TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (8) TMI 674
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g a total income of Rs. 22,57,120/- and also claimed relief under section 90 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called "the Act') for a sum of Rs. 3,48,632/- being Foreign Tax Credit. The Centralized Processing Centre (CPC) processed the return under section 143(1) of the Act and rejected the relief of Rs. 3,48,632/- claimed by the assessee under section 90 of the Act. Thereafter, the assessee filed a rectification application under section 154 of the Act on 09.01.2021 before the CPC, which was rejected by the CPC, vide order dated 03.12.2022. 2.1 Aggrieved by the order of the CPC, rejecting the rectification application under section 154 of the Act, the assessee preferred an appeal before the NFAC. However, the NFAC dismissed the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....essment has been passed in absolute violation of the principles of Natural Justice, without providing adequate opportunity of being heard and therefore deserves to be declared a nullity. 5. The appellant craves for leave to add, modify, amend or delete any other and further grounds of appeal with permission. 3.0 The Ld. Authorized Representative for the assessee (Ld. A.R.) submitted that the grievance of the assessee was the denial of Foreign Tax Credit as claimed by the assessee due to the reason of delay in filing Form 67 which was filed on 18.08.2022. It was submitted that due to such denial of Foreign Tax Credit, an amount of Rs. 3,48,632/- was not being allowed by the Department against tax liability of the assessee. The Ld....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... on the order of the ITAT Bangalore Bench in the case of Deepak Shimoga Padmaraju vs. ADIT reported in [2024] 162 taxmann.com 96, wherein, vide order dated 17.04.2024, the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal had held that Rule 128(9) of the Income Tax Rules did not provide for disallowance of Foreign Tax Credit in case of delay in filing of Form 67 and further that filing of Form 67 was not mandatory, but a directory requirement. The Ld. A.R. further submitted that in the said order of the Tribunal, it was also ordained that proceedings under section 154 of the Act can be resorted to for rectifying this kind of situation. It was further submitted that similar view had been taken by the Bangalore Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Vinodkumar ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e was no mistake apparent from the record at the stage of 154 proceedings, the present appeal was infructuous and should be dismissed as such. 5.0 I have heard the rival submissions and have also perused the material on record. The facts are not in dispute. The first question to be considered by me is whether the assessee can be given benefit of Foreign Tax Credit even though the prescribed Form 67 was filed belatedly. The other question before me is as to whether the assessee can avail the help of provisions of section 154 of the Act by filing rectification application although the original course of action against which the assessee should have appealed was the intimation under section 143(1) of the Act. 5.1 It is seen that there is....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he rival submissions. I agree with the contentions put forth by the learned counsel for the Assessee and hold that (1) Rule 128(9) of the Rules does not provide for disallowance of FTC in case of delay in filing Form No.67; (ii) filing of Form No.67 is not mandatory but a directory requirement and (ii) DTAA overrides the provisions of the Act and the Rules cannot be contrary to the Act. I am of the view that the issue was not debatable and there was only one view possible on the issue which is the view set out above. I am also of the view that the issue in the proceedings us. 154 of the Act, even if it involves long drawn process of reasoning, the answer to the question can be only one and in such circumstances, proceedings u/s. 154 of the ....