Foreign tax credit relief cannot be denied for late Form No. 67 filing when the claim is otherwise verifiable.

Foreign tax credit under section 90 could not be denied solely because Form No. 67 was filed after the assessment year, as the filing requirement under rule 128(9) was procedural rather than substantive. The Tribunal noted that the return had been processed under section 143(1) and the credit was later disallowed under section 154 only for delayed filing of the form. Since the form was on record and the claim was otherwise verifiable, belated compliance did not defeat the underlying entitlement to relief. The denial of foreign tax credit was therefore not sustainable, subject to due verification of the claim.

---

---

Issues: Whether foreign tax credit under section 90 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 could be denied solely because Form No. 67 was filed after the end of the assessment year, and whether the filing requirement under rule 128(9) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 was procedural or substantive.

Analysis: The return had been processed under section 143(1) and the foreign tax credit was disallowed in rectification under section 154 only on the ground of delayed filing of Form No. 67. The filing of Form No. 67 was treated as a compliance requirement for claiming credit, but the delay did not affect the underlying entitlement to relief under section 90. The Tribunal held that the form-filing requirement was procedural in nature and that the substantive benefit of foreign tax credit could not be denied merely for belated compliance, especially when the form was available on record and the claim was capable of verification.

Conclusion: The denial of foreign tax credit on the ground of delayed filing of Form No. 67 was not sustainable, and the assessee was entitled to the relief under section 90 after due verification.

Ratio Decidendi: A procedural time-limit for filing Form No. 67 cannot defeat the substantive entitlement to foreign tax credit under section 90 when the claim is otherwise verifiable and the statutory condition is not of a substantive disqualification.

---