CPC while processing the return u/s 143(1) dated 22/03/2022 disallowed the claim

Invesco(India) Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle -2 (1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 111/HYD/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G

For Appellant: CA, Sriram SeshadriFor Respondent: Shri B Bala Krishna, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)

above, that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AD erred in not granting consequential foreign tax credit under section 90 of the Act despite the specific 7 ITA.No.111/Hyd./2022 direction of the Hon'ble DRP to grant the same ... statistical purposes. 34. The next issue that came-up for consideration through ground no.7 of assessee’s appeal is denial of credit for Foreign Tax Credit [in short “FTC”]. 35. CA, Sriram Seshadri, Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that, the learned Assessing Officer has not granted FTC u/sec.90

Nagarajan Shapoorna, Madurai vs. ITO, Ncw-1(7), Madurai

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

ITA 812/CHNY/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.812/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2021-22 Nagarajan Shapoorna, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 2A, Vp Rathinasamy Nadar Road, Non Corporate Ward 1(7), Visalakshipuram, Madurai 625 014. Madurai. [Pan:Djwps7535G] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Thulasiram, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 04.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.06.2025 आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 27.01.2025 Passed By The Addl/Jcit(A)-1, Gurugram For The Assessment Year 2021-22. 2. The Assessee Raised 7 Grounds Of Appeal Amongst Which, The Only Issue Emanates For Our Consideration As To Whether The Ld. Cit(A) Is Justified In Confirming The Disallowance Made By The Assessing Officer Towards Foreign Tax Credit Claimed At ₹.1,82,847/- Under Section 90/90A Of 2

For Appellant: Shri R. Thulasiram, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 90

emanates for our consideration as to whether the ld. CIT(A) is justified in confirming the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer towards foreign tax credit claimed at ₹.1,82,847/- under section 90/90A of 2 I.T.A. No.812/Chny/25 the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] in the facts ... note that the assessee filed his return of income for AY 2021-22 declaring total income of ₹.16,55,300/- after claiming foreign tax credit of ₹.1,82,847/-. The CPC passed intimation under section 143(1) of the Act dated 13.10.2022 by disallowing the claim of foreign tax credit

Sankaran, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-17(7), Chennai

ITA 1212/CHNY/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Jun 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri Jagadishआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1212/Chny/2025 निर्धारण वर्ष/Assessment Year: 2023-24 Sankaran, Vs. The Income Tax Officer, 73/28, Balakrishnan Street Extension, Non Corporate Ward 17(7), West Mambalam, Chennai 600 033. Chennai. [Pan:Bpbps4698F] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से / Appellant By Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/Respondent By Shri Vijay Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing 18.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement 30.06.2025 आदेश /Order Per S.S. Viswanethra Ravi: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 14.02.2025 Passed By The Addl./Jcit(A)-5, Mumbai For The

Section 143(1)Section 90

emanates for our consideration as to whether the Id. CIT(A) is justified in confirming the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer towards foreign tax credit claimed at ₹.19,84,504/- under section 90 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” in short] in the facts and circumstances ... after claiming relief under section 90 of the Act and however, not filed the prescribed Form 67 for claiming the foreign tax credit. The Assessing Officer, CPC passed intimation under section 143(1) of the Act dated 29.08.2024 rejected foreign tax credit claimed under section

Anil Kumar Ahuja, Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle 59(1), Delhi

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 1718/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Sh. Satbeer Singh Godaraita No. 1718/Del/2025 : Asstt. Year : 2019-20 Anil Kumar Ahuja, Vs Dcit, 82, Shankar Vihar, Vikas Marg, Circle-59(1), New Delhi-110092 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Ahbpa5554F Assessee By: Sh. Sameer, Ar Revenue By : Ms. Indu Bala Saini, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 26.06.2025 Date Of Pronouncement: 26.06.2025 Order This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2019-20, Arises Against The Addl./Jcit(A)-6, Kolkata’S Din & Order No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2024-25/1072451030(1) Dated 23.01.2025, In Proceedings U/S 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (In Short “The Act”).

