Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Subhankar Chakraborty Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore)
Related Assessment Year : 2016-17
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Subhankar Chakraborty Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore) Assessee filed ROI claiming relief u/s 90 but did not file Form No.67. Form was subsequently filed beyond the due date as per under Rule. CPC did not give credit for foreign tax. On appeal, CIT(A) held that as per Rules 128(8) and 128(9), relief u/s 90 cannot be allowed to the assessee as Form No.67 was filed beyond the due date as prescribed under Rule and dismissed the appeal On further appeal before the ITAT, assessee submitted that filing of Form No.67 was a procedural mistake but it was filed on 02.04.2021. If the CPC has not allowed relief in...
This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.

Author Bio

CA Vijayakumar Shetty qualified in 1994 and in practice since then. Founding partner of Shetty & Co. He is a graduate from St Aloysius College, Mangalore . View Full Profile

My Published Posts

Patna ITAT: Interest on Delayed Payment of Sales Tax, Service Tax & Employer’s PF Contribution Allowable; TDS Interest Not Deductible Section 54F Deduction Allowed on Genuine House Purchase from In-Laws: Mumbai ITAT Pune ITAT Quashes Reassessment as Section 148A(b) & 148A(d) Reasons Differed Section 54 Relief Can’t Be Denied Merely Due to Section 50C Addition: Pune ITAT Delhi ITAT Deletes Penny Stock Addition; Suspicion Can’t Replace Evidence View More Published Posts

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search Post by Date
July 2026
M T W T F S S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031