9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (5) TMI 86X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -à-vis credit for Foreign Taxes paid of Rs. 3,33,695: 1.1 The Assessing Officer ['AO']/Centralised Processing Centre, Bengaluru ['СРС'] erred in denying the relief claimed under section 90 of the Act vis-à-vis credit for foreign taxes paid of Rs. 3,33,695, which action has been upheld by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre ['CIT(A)' / 'NFAC']. 1.2 The Appellant submits that considering the facts and circumstances of its case and the law prevailing on the subject, the AO / CPC erred in denying the relief claimed u/s. 90 for the credit of foreign taxes paid of Rs. 3,33,695 on the ground that the Appellant has claimed the credit of foreign ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d circumstances of its case and the law prevailing on the subject, no further interest is leviable u/s. 234C (over and above the interest u/s. 234C of Rs. 92,819/- computed and paid by the Appellant at the time of filing its return of income) and hence the action of the AO / CPC upheld by the CIT(A) in this regard is incorrect, erroneous and not in accordance with the law. 3.3 The Appellant submits that the AO / CPC be directed to delete the excess interest so levied and to re-compute its tax liability accordingly. 2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the assessee is a resident individual having income from salary and house property and other sources. The assessee also earned salary income and other income in Singapore for the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bmission of the parties and perused the relevant material on record. The grievance of the assessee before us is that FTC claimed by the assessee in the revised return of income filed on 28.03.2019 along with Form No. 67 was not allowed by the CPC while processing revised return and also in the rectification order dated 31.05.2021. We find that the Ld. CIT(A) has declined the claim of the FTC mainly for the reason that Form No. 67 was not filed by the assessee on or before the due date specified for furnishing return of income u/s 139(1) of the Act as provided under clause 9 of Rule 128 of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. Before us, the Ld. counsel for the assessee referred to the decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Duraiswam ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Maharashtra v. G.M.Knitting Industries (P) Limited in Civil Appeal Nos.10782 of 2013 and 4048 of 2014 dated 24.06.2015, wherein it was held that Form 3AA is required to be filed along with the return of income to avail the benefit and even if it is not filed, but the same is filed during assessment proceedings but before the final order of assessment is made that would amount to sufficient compliance. 11. The law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Commissioner of Income-Tax, Maharashtra v. G.M.Knitting Industries (P) Limited in Civil Appeal Nos.10782 of 2013 and 4048 of 2014 dated 24.06.2015, which was referred above, would be squarely applicable to the present case. In the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f rejection of FTC claim within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order." 4.1 Further, we find that the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Vidya Tukaram Desai in ITA No. 3086/Mum/2023 for assessment year 2020-21 following the finding of coordinate bench in the case of Sonkashi Sinha reported in (2022) 142 taxmann.com 414 ( Mumbai-Trib), has allowed the claim of foreign tax credit where Form No. 67 is filed before the completion of the assessment for the relevant assessment year. The relevant finding of the Tribunal is reproduced as under: "9. In the aforesaid case, it was held by the Tribunal that the Appellant would be eligible to foreign tax credit where Form No. 67 is filed before the completio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me of 192856 Singapore dollar in calendar year 2018 before 31.03.2018 which include salary income of 53286 Singapore dollar. The assessee has claimed that tax equivalent to Indian Rupees 73,403/- has been deducted in calendar year 2017 whereas tax of Rs. 260,291/- has been deducted corresponding to the calendar year 2018 by the Singapore tax authorities. In view of the above facts it is required to ascertain whether the income earned in Singapore has been added by the assessee in the return of income filed for the year under consideration in India. (ii) It needs to be verified whether the tax credit claimed pertained only to Singapore income included in the return of income filed in India for the year under consideration. (iii) It is al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