For Appellant: Sh. Sameer, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Indu Bala Saini, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)

file perused. 3. A perusal of the case file indicates at the outset that both the learned lower authorities have refused to grant foreign tax credit benefit to the assessee for the sole reason that he had filed the corresponding prescribed Form 67 on 29.09.2020 as against the “due” date ... assessee’s behest is a mandatory provision; and, therefore, both the lower authorities have rightly disallowed the assessee’s impugned foreign tax credit. I find no merit in the Revenue’s instant argument in light of Deepak Pragjibhai Gondaliya Vs. PCIT (2025) 175 taxmann.com 985(Guj.) having settled the issue

Income Tax Officer, C.R. Building vs. Fashion Factory (International) Pvt. Ltd, Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 4974/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Naveen Chandra

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Sureder Kumar Jatav, Sr DR
Section 143(1)Section 295Section 90

order dated 20/09/2022, while deciding a similar issue held that section 90/91 of the Act has not been amended insofar as grant of foreign tax credit is concerned and Rules cannot override the Act and therefore filing of Form No. 67 is not mandatory but it is directory. The relevant ... filing Form No. 67 as per the provisions of Rule 128(9) will not preclude the assessee from claiming the benefit of foreign tax credit in respect of tax paid outside India”. 5. The facts of appellate case, are similar to above mentioned and discussed judgements. Considering the totality

Kunal Chandra Prasad Sinha, Karnataka vs. Asst. Director of Income Tax, Bengaluru

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

ITA 1156/PUN/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Dr.Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1156/Pun/2025 Assessment Year : 2019-20

For Appellant: Shri Sumit AnandFor Respondent: Date of hearing
Section 143(1)(a)Section 250Section 250(6)Section 91

confirming the action of Centralized Processing Centre (CPC) of not providing relief u/s.91 of the Act at Rs.6,07,089/- towards the Foreign Tax Credit for non- submission of Form No.67. 3. At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that ld.CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee’s appeal ... please be condoned and the matter may please be restored to the file of ld.CIT(A) for examination of claim of Foreign Tax Credit at Rs.6,07,089/- towards the tax deducted by the Employer Mara Phones Rwanda Limited as per Article 16 of the Double Tax Avoidance Agreement with

Nanda Kumar Parthasarathy, Chennai vs. ITO, Ncw-15(1), Chennai

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

ITA 1085/CHNY/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Manu Kumar Giri & Hon’Ble Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1085/Chny/2025 Assessment Years: 2021-22 Nana Kumar Parthasarathy, Income Tax Officer, No.315, Ramaniyam Katima, Non-Corp Ward-15(1), No.148, Pillaiyar Koil Street, Chennai. Thuraipakkam, Chennai-600 097. [Pan: Cdjpp3991B] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri Y.Sridhar,F.C.A, प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Ms.Anitha, Addl.Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17.06.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 19.06.2025 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amitabh Shukla, A.M :

For Appellant: Shri Y.Sridhar,F.C.AFor Respondent: Ms.Anitha, Addl.CIT
Section 143(1)

passed an ex-parte order thereby confirming the assessment order u/s 143(1) wherein the Ld.AO had made a disallowance on account of foreign tax credit of Rs.6,38,670/- as well as non-credit of few TDS payments, without condoning delay petition. It was submitted that the Ld. First

Chathadi Krishnan Parvathi, Madurai vs. ITO, Ncc-1, Madurai

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

ITA 932/CHNY/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George George Kand Shri S.R. Raghunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 932/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year:2019-20 Ms. Chathadi Krishnan The Income Tax Officer, Parvathi, Vs. Non-Corporate Circle 1, Flat No.9, Block-B, Madurai Swagath Residency, 708-A, 17Th Cross Street, Anna Nagar, Madurai – 625 020. Pan: Clypp 0358P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/Appellant By : Ms. Kvsk Bhavana, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Kumar Chandan, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 17.06.2025 घोषणा क" तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 18.06.2025

