TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (7) TMI 890
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g the Foreign, tax Credit of Rs. 29,21,874/- (FTC) for the reasons stated in the impugned appellate order. 2. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the petitioner company's case, the learned First Appellate Authority erred in law and on facts in ignoring that the requisite Form 67 for claiming Foreign, tax Credit of Rs. 29,21,874/- was filed before issue of the intimation dated 12-03-2021 under section 143(1) of the Income Tax, Act 1961. 3. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the petitioner company's case, the learned First Appellate Authority erred in law and on facts in upholding the orders of the learned assessing officer in charging interest under section 234B of the Act amounting to Rs. 6,13,488/-. 4. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the petitioner company's case, the learned First Appellate Authority erred in law and on facts in upholding the orders of the learned Assessing Officer in charging interest under section 234C of the Act amounting to Rs. 1,29,090/-. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee has filed the return of income declaring income of Rs. 98,31,845/- on 30-09- 2019 for the A.Y.2019-20, wh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... "5.2. It is also noticed that under similar facts and circumstances the ITAT Delhi Bench 'B' in the case of Eastman Industries Ltd. vs. ACIT (supra) has adjudicated identical issue, observing as under: "7. Since in the present case the. claim of the assessee was denied on this technical aspect without going into the merits of the FTC, therefore, we deem it fit to restore the issue to the files of the AO. The AO is directed to decide the claim of foreign tax credit as per the provisions of the law after admitting / accepting form -67. This common grievance is also allowed for statistical purpose. In the case of Rameshwar Prasad Shrivastava vs. ITO (supra), held as under: "5. That the claim of FTC was made by the assessee in terms of section 90 of the Income Tax Act. It is a settled principle that where is there is special agreement/ DTAA signed by the government, the specific provisions made in such agreement shall prevail over the general provisions contained in the Income Tax Act. The CBDT vide its Circular No. 333 dated 02/04/1982 has held that:- SECTION 90. AGREEMENT WITH FOREIGN COUNTRIES [CORRESPONDING TO SECTION 40A OF THE 1922 ACT] 62....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o the extent that the same is beneficial to the tax payer. And as such, since the DTAA does not specifically state to disallow the claim of FTC on mere delay in filing of Form 67, we would submit that the disallowance made by the CPC and further confirmed by the CIT(A) is arbitrary, unjustified and fit to be deleted. 8. That lastly, we would like to contend that this being a debatable issue, the disallowance made by CPC was uncalled as the same cannot be termed as an adjustment in terms of section 143(1). In a similar matter before the Hon'ble ITAT Kolkata Bench in the case of M/s Surendra steel Pvt Ltd Vs CPC in ITA No. 78/Kol/2022 dated 20/05/2022, it was held as below:- We have duly considered rival contentions and perused the material available on record. To our mind there are two issues involved. First being the procedural irregularity and second the legitimate quantification for disallowance. If the adjustment has been made on the basis of first defect i.e., for procedural irregularity then according to the decisions referred by the Id. Counsel for the assessee, this irregularity is not fatal enough to deny the claim of deduction u/s 80IC of the Act. Mor....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2022 - ITAT Jaipur Bench held that:- Held that filing of Form 67, in my view, is a procedural/directory requirement and is not a mandatory requirement. Therefore, violation of procedural norms does not extinguish the substantive right of claiming the credit of FTC. There are no conditions prescribed in DTAA that FTC can be disallowed for noncompliance of any procedural provision, therefore, the provisions of DTAA override the provisions of the Act. As the assessee has vested right to claim the FTC under the tax treaty and the same cannot be disallowed for mere delay in compliance of a procedural provision. * Sanjeev Agarwal Vs DCIT in ITA No. 71/JP/2023 dated 10/05/2023 - ITAT Jaipur bench held that:- Form 67 filed by the respective assessee's, even after the end of the relevant assessment year makes the assessee entitled to claim FTC. Therefore, considering the facts of the present case, the FTC deserves to be allowed to the assessee even if Form 67 was filed by the assessee after the due date of filing the return under section 139(1) of the IT Act, 1961, and in our view not allowing foreign tax credit by AO (CPC) was nothing, but a mistake apparent on record. Th....