The assessee, who was employed in Kenya, filed his Indian income tax return and claimed the benefit of FTC under section 90/91. However, the assessee inadvertently did not upload Form-67, which is required to claim FTC, along with the return. The assessee later uploaded Form-67 before the completion of the assessment proceedings. The FTC claim was rejected by revenue on grounds that the assessee failed to comply with the statutory obligation of filing Form-67 along with the return of income under section 139(1). On writ the Court held that the returns were filed without FTC, however the same was filed before passing of the final assessment order. The filing of FTC in terms of the rule 128 is only directory in nature. The rule is only for the implementation of the provisions of the Act and it will always be directory in nature. This is what the Supreme Court in CIT v. G.M. Knitting Industries (P.) Ltd (2016) 71 taxmann.com 35/ (20015) 376 ITR 456 (SC)  had held that when the returns were filed without furnishing Form 3AA and the same can be filed the subsequent to the passing of assessment order. In the present case, the intimation under section 143(1) was issued on 26-3-2021, but the FTC was filed on 2-2-2021. Thus, the revenue is supposed to have provided the due credit to the FTC of the petitioner. However, the FTC was rejected by the revenue, which is not proper and the same is not in accordance with law. Therefore the  order is liable to be set aside.  The matter is remitted back to the revenue to make reassessment by taking into consideration of the FTC filed by the assesseee. The revenue is directed to give due credit to the Kenya income of the assessee and pass the final assessment order.(AY. 2019-20)   (SJ)