CA Sandeep Kanoi
CBDT has vide Notification No. 41/2015, Dated-15th day of April, 2015 Notified ITR-1 ITR-2 ITR-4S ITR-V for A.Y. 2015-16 with several Changes. In such ITRs CBDT has for the first time required an assessee to Compulsorily provide details of all Bank account held in India (including in joint names) at any time during financial year 2014-15 including details of those which were closed during the year.
Assessee has to provide the following details :–
- Number of bank accounts held by you at any time (including opened/closed) during the previous year– In case of Paper Returns if No. of accounts are more than two you attach a separate sheet providing details of all such accounts.
- IFS Code of the Bank –
- Name of the Bank –
- Name of Joint holder(s), if any – In Our opinion you have to give details of all bank account jointly held in India by you even if you are not the first Joint Account older in the account.
- Account Number
- Account balance as on 31 st March of the previous year– In case the account is closed during the
year, in the column for account balance as on 31st March mention “closed”.
Format of Schedule BA of Newly prescribed ITRs which mandates disclosure of Bank Accounts is as follows :-
Schedule BA
Details of Bank Accounts held in India at any time during the previous year
| Number of bank accounts held by you at any time (including opened/closed) during the previous year | |||||
| Sl. | IFS Code of the Bank | Name of the Bank | Name of Joint holder(s), if any | Account Number | Account balance as on 31st March of the previous year |
| 1. | |||||
| 2. | |||||
Question which needs Clarification in respect of Disclosure requirement of Schedule BA Whether the word “All Bank Accounts” includes Recurring Deposit A/c, Fixed Deposit A/c, Time Deposit A/c, Loan A/c besides Saving and Current A/c?
Related Posts-
♣ Disclose details of Foreign Travel In Income Tax Return (ITR)
♣ e-filing of ITR Mandatory for individuals & HUFs claiming Income tax refund
♣ CBDT mandates disclosure of all Bank Accounts in ITR
♣ CBDT Notifies ITR-1 ITR-2 ITR-4S ITR-V for A.Y. 2015-16 with several Changes
♣ Changes in Notified ITR-1, ITR-2, ITR-4S for A.Y. 2015-16
♣ ITR-1 SAHAJ – Who can & who cannot file & Manner of Filing for A.Y. 2015-16
♣ Form ITR-2 – Who can & who cannot file & Manner of Filing for A.Y. 2015-16
♣ ITR-4S Sugam- Who can & who cannot file & Manner of Filing for A.Y. 2015-16
Author Bio
Should ppf a/c details be given in itr 1 bank details….
If i someone mentions ppf no… Then what could be done…
Sir if 2Lac Deposit made in joint bank account during demonitisation. How it will be disclosed in itr of Both the persons.
Dear Sir,
I am a individual & i have 2 saving & 1 joint a/c with wife so i asked that i saw all the bank a/c details in the return & also saw the Interest of all accounts. please reply asa.
Regards
Rahul Mittal
other bank account except saving and current is no required.
Want to know for a partnership firm (traditional one) for last year 2014-2015 IT return filling whether all the partners has to produce there all the personal bank account details for firm IT return.
THE FIRST PROBLEM WITH THE LAW OF DECLARING ALL BANK ACCOUNTS IN THE ITR IS THAT THE TIME GIVEN FROM THIS YEAR ITSELF IS VERY SHORT.
IT SHOULD ACTUALLY START FROM NEXT YEAR.THEN THERE WERE AMENDMENTS ON TEH SAME AS ITR FORMS WERE AGAIN CHANGED. THEN THE TIME WAS EXTENDED FOR FILING RETURNS WAS EXTENDED TILL 31ST AUGUAT 2015.
IN FACT BANKS WHO ARE PAYING INTEREST ON FD’S ARE NOT VERY GEAREDUP WITH TAX PAID ETC.
