AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (10) TMI 399
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or the delay in filing of Form 67. 3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the assessee filed her return of income on 04.01.2021 showing total income of Rs. 77,29,670/-. The return was processed U/s 143(1) of the Act. On 26.02.2021, the assessee revised her return by declaring income of Rs. 1,66,00,310/- and claimed relief U/s 90 for Rs. 17,04,600/- for Foreign Tax Credit (FTC) in respect of taxes paid in USA. The revised return was also processed but claim of FTC was disallowed. The assessee filed an application U/s 154 which was rejected by the CPC. The assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A) but without any success. 4. We have given a thoughtful consideration to the factual matrix hereinabove. The only reason for de....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....'ble Supreme Court passed an order bringing to end the extension of limitation. However, due to recurrence of COVID-19 and drastic surge in number of COVID cases across the country, the Hon'ble Supreme Court again, vide order dated 10- 1-2022, restored its earlier order extending the period of limitation and observed that the period from 15-3- 2020 till 28-2-2022 shall stand excluded for the purpose of limitation and all persons shall have a limitation period of 90 days from 1-3-2022 to comply with legal requirements. Thus, in view of the aforesaid decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court, it has to be concluded that the assessee has filed Form 67 within the extended period of limitation as per the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court. T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... but on merits. I therefore do not agree with the submission of the learned Departmental Representative in this regard." 14. Further, in case of Sonakshi Sinha (supra), the co-ordinate Bench while seized of an identical issue, held as under: "10. We have also put before the learned authorised representative decision of the honourable Supreme Court in civil appeal number 1449 of 2022 in case of PCIT v. Wipro Ltd. dated 11 July 2022 as to why the condition of filing form number 67 on or before the due date of filing of the return of income should not be considered as mandatory in nature. 11. The learned authorised representative submitted that honourable Supreme Court was seized of the matter where in the same sub-s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....urse of assessment proceedings and not before the due date of filing return. Rule 128 (9) of the Income-tax Rules 1962 provides that the statement in Form No. 67 referred to in clause (i) of sub-rule (8) and the certificate or the statement referred to in clause (ii) of sub-rule (8) shall be furnished on or before the due date specified for furnishing the return of income under sub-section (1) of section 139, in the manner specified for furnishing such return of income. We find that coordinate bench in 42 Hertz Software India (P.) Ltd. v. ACIT [2022] 139 taxmann. Com 448 (Bangalore-Trib.) wherein following its earlier order in the case of Ms. Brinda Raman Krishna v. ITO [2022] 135 taxmann.com 358 (Bang-Trib) it was held that "one of the req....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tinct then the issue involved in the decision of the honourable Supreme Court in case of Wipro Ltd (supra). Here it is not the case of violation of any of the provisions of the act but of the rule, which does not provide for any consequence, if not complied with. Therefore, respectfully following the decisions of the coordinate bench on this issue, we hold the assessee is eligible for foreign tax credit, as she has filed form number 67 before completion of the assessment, though not in accordance with rule 128 (9) of The Income-tax Rules, which provided that such form shall be filed on or before the due date of filing of the return of income. Accordingly, ground number 2 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed." 15. The ratio laid....