https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777724 ITAT, Bangalore (AT) held that filing Form 67 after assessment but during the pendency of the appeal before CIT(A) did not bar foreign tax credit since the time limit under Rule 128(9) is directory; CIT(A) should have allowed the credit. The AO is directed to verify the claim and grant the foreign tax credit if in order. Regarding carry-forward of losses, unabsorbed depreciation is not treated as business loss for AY 2018-19; the AO must allow carry-forward losses of earlier years after giving the assessee an opportunity of hearing. en-us Mon, 13 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 04 Sep 2025 08:40:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777724 ITAT, Bangalore (AT) held that filing Form 67 after assessment but during the pendency of the appeal before CIT(A) did not bar foreign tax credit since the time limit under Rule 128(9) is directory; CIT(A) should have allowed the credit. The AO is directed to verify the claim and grant the foreign tax credit if in order. Regarding carry-forward of losses, unabsorbed depreciation is not treated as business loss for AY 2018-19; the AO must allow carry-forward losses of earlier years after giving the assessee an opportunity of hearing. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 13 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777724