IT IS A FACT :- YOU TAKE ALL THE INTEREST ON YOUR FDS IN A BANK CREDITED TO YOUR BANK ACCOUNT (ALCULATED BY THE TAX PAYER ON BASIS OF ACTUAL CREDITS TO THE ACCOUNT AND THAT CALCULATED BY BANK (WITH MERCANTILE SYSTEM OF CALCULATION) WHEREIN INTEREST ACCRUED AND IN FACT NOT PAID WILL HAVE A LARGE DIFFERENCE BECAUSE IF SAY ONE OF YOUR FD OR SAY N NUMBER OF FDS ARE AMTURING IN 2017-18 FY. THEN INTEREST (ACCRUED) ON TAHT FOR THAT YEAR IS ALSO INCLUDED AND CALCULATED BY THE BANK. THE IT DEPT WILL TAKE THAT INTEREST BY BANK SHOWN IN 26A (TAX DEDUCTED OR NOT NOT DEDUCTED AS THE CASE MAY BE) BUT TAX AYER ENDS UP PAYING MORE OR WHEN THE AMOUNT IS DIFFERENT THE IT DEPT. WILL LEVY PENALTY ON THE TAX PAYER BECAUSE HE OR SHE HAS CALCULATED ON ACTUAL CREDIT BASIS.AS SUCH I HAVE MENTIONED IN THE BEGINNING THAT THE TIME GIVEN BY CBDT IS VERY LESS. GOING TO BANK GETTING ALL FIGURES, TALLYING WITH THE ACTUAL CREDITS ETC IS A HERCULIAN TASK. THERE CAN BE ERRORS MADE BY BANKS ALSO WHICH ARE TO BE THEN CORRECTED.
UNDER THE CISRCUMSTANCE THE GOVT. WAS GETTING INFO ON BANK ACCOUNTS MANY YEARS AGO WHEN KYC CAMPAIGN HAD STARTED AND IT WAS POSSIBLE TO TART THIS ALL BANK ACCOUNT MATTER EARLIER OR NOW GOVERNMENT MUST GIVE TIME TO TAX PAYERS OF ONE YEAR AND START THIS ACTIVITY FROMMFY YEAR 2016-17.
THE GOVT. HAS TAKEN THIS STEP VERY VERY HASTILY AND DOES NOT HAVE PROPER CLARIFICATIONS:- WHAT ABOUT RD, FD’S IN POST OFFICES, JOINT ACCOUNTS, NSC, KISAN VIKAS PATRA ETC WHICH ALSO FALL UNDER BANKING. WHAT ABOUT PENSION ACCOUNTS???? ACTUALLY THIS HAS LED TO A LOT OF CONFUSUION AND I OBSERVED THERE IS RUSH IN BANKS TO GET ACCOUNT STATEMENTS, INTEREST PAID STATEMENTS AND FURTEHR CONFUSION ON THE AMOUNTS NOT TALLYING WHEN COMPARED WITH ACTUAL CREDIT OF FD INTEREST TO BANKS AND THAT SHOWN AS PAID BY BANKS IN THEIR INTEREST PAID STATEMENT.
THIS IS A VERY SERIOUS MATTER AND CBDT, FINANCE MINISTRY, COMMERCIAL MINISTRY MUST IMMEDIATELY STOP THIS AND GIVE TIME FOR A YEAR TO TAX PAYERS TO TAKE THEIR OWN TIME AND DO THE DECLARATIONS.
your given vide Notification No. 41/2015, Dated-15th day of April, 2015 nothing is mention details related to banks details for income tax returen.
For Individual Salaried “All BANK A/c” means what?? sb a/c, fd a/c , rd a/c ??????
what happend if we dont give other account details
IT SOUNDS ABSOLUTELY FOOLISH WITHOUT COMPLETE CLARIFICATIONS ON PART OF THE FINANCE MINISTRY TO ASK FOR THE SO CALLED ALL BANK ACCOUNT DETAILS.
THE FINANCE BILL WAS PASSED DURING BUDGET.
ALL THIS ADDONS HAVE COME AFTERWARDS AND ARE NOT PROPERLY PASSED IN THE PARLIAMENT.
THERE IS NO CLARIFICATION ON THE TERM ”BANK ACCOUNT (WHICH REALISTICALLY COVERS SB, FD, RD, EVEN PPF, MIS , EVEN NSC IS A FD AND A TYPE OF BANK ACCOUNT THEN WHAT ABOUT THAT?????)
THE GOVERNMENT VERY SWEETLY PROMISED GETTING BALCK MONEY FROM SWISS BANK OR ABRAOD IN TERMS OF BROADLY SPEAKING INSTEAD IS AFTER SALARIED CALSS TO EXTRACT MONEY FROM THE REALISTIC CLASS OF IT PAYERS.
WHAT ABOUT THE URBAN AREA NON TAX PAYERS WHO HAVE LACKS OF RUPEES OF AGRO INCOME???WHAT ABOUT PAAN BEEDI SHOPS AND GREEN GROCERS WHO GIVE BILLS WITHOUT CARBON COPY. UPA GOVT HAD INTODUCED RS 1500 TO SUCH MERCHANTS WHO ARE ENJOYING THE SAME FOR MAY YERAS.
