TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (7) TMI 545
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....was an employee of Nokia Solutions & Networks and was in Finland during the year under consideration. The assessee filed his return of income for the year under consideration on 09.01.2021 and claimed relief under section 90 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter called 'the Act') of Rs. 16,03,389/- being Foreign Tax Credit (FTC). The Centralized Processing Centre (CPC) processed the return of the assessee and vide intimation under section 143(1) of the Act, dated 24.12.2021 rejected the relief of Rs. 16,03,389/- claimed by the assessee under section 90 of the Act and raised a demand of Rs. 20,19,130/-. Subsequently, the assessee moved a Rectification Application under section 154 of the Act and vide rectification order passed under s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... a stringent requirement for the said claim. Hence, CPC made the disallowance." 2. Because the NFAC has erred in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal after holding as under: "5.5 As the present appellate authority does not have the power to condone delay in filing the Form 67 for claim of Foreign Tax Credit, the grounds raised by the appellant cannot be allowed." While appeal was not filed for condonation of delay. 3. Because the NFAC has erred in law and on facts in holding that the requirement of filing Form 67 is mandatory before filing of return of income to claim the benefit of DTAA and dismissing the claim made in the appeal. 4. Because the NFAC has erred in law and facts in denying th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Tax Avoidance Agreement does not provide that Foreign Tax Credit should be disallowed for non-compliance of any procedural requirements. He also referred to Rule 128(1) of the Income Tax Rules and submitted that this Rule provides that Form 67 should be filed on or before due date for filing of return of income under section 139(1) of the Act, but all the same, the said Rule nowhere provides that if the said Form 67 is not filed within the specified time, the benefit of Foreign Tax Credit would be denied. The Ld. A.R. submitted that the requirement of filing of Form 67 was directory and not mandatory and in this regard he placed reliance on the orders of the ITAT: 1 Bangalore Bench of the Tribunal in Deepak Shimoga Padmaraju vs. ADIT ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vide order dated 6.9.2022 and also other Co-ordinate Benches of the Tribunal as referred to above. 3.3 It was further submitted that in view of the above facts and the settled law, the ld. CIT(A) was not justified in rejecting assessee's appeal against rectification order passed under section 154 of the Act on the ground that the assessee should have filed appeal against the intimation passed under section 143(1) of the Act. It was also pointed out that the assessee had filed rectification application before the AO after filing of Form 67, but all the same, the Foreign Tax Credit had been claimed in the original return of income itself and, therefore, non-filing of Form 67 was not to be equated with the assessee's failure to have claimed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e is no dispute to the claim of the assessee that he was entitled to the claim of Foreign Tax Credit and the only objection of the Department for not granting the benefit of Foreign Tax Credit was that the prescribed Form 67 was filed beyond the prescribed date. It is true that Form 67 could not be filed before the due date for filing of return of income under section 139(1) of the Act, but it is also not in dispute that the amount of Foreign Tax Credit being claimed was duly reflected in the original return of income. 5.2 The assessee has also stated that Form 67 could not be filed in time for the reason that there was outbreak of Corona Pandemic and as such since the global flights were suspended, he could not travel from Europe to Ind....