DHARMENDRA KUMAR SINGH,DELHI V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, DELHI

ITA 1661/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Dharmendra Kumar Singh, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the Ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals), Pune, which denied his claim for Foreign Tax Credit (FTC) for the Assessment Year 2019-20. The denial was based on the late filing of Form 67, which was submitted after the due date for filing the income tax return under section 139(1) of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal referenced similar cases where it was held that the delay in filing Form 67 is a procedural requirement and does not warrant the denial of FTC. The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to allow the FTC as claimed by the assessee.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 43531 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-01-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2019-2020
• Other Referred Cases: Neha Kapoor Vs. ITO, Ajay Kumar Mishra, Miss Brinda Rama Krishna
• Laws Referred To: India USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA), Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: OM PRAKASH
• Assessee Lawyers: PREETI GOEL
• Keywords: Revised return
• Section: 139(1); 90

Judgement Text

"I.T.A.No.1661/Del/2024 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC” NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER आ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.1661/Del/2024 िनधा\tरणवष\t/Assessment Year: 2019-20 Dharmendra Kumar Singh, Flat No.1104, 1102/C2, Supertech Eco Village-2, Greater Noida, Sector 01, Greater Noida SO, Noida. बनाम Vs. ITO, Ward-29(1), Civic Centre, Delhi. PAN No.CVKPS2171R अपीलाथ\u0012 Appellant \u0014\u0015यथ\u0012/Respondent िनधा\u0007\bरतीक\rओरसे /Assessee by Ms. Preeti Goel, Adv. राज\u0012वक\rओरसे /Revenue by Shri Om Prakash, Sr. DR सुनवाईक\rतारीख/ Date of hearing: 03.01.2025 उ\u0018ोषणाक\rतारीख/Pronouncement on 24.01.2025 आदेश /O R D E R This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Addl./JCIT(Appeals), Pune dated 14.02.2024 for the AY 2019-20 in denying Foreign Tax Credit claimed by the assessee under article 25(2)(a) of the India USA Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) read with section 90 of the I.T. Act. 2. Heard rival submissions. On reading of the orders of the authorities below we observed that the claim for Foreign Tax Credit was denied to the assessee for the reason that the assessee has I.T.A.No.1661/Del/2024 2 filed Form 67 after filing return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act. The assessee filed revised return and claimed Foreign Tax Credit and also filed Form 67. Since the assessee filed Form 67 belatedly and not along with the return as specified under section 139(1) of the Act the claim for Foreign Tax Credit was denied. 3. Identical issue came up before the coordinate bench of the Tribunal in the case of Neha Kapoor Vs. ITO in ITA No.135/Del/2023 dated 29.08.2023, wherein the Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to allow credit of Foreign Tax Credit to the assessee observing as under: “8. We have considered the submissions of the parties and perused the records. It is evident that the solitary ground of denial of the claim of the assessee for FTC is delay in filing Form 67. It is an admitted position that the assessee filed Form 67 on 26.03.2021 along with the revised return before the end of the relevant AY 2020-21 which is in conformity with the CBDT notification No. 100/2022 amending Sub Rule 9 of Rule 128 of the Rules. Various coordinate benches of the Tribunal have held that filing Form 67 is a procedural/directory requirement and is not a mandatory requirement. We, therefore, disagree with the view of the Ld. CIT(A) on the point and reproduce below the decision in the case of Miss Brinda Rama Krishna (supra) in which facts are identical: \"16. I have given a careful consideration to the rival submissions. I agree with the contentions put forth by the learned counsel for the Assessee and hold that (i) 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 (iii) I.T.A.No.1661/Del/2024 3 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 u/s.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 Act, can be resorted to. Even otherwise the ground on which the revenue authorities rejected the Assessee's application u/s.154 of the Act was not on the ground that the issue was debatable but on merits. I therefore do not agree with the submission of the learned DR in this regard.\" 9. Respectfully we follow the decision (supra). 10. Accordingly, we hereby direct the Ld. AO to allow the impugned credit of FTC to the assessee in the light of the decision in the case of Ms. Brinda Rama Krishna (supra).” 4. Similar view has been taken by the coordinate bench in the case of Ajay Kumar Mishra in ITA No.1835/Del/2022 dated 17.04.2023. Following the above orders, we direct the Assessing Officer to accept Form 67 filed by the assessee and allow Foreign Tax Credit in accordance with law. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 24/01/2025 Sd/- (C.N. PRASAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A.No.1661/Del/2024 4 Dated: 24.01.2025 *Kavita Arora, Sr. P.S. Copy of order sent to- Assessee/AO/Pr. CIT/ CIT (A)/ ITAT (DR)/Guard file of ITAT. By order Assistant Registrar, ITAT: Delhi Benches-Delhi "