Pashora Singh Vs Commissioner of Income Tax Appeal (ITAT Amritsar)
Filing of Form No. 67 within the due date for filing of return u/s 139(1) was only directory and not mandatory in nature
Conclusion: Filing of Form No. 67 within the due date for filing of return u/s 139(1) was only directory in nature and was not mandatory. Since the Form 67 had been filed by assessee alongwith return u/s 139(8A) on the same date which was updated return in ITR 3, AO was not justified in ignoring the Form No. 67 which was also on record before him at the time of assessment proceedings. AO was directed to examine the return and allow the credit of TDS to the extent of actually claimed in the return, which again should be supported by Form 26AS, and to allow the credit of TDS to the extent which was legally allowable as per provisions of the Act.
Held: In the instant case, assessee had not filed any return within stipulated time framed u/s 139(1), but had filed the return u/s 139(8A) (updated return) on 31.03.2023 along with Form 67 filed online on the said date claiming FTC. CPC Bangalore refused to allow the claim on the ground that Form 67 had been belatedly filed beyond stipulated time as prescribed by law. The second issue related to the disallowance of Rs. 17,559/- on account of TDS credit claimed by assessee, but not allowed by CPC, Bangalore. The matter was carried in first appeal before JCIT(A), Jaipur and both the additions had been sustained due to reasons contained in the appellate order. Revenue contended that Form No. 67 had been filed belatedly which was not as per provisions of the Rules 128. Sub-rule (9) which provided that Form No, 67 would have to be furnished on or before the due date of filing of ITR u/s 139(1). Since assessee had violated the provisions of Rule 128 (9) of the IT Rules 1962 for claim of FTC, could not be allowed to assessee. Regarding the next issue, in respect of TDS credit, as per provisions of section 139(8A), the updated return need to be accompanied with proof of payment of additional tax u/s 140(B), and in this case the same had not been done. Moreover, he argued that in this updated return it was seen, that assessee had not offered the entire income for taxation and had not also claimed the entire TDS in updated return and as such full credit of taxes could not be allowed in this case. It was held that filing of Form No. 67 within the due date for filing of return u/s 139(1) was only directory in nature and was not mandatory. It would be sufficient compliance on the part of assessee if the said Form No. 67 claiming the benefit of FTC was filed before the completion of assessment proceedings and the said Form No. 67 should be before AO for his consideration at the time of processing or assessment u/s 143(1). In the instant case, since the Form 67 had been filed by assessee alongwith return u/s 139(8A) on the same date which was updated return in ITR 3 , AO was not justified in ignoring the Form No. 67 which was also on record before him at the time of assessment proceedings. AO was directed to consider the Form No. 67 for the purpose of assessment of the updated return filed u/s 139(8A). Assessee had also not claimed the full TDS as reflected in Form 26AS in his return of income. As such, on this issue, matter was set aside back to the file of AO to examine the return and allow the credit of TDS to the extent of actually claimed in the return, which again should be supported by Form 26AS, and to allow the credit of TDS to the extent which was legally allowable as per provisions of the Act.
