← All Phrases

“tax credit certificate”

Chapter I - PreliminarySection 2 - DefinitionsSection 2(43A)39 judgments

The decision most relied on for tax credit certificate is CIT v. Bhooratnam & Co. (357 ITR 396), cited in 48 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on tax credit certificate

CIT v. Bhooratnam & Co.
357 ITR 396 · 2013 · High Court
48
citing judgments

An assessee is entitled to credit for TDS even if the certificate is issued in the name of a joint venture or related party, provided the income to which the TDS relates is offered by the assessee. This principle emphasizes looking at the substance of the transaction over strict adherence to the name on the TDS certificate.

Yashpal Sahni v. ACIT
293 ITR 539 · 2007 · High Court
38
citing judgments

Once tax has been deducted at source (TDS), the bar of section 205 applies, preventing the deductee from being asked to pay the tax again, even if the deductor fails to deposit the tax or issue TDS certificates.

314 ITR 3 CIT v. Ujala Dying & Printing Mill Ltd.
328 ITR 437 · 2010 · High Court
12
citing judgments

When shareholders are produced, their books and bank statements are examined, and their share certificates are filed, the assessing officer's satisfaction regarding share application money is established. The department cannot assume the contrary without any evidence to the contrary.

Judgments citing tax credit certificate

Cosmos Maya India Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Central Processing Center, ITO-16(1)(3), Bengaluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2543/MUM/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Prakash Jhunjhunwala, A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Akshay Tapadiya, Sr. D/R
Section 143(1)

Representatives of both the sides heard at length. There is no dispute that the assessee holds a foreign tax credit certificate for Rs.59,87,813/-. In our considered opinion filing of Form 67 is procedural/directory requirement and is not mandatory requirement. Therefore, violation of procedural norms does not extinguish

Kunal Ramesh Shah, Mumbai vs. ADIT CPC Bangaluru, Bangaluru

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2502/MUM/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Ravi Dasija, C.A. & Kiran Mehta, C.A., A/RsFor Respondent: Shri Sunil K. Agwane, Sr. D/R
Section 143(1)

return of income. 4. Representatives of both the sides heard at length. There is no dispute that the assessee holds a foreign tax credit certificate for Rs.4,21,428/-. In our considered opinion filing of Form 67 is procedural/directory requirement and is not mandatory requirement. Therefore, violation of procedural norms

Ericsson India Global Services Pvt Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT Spl. Range 3, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2368/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Jul 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Deydr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Vishal Kalra, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. Vijay B. Vasanta, CIT-DR
Section 234BSection 90Section 92C

course of assessment proceedings, the assessee revised its claim of foreign tax credit to Rs.8,98,74,874/- on receipt of additional foreign tax credit certificates from the vendors till date. 7. The Transfer Pricing Officer (TPO), vide order dated October 25, 2017, made adjustment of Rs.45

Ramakrishna Rao, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-2(3), Alipurduar

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 541/KOL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jun 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rakesh Mishraassessment Year: 2020-21

For Appellant: Shri Siddarth Agarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sailen Samadder, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 250Section 90

have given a thoughtful consideration to the orders of the authorities below. The undisputed fact is that the assessee holds a foreign tax credit certificate for Rs.1887114/-. In our considered opinion filing of form 67 is a procedural / directory requirement and is not a mandatory requirement. Therefore, violation of procedural

Sharad Mathur, Hyderabad vs. DCIT., Circle 12(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 332/HYD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Jun 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Laliet Kumar & Shri Madhusudan Sawdiaआ.अपी.सं /Ita Nos.331 & 332/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years:2019-20 & 2021-22) Shri Sharad Mathur Vs. Dy. C. I. T. Hyderabad Circle 12(2) Pan:Aogpm3520B Hyderabad (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Shri B.Satyanarayana Murthy,Ca राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Smt. Sheetal Sarin, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 03/06/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: /06/2024 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: Shri B.Satyanarayana Murthy,CAFor Respondent: : Smt. Sheetal Sarin, DR
Section 139(1)Section 154Section 90Section 91

have already been reproduced in the preceding paragraph. It is the submission of the learned Counsel for the assessee that filing of foreign tax credit certificate in Form-67 is directory in nature Baburao Atluri and not mandatory and therefore the NFAC is not justified in denying the Foreign Tax

Maya Kapoor, Gurgaon vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(4), Gurgaon

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 783/DEL/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Gupta, Adv. and Shri Deepesh Garg, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. Dr
Section 139Section 143(1)Section 154Section 90

have given a thoughtful consideration to the orders of the authorities below. The undisputed fact is that the assessee holds a foreign tax credit certificate for Rs.1887114/-. In our considered opinion filing of form 67 is a procedural / directory requirement and is not a mandatory requirement. Therefore, violation of procedural

