Section 90A of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 90A is CIT v. Eli Lilly & Co.(India) Pvt. Ltd. (178 Taxmann 505), cited in 168 of the 103 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 90A

CIT v. Eli Lilly & Co.(India) Pvt. Ltd.
178 Taxmann 505 · 2009 · Supreme Court
168
citing judgments
Builders’ Association Of India v. Union Of India
2 SCC 645 · 1989 · Reported
109
citing judgments
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.

CIT v. Axis Computers (India) (P.) Ltd.
178 Taxmann 143 · 2009 · High Court
49
citing judgments
State of Rajasthan v. Mangilal Pindwal
5 SCC 60 · 1996 · Reported
49
citing judgments
Duraiswamy Kumaraswamy v. PCIT
460 ITR 615 · 2024 · High Court
48
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.

PCIT, Kanpur v. Surya Merchants Ltd.
72 Taxmann.com 16 · 2016 · High Court
47
citing judgments

The filing of an audit report along with the return of income is directory and not mandatory, meaning non-compliance does not automatically invalidate the return.

Koteswar Vittal Kamath v. K. Rangappa Baliga & Co.
1 SCC 255 · 1969 · Reported
43
citing judgments

When a new statutory provision is substituted for an existing one, the legislative intent is typically that the old provision is deemed deleted and does not remain in force unless there is a clear intention to keep it alive.

VLS Finance Limited & Another v. Commissioner of Income Tax & Another
12 SCC 32 · 2016 · Reported
43
citing judgments
India (Firm) v. CIT
14 SCC 168 · 2008 · Reported
42
citing judgments

The Supreme Court declined to stay assessment proceedings, even when there was divergence of opinion among High Courts and reservations about the correctness of prior judgments concerning the validity of orders under Section 142(2A) and extended limitation under Section 153(3).

Judgments on Section 90A

NAVIN VISHWANATH,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 3(1), GURGAON, GURGAON

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 8442/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Apr 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma& Shri Amitabh Shukla

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 154

NAVIN VISHWANATH,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 3(1), GURGAON, GURGAON

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 8429/DEL/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Apr 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma& Shri Amitabh Shukla

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 154

NAVIN VISHWANATH,GURGAON vs. DCIT, CIRCLE 3(1), GURGAON, GURGAON

The appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 8428/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Apr 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma& Shri Amitabh Shukla

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 154

NITIN KHURANA,DELHI vs. ITO, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5264/DEL/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Mar 2026AY 2023-24

Bench: Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Hon’Ble & Mrs. Renu Jauhri, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ankush Kalra, Sr. DR
Section 119Section 139(1)Section 143Section 154Section 234BSection 250Section 90

SHIPIJ RATHORE,INDORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 1(2), INDORE

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

ITA 557/IND/2025[2021-2022]Status: DisposedITAT Indore19 Feb 2026AY 2021-2022

Bench: Shri B.M. Biyani & Shri Paresh M. Joshi**

Section 143(1)Section 154Section 90

PRAPHAPANANEE SEKARBABU VIGNESH,CHENNAI vs. ITO, NCW-10(3), CHENNAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 2496/CHNY/2025[2022-23]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Feb 2026AY 2022-23

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri. Suraj Nahar, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Gouthami Manivasagam, J.C.I.T
Section 139(1)Section 154Section 90

ASHOK SETHI,DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE- 70(1), NEW DELHI

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

ITA 5526/DEL/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Feb 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Naveen Chandraassessment Year: 2018-19 Sh. Ashok Sethi, Vs. Acit, 18, Sunder Nagar, Circle-70(1), Delhi New Delhi Pan: Bqqps1160L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Sh. Shailendra Mohan, Adv. Department By Ms. Harpreet Kaur Hansra, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 02.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 02.02.2026 Order Per Satbeer Singh Godara, Jm This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2018-19, Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)/Addl. Jcit(A)- 2, Chennai’S Din & Order No. Itba/Apl/S/250/2025- 26/1078504613(1), Dated 15.07.2025, Involving Proceedings Under Section 154 Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’). Heard Both The Parties. Case File Perused. 2. Suffice To Say, It Transpires During The Course Of Hearing That Both The Learned Lower Authorities Have Denied The Assessee’S Foreign Tax Credit Claim Of Rs.1,28,946/- Under Section 90 R.W.S. 90A Of The Act For The Sole Reason That He Had Not Filed/Uploaded His Corresponding Form 67 On Or Before The Prescribed “Due” Date In The Course Of Section 154 “Rectification”, Dated 18Th August, 2022 & Upheld In The Lower Appellate Discussion. This Is What Leaves The Assessee Aggrieved. 4. We Have Given Our Thoughtful Consideration To The Assessee’S & Department’S Vehement Arguments Reiterating Their Respective Stands. It Further Emerges That The Assessee Had Subsequently Complied With The Above Form 67 Filing/Uploading Post Facto The Due Date Thereof As Admitted By Both The Parties. & Also, That Instant Identical Issue Has Been Decided By This Tribunal In Gurcharan Singh Vs. Ito

