The assessee was signatory in a foreign the Bank Account held by the mother . Amount in the said bank account was belong to mother . The Assessing Officer levied the penalty u/s 43A of the BMA for not disclosing the bank account in return of income . CIT(A) deleted the penalty . On appeal by the revenue the Tribunal held that , the amount held in bank account was not taxed in the hands of the assessee . The Assessee was only a signatory and held in a fiduciary capacity and was never operated by her . On account of search provisions of section. 153A had come to play and in the said return the account was disclosed . The non disclosure of account in the original return got substituted by return u/s 153A of the Act , which is advantage of the assessee . For non disclosure in previous years , the BMA Act was not in force and hence no lapses . The Non inclusion of account in its return is only technical or venial breach of law . The Order of CIT ( A) deleting the penalty was affirmed . (BMA No. 1/Mum/ 2022 dt 29 -3 -2022 ( AY. 2017 -18 )
Addl. CIT v. Leena Gandhi Tiwari (2022) 216 TTJ 905 /96 ITR 384 / 212 DTR 105 ( Mum) ( Trib) www.itatonline .org
Black Money ( Undisclosed Foreign Income & Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act , 2015.
S. 43: Penalty for failure to furnish return of income an information , or furnish inaccurate particulars about an asset (including interest in any entity )located outside India- Foreign Bank Account – Signatory for late Mother-Amount was donated to the Charity –Not beneficial owner – Mere no disclosure is not valid ground for levy of penalty – Deletion of penalty was affirmed . [ S.10(3), Income -tax Act , 1961 132(4) 139 , 153A]
Leave a Reply