For Appellant: Ms. KVSK Bhavana, CAFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Chandan, JCIT
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 90

whether the First Appellate Authority is justified in confirming the intimation issued u/s.143(1) of the Act, wherein the assessee was denied Foreign Tax Credit (FTC) of Rs.1,45,891/-. 3. Brief facts of the case are as follows: The assessee is an individual. For the assessment year ... paid in USA while discharging her tax in India. 4. An intimation was issued u/s.143(1) of the Act on 12.02.2021, wherein the Foreign Tax Credit amounting to Rs.1,45,890/- claimed in the return of income was denied (for the reason of failure to furnish Form 67). On receipt

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

Aurangabad erred in law and on facts in sustaining the action of the learned DDIT, CPC, Bengaluru in not granting Foreign Tax Credit of Rs. 16,49,094/-. The learned I-T Authorities ought to have appreciated that Foreign Tax Credit cannot be denied merely due to delay in filing ... that filing of Form-67 as per Rule 128 of the ITR, 1962 is only directory in nature and therefore non grant of foreign tax credit for delay in filing Form-67 is uncalled for, as held by various courts. 3. The learned Addl. / Jt. CIT(A), Aurangabad erred

M/S. Castlewick Fze, Dubai vs. ACIT, International Taxation, Circle-1(1), Chennai

ITA 459/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 Jun 2025AY 2018-19
For Appellant: Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. E. Pavuna Sundari, CIT
Section 139Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 148Section 201Section 201(1)Section 234ASection 9(1)(vii)

provide any separate mechanism for quantification or computation of 'Philippine tax payable' or ‘Indian tax income' which is the starting point for claiming foreign tax credit. This means that Article 24(1) operates in the field of computation of doubly taxed income and tax thereon in accordance with the domestic

Hirachand Damji Dand, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 16(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 1804/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jun 2025AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan & Hirachand Damji Dand Vs. Acit Circle 16(1) A/704, Remi Biz Court, Plot No. 9, Aayakar Bhavan, Shah Industries Estate, Off Veera Mumbai-400 020 Desai Road, Azad Nagar, Andheri (West), Mumbai-400 053 Pan: Aaapd8985F (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 139(1)Section 154Section 90

refusing to rectify the apparent mistake while making adjustment of Rs. 4,88,188/- and Rs. 1,72,931/- on account of Foreign Tax Credit (FTC) u/s 90/90A of the Act for the AY 2019-20 and 2020-21 respectively. 2. Since the facts and grounds of both the appeals ... 1804/Mum/2025 (AY 2019-20):- (1) On the facts and in law, the CPC (Centralized Processing Centre), Bengaluru erred in not allowing credit for foreign Tax Credit (FTC) u/s. 90/90A of Rs.4,88,188/- in spite of the fact that it is claimed in the return of income filed

Hirachand Damji Dand, Mumbai vs. ACIT-Circle 16(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 1803/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vikram Singh Yadav & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan & Hirachand Damji Dand Vs. Acit Circle 16(1) A/704, Remi Biz Court, Plot No. 9, Aayakar Bhavan, Shah Industries Estate, Off Veera Mumbai-400 020 Desai Road, Azad Nagar, Andheri (West), Mumbai-400 053 Pan: Aaapd8985F (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 139(1)Section 154Section 90

refusing to rectify the apparent mistake while making adjustment of Rs. 4,88,188/- and Rs. 1,72,931/- on account of Foreign Tax Credit (FTC) u/s 90/90A of the Act for the AY 2019-20 and 2020-21 respectively. 2. Since the facts and grounds of both the appeals ... 1804/Mum/2025 (AY 2019-20):- (1) On the facts and in law, the CPC (Centralized Processing Centre), Bengaluru erred in not allowing credit for foreign Tax Credit (FTC) u/s. 90/90A of Rs.4,88,188/- in spite of the fact that it is claimed in the return of income filed

