<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2026 (7) TMI 301 - ITAT DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794415</link>
    <description>Foreign tax credit under section 90/90A could not be denied merely because Form No. 67 was filed after the due date under section 139(1). Rule 128(9) was treated as procedural and directory, not a substantive condition that extinguishes the credit. Relief under the treaty and the Act remained available where foreign tax had been paid, subject to the applicable legal conditions, and delayed filing of Form No. 67 alone did not justify refusal of the credit.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Jul 2026 08:15:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=909999" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (7) TMI 301 - ITAT DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794415</link>
      <description>Foreign tax credit under section 90/90A could not be denied merely because Form No. 67 was filed after the due date under section 139(1). Rule 128(9) was treated as procedural and directory, not a substantive condition that extinguishes the credit. Relief under the treaty and the Act remained available where foreign tax had been paid, subject to the applicable legal conditions, and delayed filing of Form No. 67 alone did not justify refusal of the credit.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794415</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>