Patent-settlement expenditure treated as commercially expedient revenue outlay, with foreign-law restrictions inapplicable before the prospective amen...
International transaction benchmarking restricts transfer pricing adjustments to associated-enterprise dealings, while functional comparability govern...
Joint development agreements defer taxable transfer where possession lacks part performance, while completed flats determine consideration and exempti...
Passenger baggage re-export requires true declaration and cannot be granted indirectly through discretionary redemption of undeclared prohibited goods...
The High Court, following the judgment in G.M. Knitting Industries (P.) Ltd., held that filing a foreign tax credit claim u/r 128 is directory and not mandatory. The petitioner, an Indian resident working in the UK, filed an Indian tax return claiming foreign tax credit u/s 90 but uploaded Form 67 with delay due to COVID-related difficulties in obtaining foreign documents. The court condoned the delay, noting Sections 90, 90A, and 91 aim to avoid double taxation. Despite the delayed Form 67 filing, the impugned order was set aside, allowing the foreign tax credit claim under Article 24 of the India-UK tax treaty.
The High Court, following the judgment in G.M. Knitting Industries (P.) Ltd., held that filing a foreign tax credit claim u/r 128 is directory and not mandatory. The petitioner, an Indian resident working in the UK, filed an Indian tax return claiming foreign tax credit u/s 90 but uploaded Form 67 with delay due to COVID-related difficulties in obtaining foreign documents. The court condoned the delay, noting Sections 90, 90A, and 91 aim to avoid double taxation. Despite the delayed Form 67 filing, the impugned order was set aside, allowing the foreign tax credit claim under Article 24 of the India-UK tax treaty.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.