TMI Blog2022 (9) TMI 1430X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... C and the AO is directed to allow the claim. - ITA No. 708/Bang/2022 - - - Dated:- 19-9-2022 - Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Vice President And Shri Chandra Poojari, Accountant Member For the Assessee : Shri. Y. Sridhar, CA. For the Revenue : Shri. K. Sankar Ganesh, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. ORDER PER N. V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order dated 26.7.2022 passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) pertaining to AY 2017-18. 2. The assessee filed the return of income on 24-07-2017 admitting an income of Rs.69.22,004 which included income from other sources of Rs.6,96,084. The income from other sources included dividend income of Rs.4.77,500 received from a Denmark Company. On this dividend received from Denmark. TDS of Rs.1,28.925 was deducted @ 27%. The appellant did not claim this TDS of Rs.1,28,925 in the return filed u/s 90/91. The return was processed u/s 143(1) and an intimation order dated 30-03-2019 was passed. The appellant subsequently filed Form No. 67 (statement of income from a country or specified territory outside India and Foreign Tax Credit) on 08-02-2020 and made a rectification ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of FTC available to the Assessee merely because there was a delay in filling Form 67 i.e. it was filed after the due date for filling original return of income prescribed under section 139(1) of the income tax Act. The said issue under consideration is no longer res integra. We note that on identical issue, the Co-ordinate Bench of ITAT, Bangalore in the case of Brinda Rama Krishna (in ITA No. 454/Bang/2021 for AY.2018-19), order dated 17.11.2021 held 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) DTAA overrides the provisions of the Act and the Rules cannot be contrary to the Act. Therefore, non-furnishing of Form No.67 before the due date u/s 139(1) of the Act is not fatal to the claim for FTC. The findings of the Coordinate Bench is reproduced below: 2. The Assessee is an individual and during the previous year relevant to AY 2018-19 an ordinary resident in India. The Assessee worked with Ernst Young Australia from 20.11.2017 till 16.05.2019. Since her global income was taxable in India, the Assessee offered to tax salary inc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for furnishing such return of income. 4. The Assessee claimed FTC of Rs. 4,73,779/- u/s. 90 of the Act read with Article 24 of India Australia tax treaty ( DTAA ) in a revised return of income filed on 31.8.2018. The Assessee had not filed the Form 67 before filing the return of income. On realising the same, the Assessee filed Form 67 in support of claim of foreign tax credit on 18.04.2020. The revised return of income was processed by Centralized Processing Centre (CPC) electronically and intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act on 28.05.2020 was passed disallowing the claim of FTC. 5. The Assessee filed a rectification application before the AO on 15.06.2020 25.02.2021 and submitted that credit for FTC as claimed in the return should be given. In the rectification order dated 10.03.2021, the AO upheld the action on the ground that the Assessee has failed to furnish Form 67 on or before the due date of furnishing the return of income as prescribed u/s 139(1) of the Act which is mandatory according to Rule 128(9) of the Rules. 6. On appeal by the Assessee, the CIT(A) vide Order dated 03.09.2021 confirmed the Order of AO. The CIT(A) held that the Assessee has not filed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y of the following matters: (ha) the procedure for granting of relief or deduction, as the case may be, of any income-tax paid in any country or specified territory outside India, under section 90 or section 90A or section 91, against the income-tax payable under this Act; 9. It was submitted that the Board has power to prescribe procedure to granting FTC. However, the Board does not have power to prescribe a condition or provide for disallowance of FTC. The procedure prescribed in Rule 128 should therefore be interpreted in this context. Rule 128 is therefore a procedural provision and not a mandatory provision. 10. It was further submitted that Rule 128(9) provides that Form 67 should be filed on or before the due date of filing the return of income as prescribed u/s 139(1) of the Act. However, the Rule nowhere provides that if the said Form 67 is not filed within the above stated time frame, the relief as sought by the assessee u/s 90 of the Act would be denied. The learned counsel for the Assessee submitted that in case the intention was to deny the FTC, either the Act or the Rules would have specifically provided that the FTC would be disallowed if the assessee d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ia) (P.) Ltd [2009] 178 Taxman 143 (Delhi) PCIT, Kanpur vs Surya Merchants Ltd [2016] 72 com 16 (Allahabad) CIT, Central Circle vs American Data Solutions India (P.) Ltd [2014] 45 com 379 (Karnataka) CIT-II vs Mantec Consultants (P.) Ltd [2009] 178 Taxman 429 (Delhi) CIT vs ACE Multitaxes Systems (P.) Ltd [2009] 317 ITR 207 (Karnataka). 13. It was submitted that as per the provisions of section 90(2) of the Act, where the Central Government of India has entered into a DTAA, the provisions of the Act would apply to the extent they are more beneficial to a taxpayer. Therefore, the provisions of DTAA override the provisions of the Act, to the extent they are beneficial to the assessee. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following cases and circulars: Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan [2003] 263 ITR 706 (SC) CIT v Eli Lily Co (India) P Ltd (2009) 178 Taxman 505 (SC) GE India Technology Centre P Ltd v CIT (2010) 193 Taxman 234 (SC) Engineering Analysis Centre of Excellence P Ltd v CIT (2021) 125 taxmann.com 42 (SC) (Pg 106-109 of PB 2-Para 25 26) CBDT Circular No 333 dated 2/4/82 137 ITR (St.) It was submitted that when there is no condition prescribed in DTAA that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
