9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (5) TMI 214X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -2019 and quash the same and direct the 3rd Respondent allow the foreign tax credit for the Assessment Year 2018-2019,if necessary by condoning the delay in filing Form No.67. 2. The facts giving rise to the writ petition, in a nutshell are as follows: (i) The petitioner filed his income tax return for the Assessment Year 2018-2019 on 30.06.2018, admitting an income of Rs. 68,81,870/- which included foreign income of Rs. 65,61,171 and claimed a sum of Rs. 18,85,919/- towards foreign tax credit which was withheld by employer. While so, the 2nd respondent sent a communication to the petitioner dated 14.05.2020 stating that relief under Section 90 of the Act i.e. Foreign tax credit was not considered, for the reason that Form 67 was not sub ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ectification petition, but the same was rejected by the 3rd respondent vide letter dated 06.09.2024 for the reason that the petitioner have failed to furnish Form 67, within due date of filing Return of Income and Form 67 was submitted only after the processing of Return of Income. The said order is impugned in this writ petition. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the delay in filing Form 67 is only the procedural lapse on the part of the petitioner and that apart requirement of filing Form 67 is only directory and not mandatory. In support of his contention, he relied upon the decision of this Court in the case of Duraiswamy Kumaraswamy Vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax [2023] 156 taxmann.com. 44 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... resident of Indian from the assessment year 2018-2019 and 2019- 2020. The petitioner admitted the fact that he has filed his return in India on 10.08.2019. The intimation under Section 143(1) was issued on 26.03.2020. However, he has filed the return without Form-67 which is required to be filed under Rule 128 to claim the benefit of FTC and the same came to be filed on 02.02.2021 which was well before the completion of the assessment year. The intimation under Section 143(1) was issued from the CPC only on 26.03.2021. 10.According to the learned counsel appearing for the respondent, the procedure under Rule 128 is mandatory and and cannot be considered as directory in nature. The petitioner has filed his return including his Kenya income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... preme Court had held in the above cases when the returns were filed without furnishing Form 3AA and the same can be filed the subsequent to the passing of assessment order. 12. Further, in the present case, the intimation under Section 143(1) was issued on 26.03.2021, but the FTC was filed on 02.02.2021. Thus, the respondent is supposed to have provided the due credit to the FTC of the petitioner. However, the FTC was rejected by the respondent, which is not proper and the same is not in accordance with law. Therefore the impugned order is liable to be set aside. 13. Accordingly the impugned order dated 25.01.2022 is set aside. While setting aside the impugned order, this Court remits the matter back to the respondent to make reassessme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