WHERE IS THE RS 15 LACS WHICH THE PRIME MINISTER MR NARENDRA DAMODARDAS MODI PROMISED TO GET IN EACH INDIAN CITIZEN’S ACCOUNT????? AS PER THE GOVT SURVEY ITSELF A LARGE PERCENTAGE OF THE POPULATION EARNING TACXABLE INCOME DO NOT FILE RETURNS (THERE ARE MANY MINORITY PEOPLE WHO DO NOT FILE RETURNS-AUTHENTICATED INFO BY A PERSON HIMSELF)WHAT ABOUT THEM???
THIS WILL GIVE RISE TO PEOPLE WITHDRAWING MONEY FROM BANKS AND STORING THE SAME IN BATHS AND TUBS AND UNDERGROUND AS IT USED TO BE SHOWN IN HINDI PICTURES ERALIER.
EVEN THAT LOKPAL LAW FOR GOVT EMPLOYEES TO DECLARE ASSETS IS ALL RUBBISH. THAT ANNA HAZARE HAS NO OTHER WORK AND TO GAIN POLITICAL MILEAGE THIS NDA GOVT. DANCED TO HIS TUNES.
NOW AGAIN HE IS REVOLTING WITH AANDOLANS ETC. WILL GOVERNMENT DANCE TO HIS TUNES AGAIN.IS THIS THE WY A DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED GOVERNMENT OR GOVERNMENTS (BOTH UPA AND NDA ) WILL FUNCTION.
THE NDA GOVT. HAS LOST ITS CITIZEN FRIENDLY FACE BY DOING ALL THESE UNWANTED ACTIVITIES.
THIS ABSOLUTELY IMMORAL ON PART OF THE GOVERNMENT TO FORCIBLY ASK PEOPLE TO DEACLRE FINANCIAL AND PERSONAL DETAILS.
WHY WAS THE KYC AND PAN ASKED DURING PAST 5 TO 7 YEARS BY ALL BANKS??? TO GATHER RADDI OR GOOVT SELLS ATHTA RADDI AND EARNS MONEY OUT OFT???
WHEN PAN AND KYC WERE GIVEN AGAIN AADHAR WAS ALSO INSISTEDA ND GIVEN THEN WHY THE CBDT WANTS AGAIN THE SAME TO BE MENTIONED IN IT RETURNS????
THIS WILL ENDUP IN PEOPLE DOING MORE FRAUD AND RISE TO INSPECTOR RAAJ AND BRIBERY.
I did not show my income from S.B. accounts in ITR of the last A.Y.(i.e., 2014-15) as this was bellow Rs.10000 and would be deducted u/s-80TTA. The ITR has not been processed till date. If I show my S.B. account details in the current A.Y. what will be the consequences?
if my another account is joint,than its mandatory to give details in itr form 1
suppose all bank Accounts are not filled in forms then what is the tax treatment
Dear fellow Indians,
The new ITR forms specifically ask you to detail only those accounts that are considered “CURRENT” and/or “SAVINGS”.
RDs and FDs are neither of the two above, so they do not need to be reported on ITR.
whether giving all bank account no is mandatory for a genuine salaried class employee who is entitled for refund of rs 2000..we have given one account for refund purpose . In other account assess getting LPG subsidy …is it that much serious to give bank all bank detail..for small assessee of refund case
CLARIFICATION NEEDED
ACCOUNTS MEANS
1 ACCOUNTS WITH FIRST NAME OR
2 ALL THE ACCOUNTS IRRESPECTIVE OF NAME FIRST OR SECOND
Alongwith bank count details and verification,Income Tax Dept should collect details of total properties in municipal ,corporation area and it should be compared with revenue dept record to find out real owner and source of investment.Only Bank accts will not give details of taxable income
CBDT is looking for black money trail. What about furnishing names of all donors including those giving less than Rs 20000 to political parties? Without it, there is no moral authority to ask for bank details of individuals and who spent for your foreign visit. Persons spending for political parties should also be known.
Instead of fulfilling the electon promises made, the BJP govt is targetting the voters who have votd him coz of frustration with Cong.!.
What happened to Black Money issue? Let them atleast bring 1 % of what they were talking about during elections?
What happened to ‘Namami Ganga’? at the end of 5 years it is going to be ‘Salam Ganga?
Look at the harsh penal provisions of New Cos Act, 2013? It prohibits owners of the company to bring in money to their own Company! Penalty will be in lakhs! if the owners/share holders bring in their money to support their company needs!
Look at the progress of promise of cleaning Politics within one year. Not even an inch moved in this direction!
Slowly we are understading the reality that all those promises were only election promises were fake and not real.
I am sure BJP is gearing up to get routed in the next general elections.
