Where penalty was imposed on assessee for non-disclosure of foreign investment holding in Schedule FA, but the record showed that the investment was held in assessee’s name only for administrative convenience and that her husband had disclosed the said investments in Schedule FA along with his return of income, it was held that, on the facts of the case, the assessee could not be treated as having failed to disclose the foreign investment in the return and the penalty imposed under section 43 was therefore deleted. (AY. 2017-18)
PCIT v. Aditi Avinash Athavankar [2025] 180 taxmann.com 476 (Bom)(HC)
Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015]
S. 43: Penalty-Failure to furnish in return of income, an information or furnish inaccurate particulars about an asset-Non-disclosure of foreign investment in Schedule FA-Investment held in assessee’s name only for administrative convenience and disclosed by husband-Penalty deleted-Order of Tribunal affirmed. [S.260A]
Leave a Reply