<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Discretionary penalty under the Black Money Act cannot stand for bona fide non-disclosure of foreign ESOP shares already taxed</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100437</link>
    <description>Penalty under section 43 of the Black Money Act was treated as discretionary rather than automatic, and was deleted for a bona fide failure to disclose foreign ESOP shares in Schedule FA. The Tribunal accepted that the shares formed part of employment compensation, the related perquisite and later capital gains had already been taxed, and the only lapse was non-disclosure in the initial reporting year while the assets were held through a fiduciary structure. Applying the principles that a technical or inadvertent breach without deliberate concealment or guilty intent does not justify penalty, the Tribunal also followed prior ITAT and Supreme Court guidance. The jurisdictional challenge was left open as unnecessary.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2026 08:37:37 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2026 08:37:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=905319" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Discretionary penalty under the Black Money Act cannot stand for bona fide non-disclosure of foreign ESOP shares already taxed</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100437</link>
      <description>Penalty under section 43 of the Black Money Act was treated as discretionary rather than automatic, and was deleted for a bona fide failure to disclose foreign ESOP shares in Schedule FA. The Tribunal accepted that the shares formed part of employment compensation, the related perquisite and later capital gains had already been taxed, and the only lapse was non-disclosure in the initial reporting year while the assets were held through a fiduciary structure. Applying the principles that a technical or inadvertent breach without deliberate concealment or guilty intent does not justify penalty, the Tribunal also followed prior ITAT and Supreme Court guidance. The jurisdictional challenge was left open as unnecessary.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2026 08:37:37 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100437</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>