https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93584 ITAT held that the term "may" in Section 43 of the BM Act is directory and not to be construed as "shall," therefore imposition of penalty for non-disclosure of foreign assets in Schedule FA is not automatic; the Assessing Officer retains discretion to impose or waive penalty based on the facts and circumstances of each case. The Tribunal found the appellants failed to demonstrate a bona fide omission and noted material inaccuracies and non-reporting, but clarified that a prior decision did not bind the Division Bench on whether penalty is mandatory nor considered Section 46's requirement of hearing. The matters are remitted to the Division Bench to determine the penalty merits in accordance with law. en-us Mon, 27 Oct 2025 09:17:15 +0530 Mon, 27 Oct 2025 09:17:16 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93584 ITAT held that the term "may" in Section 43 of the BM Act is directory and not to be construed as "shall," therefore imposition of penalty for non-disclosure of foreign assets in Schedule FA is not automatic; the Assessing Officer retains discretion to impose or waive penalty based on the facts and circumstances of each case. The Tribunal found the appellants failed to demonstrate a bona fide omission and noted material inaccuracies and non-reporting, but clarified that a prior decision did not bind the Division Bench on whether penalty is mandatory nor considered Section 46's requirement of hearing. The matters are remitted to the Division Bench to determine the penalty merits in accordance with law. Highlights Income Tax Mon, 27 Oct 2025 09:17:15 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93584