Assessee-individual offered to tax salary income earned for services rendered in Australia and claimed foreign tax credit for taxes paid in Australia under section 90 read with article 24 in a revised return of income. Assessee filed Form 67 in support of claim of foreign tax credit. Revised return of income was processed by Centralized Processing Centre (CPC) electronically and claim of FTC was disallowed. Assessee filed a rectification application before Assessing Officer and submitted that credit for FTC as claimed in return should be given. Assessing Officer upheld disallowance on ground that assessee had failed to furnish Form 67 on or before due date of furnishing return of income as prescribed under section 139(1) which is mandatory according to rule 128(9).CIT(A) affirmed the order of CIT(A). On appeal the Tribunal held that filing of Form No. 67 is not mandatory but a directory requirement and DTAA overrides the provisions of the Act and Rules cannot be contrary to the Act. Issue is not debatable. In view of legal position the assessee had right to claim Foreign tax Credit. (AY. 2018-19)
Brinda RamaKrishna (Ms.) v. ITO (SMC) (2022) 193 ITD 840 (Bang.)(Trib.)
S. 90 : Double taxation relief-Foreign Tax credit-Salary income-Rule 128(9) of Rules does not provide for disallowance of Foreign Tax Credit in case of delay in filing Form No. 67,-Filing of Form No. 67 is not mandatory but a directory requirement-DTAA-India-Australia. [S. 91, 139(1), 154, 192, R. 128(9), Form no. 67, Art. 24(4)(a)]