Rahul Anand Vs ADIT CPC (ITAT Kolkata)
ITAT Kolkata held that Rule 128(a) does not preclude the assessee from claiming credit for FTC in case of delay in filing the required form no 67. Also held that filing of form 67 is procedural requirement and accordingly violation of procedural norms doesn’t extinguish substantive right of claiming credit of FTC.
Facts- The assessee filed his return of Income on 27.08.2019. After filing the return, assessee received intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act dated 23.03.2021 and found that relief under section 90 of the Act had not been allowed amounting to Rs 73,658/-. Notably, assessee filed belated Form No. 67 on 08.04.2021.
CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Being aggrieved, the present appeal is filed.
Conclusion- ITAT Delhi in Vikash Daga Vs ACIT Circle-3 (1) Gurgaon has held that filing of form 67 is a procedural / directory requirement and is not a mandatory requirement Therefore, violation of procedural norms does not extinguish the substantive right of claiming the credit of FTC.
Held that since the provision of DTAA override the provision of Section 90 of the Act as they are more beneficial to the assessee, in view of judicial pronouncements in this regard and since Rule 128(a) does not preclude the assessee from claiming credit for FTC in case of delay in filing the required form no 67 as the credit for FTC is a vested right of the assessee and since form 67 was filed as contended by the assessee, therefore, there was no justification for not allowing the credit for FTC.
