TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (9) TMI 917
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....fter referred to as "CIT(A)"] pertaining to assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as "Act"] dated 22.03.2021 for the Assessment Year [A.Y.] 2018-19. 2. The grounds of appeal are as under: 1. The impugned order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) under Section 250 dated 19.02.2026 for Assessment Year 2023-24 is bad in law and facts and liable to be quashed as the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of CPC in disallowing Foreign Tax Credit of Rs. 33,915 claimed under Section 90/90A read with the relevant DTAA between India and Indonesia. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in upholding the consequential increase in additional tax liability unde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... substantive right to claim foreign tax relief. 6. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding the adjustment made under Section 143(1)(a) by CPC thereby ignoring that the issue of allowability of foreign tax credit involves verification of facts and interpretation of DTAA provisions, which falls outside the limited scope of prima facie adjustments permissible under Section 143(1)(a). 7. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating that no prior intimation OR opportunity of being heard was provided by CPC as mandated under the proviso to Section 143(1)(a), thereby rendering the adjustment void ab initio. 8. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming an addition made without any defect, discrepancy OR mismatch in the return of income OR....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....xation of the same income. In the instant case, the assessee had filed the Form on 16.12.2024 and the return of income was filed by the assessee on 27.11.2024. The due date for filing original return of income for the said assessment year was 31.07.2023. Since the assessee had filed it after filing his original return of income for the said assessment year, the appeal was dismissed. 6. When the case was called up for hearing, the case was not represented by anyone. No adjournment petition was also not filed. However, we find that the assessee had e-filed a written submission claiming that the assessee had filed detailed written submissions and documentary evidences including the return of income, schedules relating to foreign income and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tly not allowed. 8. We have duly considered all the related aspects of the case qua the provisions of the Act in this regard. It is not disputed that the assessee made the claim in the prescribed form though belatedly. There was no other deficiency in the claim of the assessee. Short question in this appeal is whether assessee is entitled to foreign tax credit even when the Form no. 67 required to be filed according to the provisions of rule 128 (9) of the Income Tax Rules on or before the due date of filing of the return of income, not complied by the assessee, but same was filed before the completion of the assessment proceedings. Precisely, the fact shows that assessee filed return of income u/s. 139(1) of the Act. In such a return of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....0/Bang/2022 06.09.2022. Similar decisions have been rendered in Nirmala Murli Relwani v. ACIT, ITA No. 2094/Mum/2022, Satyen Sanghavi No. 1704/Mum/2022 dated 08.09.2022 and Sonakshi Sinha v. CIT, ITA No.6707/MUM/2026. 8.2 Thus, the issue is no more res integra as it is well settled that while laying down a particular procedure, if no negative or adverse consequences are contemplated for non-adherence to such procedure, the relevant provision is normally not taken to be mandatory and is considered to be purely directory. Admittedly, Rule 128 does not prescribe denial of credit of FTC. Further, the Act i.e. section 90 or 91 also does not prescribe timeline for filing of such declaration on or before due date of filing of ROI. Rule 128 (4) ....