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 154Section 90

NOBUHIRO WATABE,KANCHEEPURAM vs. DCIT, NCW-17(3), CHENNAI

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

ITA 3179/CHNY/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George Kand Ms Padmavathy Sआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.: 3179/Chny/2025 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. R. Kavitha, Addl.CIT
Section 139(1)Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 250

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), CHENNAI vs. PERIYASAMY ANBUNATHAN, KARUR

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1596/CHNY/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jan 2026AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: Mr.J.K. Reddy, CAFor Respondent: Ms.E. Pavuna Sundari, CIT
Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)Section 250

PERIASAMY ANBUNATHAN,KARUR vs. DCIT, CC-1(4), CHENNAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue and the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes and the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 1488/CHNY/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri S.R.Raghunatha

For Appellant: Mr.J.K. Reddy, CAFor Respondent: Ms.E. Pavuna Sundari, CIT
Section 131Section 132Section 132(4)Section 250

HASMUKHBHAI MOHANLAL SHAH,VADODARA vs. THE DY.CIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1, VADODARA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2221/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Jan 2026AY 2017-18

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Shri Narendra Prasad Sinhaassessment Years:2017-18

Section 139Section 153CSection 154Section 234A

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. KALPATARU PROJECTS INERNATIONAL LIMITED, GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 6114/MUM/2025[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2026AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 147Section 250Section 90

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-3(3), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. KALPATARU PROJECTS INTERNATIONAL LIMITED, GUJARAT

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 6113/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2026AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 147Section 250Section 90

KALPATARU PROJECTS INTERNATIONAL LTD,GUJARAT vs. DCIT, CC-3(3), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee bearing ITA No

ITA 5959/MUM/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2026AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Shri Ritesh Misra, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 139(1)Section 147Section 250Section 90

ACIT CIRCLE 28(1), NEW DELHI, NEW DELHI vs. SUBODH GUPTA, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1951/DEL/2025[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri C. N. Prasad & Shri M. Balaganeshacit, Vs. Subodh Gupta, Circle-28(1), N-50, Panchsheel Park, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan: Aakpg5913G

For Appellant: Shri Somil Aggarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Sahil Kumar Bansal, Sr. DR
Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 153

SOUMIK CHATTERJEE,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD 33(2),, KOLKATA

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

ITA 1508/KOL/2025[2024-2025]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Dec 2025AY 2024-2025

Bench: the Ld. CIT(A), the appellant filed statement of computation of income claiming tax relief of Rs.2,20,926/- (foreign tax credit) instead of Rs.5,22,964/- as claimed in his revised return of income. However, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground that the Form 67 was not filed in time. In our opinion the foreign tax credit cannot be denied mere for the reason of late filing of form 67. We note that the case is squarely covered by the decision of coordinate Benches

Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 154Section 250Section 90Section 90(2)

MEKALA RAKESH REDDY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 1430/HYD/2025[2023-24]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2025AY 2023-24

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON'BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA HON'BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 139Section 143(1)Section 90

MEKALA RAKESH REDDY,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD

ITA 1429/HYD/2025[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: SHRI RAVISH SOOD, HON'BLE (Judicial Member), SHRI MADHUSUDAN SAWDIA HON'BLE (Accountant Member)

Section 139Section 143(1)Section 90

SRESTA NATURAL BIOPRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DCIT., CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 711/HYD/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad19 Dec 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.711/Hyd/2024 Assessment Year 2020-2021 Sresta Natural Bioproducts Private Limited, Hyderabad. The Dcit, Circle-3(1), Vs. Pin – 500 081. Hyderabad – 500 081. Telangana. Telangana. Pan Aahcs9571J (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca P Murali Mohan Rao राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 11.12.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 19.12.2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: CA P Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 153Section 92CSection 92C(3)

DSM SHARED SERVICES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED,HYDERABAD, TELANGANA vs. DCIT., CIRCLE 8(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1358/HYD/2024[2021-22]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad12 Dec 2025AY 2021-22

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Manjunatha G.आ.अपी.सं /Ita No.1358/Hyd/2024 Assessment Year 2021-2022 Dsm Shared Services India Private Limited, The Dcit, Circle-8(1), Hyderabad – 500 081. Hyderabad – 500 081. Vs. Telangana. Telangana. Pan Aadcd8407C (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती "ारा /Assessee By: Ca Aliasgar Rampurawala राज" व "ारा /Revenue By: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, Cit-Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing: 09.12.2025 घोषणा की तारीख/Pronouncement: 12.12.2025 आदेश/Order

For Appellant: CA Aliasgar RampurawalaFor Respondent: Dr. Narendra Kumar Naik, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 144C(13)Section 153Section 92C(3)

Showing 1–20 of 103 · Page 1 of 6