Just a moment...
Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.
Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review
The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.
• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required
Step 2 – Draft Generation
Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.
• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review. 
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether foreign tax credit could be denied solely because Form No. 67 under Rule 128(9) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 was filed after the due date but before processing of the return under section 143(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
Analysis: The claim for foreign tax credit had been made in the return and the relevant figures were already reflected in the processing records, but the credit was disallowed only because Form No. 67 was uploaded belatedly. The decision turned on whether Rule 128(9) is mandatory or directory. Consistent Tribunal authority was noted to hold that the rule prescribes a procedure for claiming credit and does not expressly provide for denial of the substantive benefit on account of delay. The later amendment extending the filing time up to the end of the assessment year was also treated as supporting the directory character of the requirement. In a situation where competing non-jurisdictional views existed, the construction favourable to the assessee was preferred.
Conclusion: The delay in filing Form No. 67 did not justify denial of foreign tax credit, and the claim was held allowable in favour of the assessee.
Ratio Decidendi: Where a procedural rule governing the manner and time of furnishing Form No. 67 does not expressly attach a consequence of forfeiture, delayed compliance does not extinguish an otherwise admissible foreign tax credit.