SHIVANK DUA,UTTAR PRADESH V. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, ITO WARD 1(2)(5), MEERUT

ITA 3077/DEL/2024

AI Insights

The case involves Shivank Dua, the appellant, who appealed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, which confirmed the disallowance of Foreign Tax Credit amounting to Rs. 70,501. The disallowance was based on the grounds that Form 67 was not duly filed within the prescribed time. The appellant argued that although there was a clerical mistake in the form regarding the year, it was filed in due course. The Tribunal referenced a similar case, Duraiswamy Kumaraswamy v. PCIT, which settled the issue in favor of the assessee, indicating that the filing of Form 67 within the prescribed due date is not mandatory but directory.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 471967 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-11-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 06-11-2024
• Assessment Year: 2021-2022
• Appeal Filed On: 26-06-2024
• Other Referred Cases: Duraiswamy Kumaraswamy v. PCIT [TS-681-HC-2023 (Mad) dated 6th October, 2023]
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: YOGESH SHARMA
• Assessee Lawyers: MITUL RUPARAYL
• Keywords: Salary income
• Section: 250; 154; 90; 139

Judgement Text

"1 ITA no. 3077/Del/2024 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “SMC”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 3077/DEL/2024 [Assessment Year: 2021-22 Shivank Dua, C-104, Samrat Palace, Garh Road, Meerut-250002 PAN- BOUPD 5631 R Vs Income-tax Officer, Ward-1(2)(5), Meerut. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by Shri Mitul Ruparayl, adv. Respondent by Shri Yogesh Sharma, Sr. DR Date of hearing 06.11.2024 Date of pronouncement 14.11.2024 O R D E R PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JM: This assessee’s appeal for assessment year 2021-22 arises against DIN and order no. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1064447356(1), dated 30.04.2024, passed by the learned CIT(Appeals)/ National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, in appeal No. NFAC/2020-21/10284203 in proceedings u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, hereinafter referred to as the “Act”. 2. Heard both the parties at length. The assessee pleads the following substantive grounds in the instant appeal. 2 ITA no. 3077/Del/2024 “1 The order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), (NFAC), Delhi is bad in law and contrary to the provision of law and facts. It is submitted that the same be held so now. 2 The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), (NFAC) Delhi has grossly erred in confirming disallowance of Foreign Tax Credit amounting to Rs. 70,501/- and demanded tax of Rs.64,532/-on the ground that Form 67 was not duly filed in due course of time. However, Form 67 was filed in due course of time but in that form, there was a clerical mistake in mentioning the year on behalf of the income tax practitioner who filed the form on behalf of the Appellant. 3 The Appellant filed his return of income for the A.Y. 2021-22 on 29/12/2021 declaring the total income Rs.11,64,120/-. The Appellant went to United Kingdom to work based on the scheme of employee exchange adopted by the company M/s. Infosys Limited. He stayed there for 2 years from 01/10/2018 to 29/09/2020. During his period of stay in United Kingdom between 01/04/2020 to 29/09/2020, he derived salary of £9997.31 which comes to Rs.9,41,770/-. During his period of stay, his salary income was taxed by the Government of United Kingdom at the rate of 7.486% which comes to £748.40 i.e., Rs. 70,501/- after applying exchange rate. The Appellant was eligible to avail Foreign Tax Credit under section 90 of the Act as per Rules of Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement formed between two Contracting States i.e., United Kingdom and India. The income tax practitioner hired by the Appellant while filing the income tax return under section 139 of the Act filed Form No.67 on 29/09/2021 in order to avail. 4. The Appellant reserves his right to submit all the details in connection with the addition as fresh evidence as per Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 at the time of hearing of this appeal. Being aggrieved by the dismissal of rectification made under section 154 of the Act and dismissal of appeal under section 250 of the Act, the Appellant prefers to appeal on the accompanied grounds. 5. The Appellant craves, leave to add, to alter, to modify, to amend or to withdraw/delete any of the grounds of appeal at any time in or before the final hearing of appeal.” 3 ITA no. 3077/Del/2024 3. Suffice to say, it emerges during the course of hearing that the assessee’s sole substantive ground raised in the instant appeal claims foreign tax credit which has been rejected on the ground that he had failed to file the prescribed Form 67 within due date as per Rule 128 of the Income-tax Rules. 4. It is noticed in this factual backdrop that the instant issue as to whether filing of the said Form 67 within prescribed due date is mandatory or directory in nature stands settled in assessee’s favour and against the department in Duraiswamy Kumaraswamy v. PCIT [TS-681-HC-2023 (Mad) dated 6th October, 2023]. That being the case, I accept the assessee’s instant sole substantive ground in principle and leave it open for Assessing Authority to verify all the relevant facts as per law for the purpose of consequential relief. 6. This assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open court on 14.11.2024. Sd/- (SATBEER SINGH GODARA) JUDICIAL MEMBER *MP* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI 4 ITA no. 3077/Del/2024 "