Vijay Indubhai Sheth, Satellite vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 3(3)(5), Vejalpur

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 780/AHD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Jun 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Smt. Annapurna Gupta (Accountant Member), Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar (Judicial Member)

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 90

along with Form No. 67. The return was processed u/s. 143(1) of the Act vide intimation dated 30-10-2022. However the Foreign Tax Credit claimed by the assessee was denied because of late filing of Form No. 67 and demand tax of Rs.10,82,240/-. 3. The assessee ... Assessing Officer to I.T.A No. 780/Ahd/2025 A.Y. 2021-22 Page No 4 Vijay Indubhai Sheth. vs. ITO consider the Form No. 67 claiming Foreign Tax Credit by giving proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee and redo the assessment in accordance with law. 8. In the result, the appeal filed

Sameer Shrikant Pise, Pune vs. DCIT Circle 12, Pune

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

ITA 1078/PUN/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Pune06 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Shri Vinay Bhamore

For Appellant: Shri V. Balaji, CA (virtual)For Respondent: Shri Akhilesh Srivastva - Addl.CIT
Section 143(1)Section 154

facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. ADDL/JCIT(A) has erred in not directing the Ld. JAO to allow Foreign Tax Credit of Rs. 9,88,899 on salary income of Rs. 36,67,617 doubly taxed in India as well as the United Kingdom ... prayed that the JAO be directed to allow the Foreign Tax Credit of Rs. 9,88,899. Around 4: On the facts and circumstances, the Ld. ADDL/JCIT(A) erred in directing the Ld. JAO to allow TDS credit after reconciling the Form 26AS data with the TDS credit allowed

Vembu Kumar, Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 1(1), Chennai

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

ITA 734/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Ms. N.V. Lakshmi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam
Section 139(1)Section 90

No.28/Chny/2025 (AY 2018-19) Vembu Kumar 2. The only grievance of the assessee is against the action of the Ld.CIT(A) denying the Foreign Tax Credit (FTC) as claimed by the assessee. 3. The brief facts are that the assessee, an individual, filed his return of income ... would always be directory in nature. Respectfully following the same, we direct Ld. CIT(A) to grant impugned Foreign Tax Credit to the assessee after verifying Form No.67. 5. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and Stay Petition filed by the assessee is dismissed as infructuous

Tips Music Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst. Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bengaluru, Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed as per above directions

ITA 655/MUM/2025[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jun 2025AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Deepak Tralshawala, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Hemanshu Joshi, Sr. D/R
Section 139(1)Section 90

substance of the grievance of the assessee is that the ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the denial of foreign tax credit (FTC) of Rs. 47,36,704/- on the ground that Form No. 67 was not filed along with return of income. As per Rule

Amitkumar Pravinchandra Reshamwala, Surat vs. Deputy Director of Income Tax, CPC Bengaluru / ITO (Int. Tax) Surat, CPC Bengaluru / ITO Surat

In the result, appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 1240/SRT/2024[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Surat29 May 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1240/Srt/2024 Assessment Year: (2023-24) (Hybrid Hearing) Amitkumar Pravinchandra Deputy Director Of Income-Tax, बनाम/ Reshamwala Cpc, Bengaluru/Ao (Int. Tax) Vs. B-1004, Arihant Heightsopp Surat Stuti Icon. Auravpath, Palanpur-395 005 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Agspr 4047 K (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent)

Section 154Section 234BSection 234CSection 250Section 90

filed the return of income for AY 2023-24 on 25.07.2023, which was processed u/s 143(1) on 25.08.2023. The appellant had claimed foreign tax credit (FTC) of INR 8,86,167/- in respect of US federal taxes paid u/s 90 of the Act read with Article 23 of DTAA