Suchi Agrawal, Noida vs. ITO Ward 5(2)(4), Noida

ITA 601/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 May 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri S Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Shri Akash Vajpai, Adv. and Ms. Shweta ShandiyalFor Respondent: Shri Om Prakash, Sr. Dr
Section 143(1)Section 154Section 90

have given a thoughtful consideration to the orders of the authorities below. The undisputed fact is that the assessee holds a foreign tax credit certificate for Rs.1887114/-. In our considered opinion filing of form 67 is a procedural / directory requirement and is not a mandatory requirement. Therefore, violation of procedural

The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD), Circle-12, Pune vs. Raj Surendra Mohan Hajela, Pune

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

ITA 470/PUN/2023[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 May 2024AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Astha Chandraassessment Year : 2021-22

For Appellant: Shri Pramod ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak, Addl.CIT
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 90

which have already been reproduced in the proceeding paragraph. It is the submission of the ld.Counsel for the assessee that filing of foreign tax credit certificate in Form-67 is directory in nature and not mandatory and therefore the NFAC is not justified in denying the Foreign Tax Credit

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)

have given a thoughtful consideration to the orders of the authorities below. The undisputed fact is that the assessee holds a foreign tax credit certificate for Rs.1887114/-. In our considered opinion filing of form 67 is a procedural / directory requirement and is not a mandatory requirement. Therefore, violation of procedural

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

have given a thoughtful consideration to the orders of the authorities below. The undisputed fact is that the assessee holds a foreign tax credit certificate for Rs.1887114/-. In our considered opinion filing of 4 form 67 is a procedural / directory requirement and is not a mandatory requirement. Therefore, violation

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)

have given a thoughtful consideration to the orders of the authorities below. The undisputed fact is that the assessee holds a foreign tax credit certificate for Rs.1887114/-. In our considered opinion filing of form 67 is a procedural / directory requirement and is not a mandatory requirement. Therefore, violation of procedural

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Visakhapatnam vs. Ssnr Projects Pvt Ltd, Visakhapatnam

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 161/VIZ/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam28 Feb 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.161/Viz/2022 ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year : 2019-20) Asst. Commissioner Of Income Vs. M/S. Ssnr Projects Private Tax, Circle-3(1), Limited, Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aarcs 2464 C (अपीलाथ"/ Appellant) (""यथ"/ Respondent) C.O. No. 29/Viz/2023 (In आयकरअपीलसं./ I.T.A. No.161/Viz/2022) ("नधा"रणवष"/ Assessment Year : 2019-20) M/S. Ssnr Projects Private Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Limited, Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Visakhapatnam. Visakhapatnam. Pan: Aarcs 2464 C (Cross Objector / Respondent In (Appellant In Appeal) Appeal) अपीलाथ"क"ओरसे/ Assessee By : Sri Samuel Nagadesi ""याथ"क"ओरसे/ Revenue By : Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. Ar सुनवाईक"तार"ख/ Date Of Hearing : 05/02/2024 घोषणाक"तार"ख/Date Of : 28/02/2024 Pronouncement O R D E R

For Appellant: Sri Samuel NagadesiFor Respondent: Dr. Aparna Villuri, Sr. AR
Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 90

wherein the date of order is mentioned as 13/3/2021. It was further submitted that there was a delay in obtaining the Foreign Tax Credit Certificate from Nepal Tax Authorities and hence the assessee could not file Form-67 within the time as prescribed under Rule

Nagubabu Kuchibhotla, Hyderabad vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-12(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 28/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad27 Feb 2024AY 2020-21

Bench: Hon'Ble Justice (Retd.) C.V. Bhadang & Shri R.K. Panda, Vice-आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.28/Hyd/2024 (िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2020-21) Shri Nagubabu Vs. Income Tax Officer Kuchibhotla Ward-12(1) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan:Ahlpk3559L (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा""रती "ारा/Assessee By: Adv. P Prabhakara Murthy राज" व "ारा/Revenue By:: Shri Shakeer Ahmed, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 15/02/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 27/02/2024 Order Per R.K. Panda, Vice-. This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Dated 19.02.2023 Of The Learned Cit (A)-Nfac, Delhi, Relating To A.Y.2020-21. 2. Although A Number Of Grounds Have Been Raised By The Assessee, However, These All Relate To The Order Of The Learned Cit(A)Nfac In Upholding The Disallowance Of Rs.4,40,939/- Being Foreign Tax Credit Claimed By The Assessee By Way Of Tax Relief U/S 90 Of The I.T. Act, 1961. Page 1 Of 7

