9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (5) TMI 1441X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... out by Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd. [ 2006 (3) TMI 75 - SUPREME COURT] we admit this claim of the assessee in the light of the submissions above and case laws cited. We remit the issue to the file of AO. AO shall duly consider the claim of the assessee in the light of the documents already submitted and decide as per law on this claim duly admitted. Appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. - Shri Shamim Yahya, Accountant Member And Shri Sudhir Pareek, Judicial Member For the Assessee : Shri S.P. Chitambram, Advocate For the Revenue : Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. DR ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. CIT (Appeals)/National ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns of the Act. 2.6 The CIT (A) ought to have appreciated that intimation under section 143(1) gets statutorily merged with scrutiny assessment order under section 143(3) by operation of law and as such the mistake of non-grant of FTC in intimation now forms part and parcel for the scrutiny assessment order and as such the CIT(A) is empowered to consider the same and grant relief. 3. Miscellaneous 3.1 The NFAC/CPC ought to have granted tile relief u/s 90 amounting to Rs. 6,67,530 by considering the fact that Form 67 was filed along with supporting documents as required under Rule 128 of Income-tax Rules, 1962. 3.2 The NFAC/CPC erred in 1evying excessive interest under sections 234B and section 234C of the Act. 4. The Appellant prays that dir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issue was not raised before the AO. The case was selected for Limited Scrutiny on account of foreign bank account and no addition was made on the basis of the said issue. The disallowance of foreign tax credit continued as a result of intimation u/s 143(1) done earlier on 03.06.2020. It is thus clear that the issue of disallowance of FTC was neither raised during assessment proceedings nor is a part of assessment order. The grounds of appeal in the present appeal pertains to disallowance of FTC made in intimation u/s 143(1) dated 03.06.2020. The appellant therefore should have challenged the same by filing an appeal against the intimation u/s 143(1). It is therefore held that the appeal filed is not maintainable and it is accordingly dismis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me on 31.08.20 18 had also filed Form 67. Subsequently, the Appellant filed revised return of income on 31.03.2019. Along with revised return of income the Appellant also filed Form 67 on 31.03.2019. However, in this Form 67 filed on 31.03.20 19, the Appellant did not attach the necessary proof to show payment of tax in the US. Later, on 05.12.2019, the Appellant filed updated Form 67 along with proper attachments evidencing payment of tax in US. The lower authorities denied the benefit of FTC while computing the tax liability merely on the basis that proper Form 67 was filed belatedly without appreciating that Form 67 filed before completion of assessment. 3. It is submitted that the condition prescribed in Rule 128 i.e. filing of Form 67 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