The trend seems to be in this direction.
Instead of targetting those who deal in Gunny Bags, they are targetting those who transact through Bank Account.
How safe is this disclosed bank account in the hands of corrupt officials?
It’s a pity that that the CBDT is interested to know the details of those who are already filing returns and honestly paying their taxes while leaving out those who are earning millions but do not bother to pay taxes. If the CBDT goes after those who do not pay taxes then there is a possibility their the tax amount will double up. TRY it and see for yourself.
Every year the CBDT only tries to creat fear by advertising in the papers that they are aware of those who earn a lot but do not pay taxes butt we do not hear of anyone caught and prosecuted. Just making them afraid is of no use. They are become immune to such things.
The CBDT instead of asking Assessee to give the Details of Bank Accounts in Return of Income, can easily ask the BANKS to link the Bank Accounts with Pan Number, (LIKE KYC DOCUMENTS OF BANKS) and ask the Bank to Upload the Details of Balances, peak balances, etc., in PAN HOLDERS A/C. which can be reflected in 26AS.
Also the Banks at the time of Opening Bank Account, should obtain the Source of Income, Salary, Business, Agricultural etc., along with PAN NUMBER , & same can be uploaded, in Department web site so that the Department can have track of Accounts of IT Returns files and non filers.
In present, scenario all the Burden of giving details are on Assessee who is filing the Return of Income, & PAYING THE TAXES HONESTLY. Others in spite of having income and Bank Accounts just escape everything by just not filing Any Return At all, having attitude JAB AAYAGA JAB DEKENGE.
THE CBDT, should concentrate More or Non filers, rather than Burdening the Filers.
– See more at: https://taxguru.in/income-tax/cbdt-mandates-disclosure-bank-accounts-itr.html#sthash.KNwrxoWL.dpuf
CBDT should immediately come out with clarifications on various points arising from the new requirements of reporting on Bank acctts.The circular is ambiguous and non-speaking on most points/doubts commented upon by readers.
With a few months left to file,lot of information will have to be collected before filing
This schedule for giving information of all bank accounts (including SB,RD, FD AND CURRENT AND CC ACCOUNTS) can put the assesses in trouble.
Post office accounts are not to be disclosed.
The CBDT instead of asking Assessee to give the Details of Bank Accounts in Return of Income, can easily ask the BANKS to link the Bank Accounts with Pan Number, (LIKE KYC DOCUMENTS OF BANKS) and ask the Bank to Upload the Details of Balances, peak balances, etc., in PAN HOLDERS A/C. which can be reflected in 26AS.
Also the Banks at the time of Opening Bank Account, should obtain the Source of Income, Salary, Business, Agricultural etc., along with PAN NUMBER , & same can be uploaded, in Department web site so that the Department can have track of Accounts of IT Returns files and non filers.
In present, scenario all the Burden of giving details are on Assessee who is filing the Return of Income, & PAYING THE TAXES HONESTLY. Others in spite of having income and Bank Accounts just escape everything by just not filing Any Return At all, having attitude JAB AAYAGA JAB DEKENGE.
THE CBDT, should concentrate More or Non filers, rather than Burdening the Filers.
As is usual, rule makers do not want clarity in any rule. Ambiguity is their domain. Details of all accounts held jointly will have to be disclosed. However the rule should have provided for a separate division for accounts held in joint names, but the funds or income therein does not belong to a joint holder whose name appears second or third. They should have provided a column to show the name of the person and his PAN Number in whose returns the transactions are reflected. They should also clarify whether Bank accounts mean only Savings / Current / Overdraft accouts or whether they include Term Deposit / Loan accounts as well.
May God Save the assessees.
The assessee is having his name as a second person in the joint bank account. It is normal practice when a bank account is opened. The second name holder in the account is mainly a trustee in the account. The bank account and the balance does not appear in the books of the second name holder.
What is the propriety of giving the details of this bank account with balance etc as called for in the return of the assessee, ie the second name holder in the account?
Moreover all the bank accounts are linked to PAN, Without PAN no bank account can be opened. In case the I.Tax Dept wants to examine any assessees bank accounts it can do so through PAN. No need to call for the information from the assessee in this respect.
Where is the so called simplification for Income TAx Act and the procedures therein?
in my opinion, RD and FDR etc will not be included in bank account detail
sanjay jain
From now on-wards one can not escape the tax by keeping accounts (FDs.& SBs)in many banks and by giving Form 15G/H to all of them very well knowing that his/her income is more than the non-taxable limit. Due to introduction of single customer id for all the accounts in different branches in the same bank, all the interest credited in various branches of the same bank will be added for TDS provisions. If the PAN is integrated with all the Banks all the interest in all the banks will be clubbed for TDS, which is not far away.