For Appellant: Adv. P Prabhakara MurthyFor Respondent: : Shri Shakeer Ahmed, DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 90

have already been reproduced in the preceding paragraph. It is the submission of the learned Counsel for the assessee that filing of foreign tax credit certificate in Form-67 is directory in Page 4 of 7 ITA No 28 of 2024 Nagubabu Kuchibhotla nature Baburao Atluri and not mandatory

Infrastructure Leasing and Financial Services Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl /Jt/ACIT/NFAC Delhi, Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1554/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jan 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA (Judicial Member), SHRI GAGAN GOYAL (Accountant Member)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 92B

area for the purpose of Chapter XXII- B, gave to a person who shifted from an urban area to another area, a tax credit certificate with reference to the tax payable by the company on income-tax chargeable under capital gains and would be given relief accordingly. The Appellant contended ... Court held that the idea of omitting section 280ZA and introducing Section 54G on the same date was to do away with the tax credit certificate scheme together with the 12 Infrastructure Leasing and Financial Services Ltd. prior approval required by the Board and to substitute the repealed provision with

DCIT, Circle-7(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Hind Aluminium Industries Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, Cross objection of the assessee is allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1904/MUM/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Oct 2023AY 2013-14
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92BSection 92C

urban area for the purpose of Chapter XXII- B, gave to a person who shifted from an urban area to another area, a tax credit certificate with reference to the tax payable by the company on income-tax chargeable under capital gains and would be given relief accordingly. The Appellant ... Court held that the idea of omitting section 280ZA and introducing Section 54G on the same date was to do away with the tax credit certificate scheme together with the prior approval required by the Board and to substitute the repealed provision with the new scheme contained in Section 54G.Once

Rameshwar Prasad Shrivastava, Delhi vs. ITO, Ward 70(1), Delhi

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

ITA 1839/DEL/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Sept 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year: 2020-21 Rameshwar Prasad Shrivastava, Vs Ito, 344, Pocket-1, Sector-12, Ward-70(1), Dwarka, Delhi. Delhi – 110 078. Pan: Audps0424K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Devesh Poddar, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Om Parkash, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 11.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 11.09.2023

For Appellant: Shri Devesh Poddar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Om Parkash, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)

have given a thoughtful consideration to the orders of the authorities below. The undisputed fact is that the assessee holds a foreign tax credit certificate for Rs. 1887114/-. In our considered opinion filing of form 67 is a procedural / directory requirement and is not a mandatory requirement. Therefore, violation ... have given a thoughtful consideration to the orders of the authorities below. The undisputed fact is that the assessee holds a foreign tax credit certificate for Rs.1887114/-. In our considered opinion filing of form 67 is a procedural / directory requirement and is not a mandatory requirement. Therefore, violation of procedural

Vikash Daga, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, Circle 3(1), Gurgaon

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

ITA 2536/DEL/2022[2019-2020]Status: HeardITAT Delhi14 Jun 2023AY 2019-2020

Bench: Sh. Saktijit Dey & Sh. N. K. Billaiyaassessment Year: 2019-20 Vikash Daga Acit Flat No. D-022, The Belaire, Vs Circle – 3 (1) Golf Course Road, Dlf Gurgaon Phase 5 Gurgaon Haryana Pan No.Adipd4214E (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 90

have given a thoughtful consideration to the orders of the authorities below. The undisputed fact is that the assessee holds a foreign tax credit certificate for Rs.1887114/-. In our considered opinion filing of form 67 is a procedural / directory requirement and is not a mandatory requirement. Therefore, violation of procedural

Tranztar Commercial Vehicle Applications Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO Ward 14 (3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6624/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Apr 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Amit Shukla () & Ms. Padmavathy S. ()

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 40ASection 92BSection 92C

urban area for the purpose of Chapter XXII- B, gave to a person who shifted from an urban area to another area, a tax credit certificate with reference to the tax payable by the company on income-tax chargeable under capital gains and would be given relief accordingly. The Appellant ... Court held that the idea of omitting section 280ZA and introducing Section 54G on the same date was to do away with the tax credit certificate scheme together with the prior approval required by the Board and to substitute the repealed provision with the new scheme contained in Section 54G.Once

York Tech Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-25(1), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 635/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Aug 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Wadhwa, Adv. and MsFor Respondent: Ms. Meera Srivastava, CIT-DR and Shri M. Baranwal, Sr.D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(5)Section 92B

urban area for the purpose of Chapter XXII- B, gave to a person who shifted from an urban area to another area, a tax credit certificate with reference to the tax payable by the company on income-tax chargeable under capital gains and would be given relief accordingly. The Appellant ... Court held that the idea of omitting section 280ZA and introducing Section 54G on the same date was to do away with the tax credit certificate scheme together with the prior approval required by the Board and to substitute the repealed provision with the new scheme contained in Section 54G.Once