GRANDHI BUCHI SANYASI RAJU,BANGALORE V. DCIT, CIRCLE-3(1)(2), BANGALORE

ITA 1098/BANG/2025

AI Insights

The case revolves around the denial of Foreign Tax Credit (FTC) to the assessee, Grandhi Buchi Sanyasi Raju, by the lower tax authorities. The assessee had filed his income tax return for the assessment year 2017-18, claiming FTC under sections 90 and 90A of the Income Tax Act. Initially, the FTC was claimed in the original return filed on 01.08.2017 and later revised on 17.09.2018. The credit was denied by the Assessing Officer (AO) and subsequently by the CIT(A), primarily on the grounds that Form 67, necessary for claiming FTC, was not filed along with the original return as required under Rule 129 of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. The Tribunal, however, found that the requirement to file Form 67 was not in effect at the time of the original return filing, leading to the decision to allow the assessee's appeal.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 712829 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, Income Tax Rules, 1962
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: JAGADISH JOGI
• Keywords: Revised return

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1098/Bang/2025 Assessment Year : 2017-18 Grandhi Buchi Sanyasi Raju, 25/1, Skip House, Museum Road, Bangalore – 560 025. PAN : AGAPG1105G Vs. DCIT, Circle – 3(1)(2), Bangalore. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. Jagadish Jogi, CA Revenue by : Shri. Balusamy N, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore. Date of hearing : 24.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 31 .07.2025 O R D E R Per Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against CIT(A)’s order vide DIN & Order No: ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2025-26/1077855182(1) dated 28.04.2025. 2. The sole issued raised by the assessee is with regard to Foreign Tax Credit (FTC) not given in terms of section 90/90A of the Act for not filing Form 67 along with the original return filed by the assessee. 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee filed return of income on 01.08.2017 declaring income of Rs.3,83,49,150/- and claimed the foreign tax credit of Rs.27,39,914/- under section 90/90A of the Act. Subsequently, assessee has revised the original return of income on Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1098/Bang/2025 Page 2 of 7 17.09.2018 declaring same income and FTC was claimed at Rs.24,86,890/- under section 90/90A of the Act. The return was processed and the case was selected for scrutiny under CASS. In this regard, various notices were issued to the assessee. The assessee submitted reply which is incorporated by the AO in his Order and AO observed that FTC can be given only if the assessee has complied under Rule 129 as laid down by the Income Tax Rules, 1962. Assessee furnished From 67 on 17.09.2018 and CBDT in September 2019 notified From No.67 for claiming FTC and FTC was denied. Against this assessee filed appeal before the learned CIT(A). Assessee also filed written submissions which is incorporated by him but FTC was denied. 4. Aggrieved from the Order of the CIT(A), assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal. The learned Counsel reiterated the submissions made before the lower authorities and filed written synopsis which is as under: Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1098/Bang/2025 Page 3 of 7 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1098/Bang/2025 Page 4 of 7 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1098/Bang/2025 Page 5 of 7 Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1098/Bang/2025 Page 6 of 7 5. In addition to the above written synopsis he submitted that on the date of filing of original return, it was not mandatory to file Form 67 which is notified by the CBDT on 17.09.2017 after filling of income tax return. Immediately after the assessee came to know about the same, assessee revised return of income and claimed FTC in Form 67. Therefore, the claim of FTC cannot be denied to the assessee and he referred to various judgments as cited in the written submissions. 6. The learned DR relied on the Order of the lower authorities. 7. Considering the rival submissions, we noted that Form 67 was notified by CBDT on 19.09.2017. Assessee filed original return of income on 01.08.2017. Later on, he revised return of income on 17.09.2018 claiming FTC of Rs.24,867,890/- under section 90/90A of the Act. Thereafter, the CBDT vide notification has prescribed the procedure for filing Form 67 for claiming FTC. But till the date of filing of return of income there was no notification in this regard and there is no doubt on the quantum of claim of the Printed from counselvise.com ITA No.1098/Bang/2025 Page 7 of 7 assessee. Considering the above case law cited by the assessee and facts of the case, we allow appeal of the assessee. 8. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. Pronounced in the open court on the date mentioned on the caption page. Sd/ Sd/- Sd/- (KESHAV DUBEY) (LAXMI PRASAD SAHU) Judicial Member Accountant Member- Bangalore. Dated: 31.07.2025. /NS/* Copy to: 1. Appellants 2. Respondent 3. DRP 4. CIT 5. CIT(A) 6. DR,ITAT, Bangalore. 7. Guard file By order Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore. Printed from counselvise.com "