TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (12) TMI 1787
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al, which caused the delay of 45 days. The assessee further submitted that the delay was not due to negligence, willful neglect or any intention to disregard the legal process, but purely the result of an inadvertent oversight. The assessee further submitted that he has always been a law abiding citizen and committed to fulfilling tax obligations. He, therefore, pleaded to condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing in the interest of justice. 3. The Ld. DR on the other hand, opposing the petition filed by the assessee submitted that the reason given by the assessee is vague in nature and does not come under reasonable cause for condoning the delay of 45 days in filing the appeal. Therefore, the delay in filing the appeal should not be condoned. 4. We have heard both the parties and considered the relevant reasons given by the assessee for the delay in filing the appeal in the affidavit filed in support of his petition and after considering the reasons given by the assessee, we find that the assessee was not aware of the appellate order passed by the Ld. CIT(A), since he has not received any communication on the email address provided until it was found by his Chartere....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e has filed Form 67 before the Assessing Officer passed order u/s 143(1) of the Act, because, the assessee has not filed relevant Form 67 on or before the extended due date for filing the return of income u/s 139(5) of the Act, the Form 67 filed by the assessee is non-est in law and the Assessing Officer has rightly denied the credit for FTC of Rs. 2,37,156/-. 7. Aggrieved by the Ld. CIT(A) order, the assessee is now in appeal before the Tribunal. 8. The learned Counsel for the assessee, referring to paper book filed by the assessee, submitted that as per Press Information Bureau, Govt.of India, Ministry of Finance, the due date for filing return of income has been finally extended upto 31.01.2021, for the A.Y. 2020-21, by considering the problem faced by the public on account of Covid pandemic. The assessee has filed the return of income on 10.01.2021, which is before the extended due date for filing the return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act. Therefore, the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) that the assessee has not filed the return of income on or before the due date for filing the return of income u/s 139(1) is incorrect. Further, the assessee has also filed Form 67 on 31.03.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eturn of income u/s 139(1) of the Act is incorrect. Further, the assessee had also filed Form 67 on 30.03.2021, which is on or before the due date for filing the return of income u/s 139(5) of the Act. Therefore, the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) that the assessee has not filed the Form 67 before the time allowed u/s 139(5) is also incorrect. 11. Having said so, let us come back to whether the Assessing Officer is right in denying the FTC, having noticed the fact that the assessee has earned income from outside India and also paid taxes on the said income. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that as per section 90 of the Act read with Article 23 of the DTAA, the assessee can claim credit for taxes paid in Germany. In order to claim FTC, certain conditions are provided under Rule 128 of IT Rules and as per the said Rules, the statement in Form 67 shall be furnished on or before the due date specified for furnishing the return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act. Since the assessee has furnished the return of income for the assessment year under consideration on or before the extended due date for furnishing the return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act and further Form 67 has been ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Tribunal from Para 8 to 9 read as under: "8. We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the AO and the learned CIT (A) NFAC and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. We have also considered the various decisions cited before us by both sides. We find the AO in the instant case rejected the 154rectification application on the ground that Form No.67 was not furnished before the due date as provided u/s 139(1) in compliance to Rule 128(9). We find the learned CIT (A) NFAC upheld the action of the Assessing Officer in denying the relief for foreign tax credit, the reasons of which have already been reproduced in the preceding paragraph. We find an identical issue had come up before the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Shri Baburao Atluri (Supra) wherein the Tribunal, after considering various decisions, has allowed the foreign tax credit, although there was delay in filing of such Form 67 beyond the due date of filing of the return. Relevant observation of the Tribunal from Para 10 onwards read as under: "10. We have heard the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the AO and NFAC a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e stands allowed for statistical purposes." 12. We further find, in the instant case, the delay in filing of the FTC certificate in Form-67 was explained to be due to non-receipt of the tax deduction certificate form the foreign deductor from Zambia within time for which the said Form-67 was filed belatedly by 14 days. It was stated that the tax jurisdiction of the Zambian deductor follow different period for taxing the income and have different due dates for filing the return as compared to India. So, Baburao Atluri far as the decision relied on by ld. DR in the case of Muralikrishna Vaddi(supra) is concerned, we find there is a delay of more than two years without any valid and reasonable cause. Therefore, the said decision in our opinion cannot be applicable to the facts of the present case. In any case, when there are two view possible, the view which is favourable to the assessee has to be followed as held by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Vegetable Products Ltd. reported in (1972) 88 ITR 192. Since, the assessee in the instant case has filed FTC certificate in Form No.67 with delay of only '14' days, therefore following the decision of the B....