Dear,
Always the salaried persons are targeted. We request the CBDT to exclude all salaried persons from filling ITR. Also no conditions attached for saving, Medical etc to be their. After the employer deduct tax, why they need all details? It is better if the integrate and check the details from the banks. Instead they must stop cash transactions.
This requirement puts a major burden on ALL tax return filers, irrespective of his taxable income.
CBDT needs to urgently clarify whether these details are to be reported only for those bank accounts which are in the name of the assessee who is named first in the bank accounts, and whether only details of current/saving bank are required to be reported or whether even recurring deposits and fixed deposits are also to be reported.
If a person has more than one fixed deposit, then each deposit would have different account/deposit number (though may be under a common customer ID) and so it would be cumbersome to report all the deposits individually – if at all fixed deposit holdings are to be reported, then they should be under each customer ID and total amount held under each customer ID rather than individual deposit numbers/account nos.
This requirement, read with other details such as reporting foreign travel expenses, is obviously meant to enable the I-T Dept. to obtain information about the wealth of assesses, due to the proposed abolition of Wealth Tax, as mentioned by Mr. Jaitley in his budget speech. I quote below from his Budget speech:
“The information regarding the assets which are currently required to be furnished in wealth tax return will be captured in the income tax returns. This will ensure that the abolition of wealth tax does not lead to escape of any income from the tax net.”
The intention probably was that those presently required to file Wealth Tax returns would instead have to provide the details in the ITR form itself due to the proposed abolition of wealth tax. However this burden has now fallen on ALL those who file ITR, irrespective of the taxable income! This is sheer harassment of a majority of tax return filers, and would give enormous scope for I-T officials to harass assessees to find small faults in the BA section of the Returns, and provide an additional avenue to increase corruption.
In any case, since WT is to be abolished from FY 2015-16, the need for reporting details under the BA section of the ITRs should be postponed to AY 2016-17 by which time public response to this schedule BA would be available from tax return filers and other professionals such as CAs.
Mr. Jaitley should immediately take steps to restrict the BA reporting to people whose total income is over Rs 1 crore (who are to be taxed at a higher rate to compensate for loss of Govt. revenue from Wealth Tax) and not for ALL tax return filers (as is now proposed through the schedule BA), to reduce paperwork, harassment, likely increase in corruption in the I-T Dept. and disputes.
I think all concerned tax filers and professionals could bring these points to the notice of Mr. Jaitley and CBDT.
Instead of clarity, they are confusing. If you have 50fds, do you give details of each? Do you have to furnish ppf ac details? Then they have omitted deposits given to co. Loans given, etc. If the intention were to obtain assets declaration even from people who are ord salaried or retired persons or those living on income from other sources like bank int etc. It is foolhardy. The various columns show the income and its source. What exact purpose will be served by just knowing bal in a given ac? It appears to be some backdoor entry to harass taxpayers by babudom. With efiling, their pockets might not be getting full, what with not getting a cut from each refund order etc. This minister is rather being retrogressive. Instead of simplifying, he is complicating returns. He should have been bothering about Ambanis and the like. Instead he is worried about tax collection from middle classes. Look he abolished wealth tax. Now who amongst us had to pay it? Even if you had assets of 5crore, all parked in banks, no wealth tax! It was only Ambanilikes who might he payiing wt before it was abolished. BJP will suffer for such foolish anti middleclass gimiks. Let them deliver upon the bloated promises of Achche din first!
I don’t understand tyhe need for disclosure of all bank a/cs in the IT return. PAN no. has already been prescribed and it should be possible for the IT Deptt to extract details of bank a/cs of assessees in this age of super technological methods.
it must be 31 march 2014. I agree that the information must be fetched using the PAN number.
This activity can be carried out by the IT department, and the tax payer not even knowing it.
This is going to be a draconian provision as all the details are given to the tax authorities on the platter. There is a possibility of it being misused.
Dear Rukmesh,
31st march as at end of previous year is end of the relevant financial year i.e., 31.03.2015 in the case of FY 2014-15
If all information to be provided by the tax payer, why the PAN is used for? Is it just a login Id and identity document? Instead of using the Information technology to ease the processes, the CBDT and Income tax department is adding more task for the individuals. That’s pathetic.
Aa Gaye Achhe Din. Sabse pahle sab politicians ka data bahar nikalo, taki shubh shuruaat ho jaye.
account balance as on 31st March of previous year! What does it mean?
31st March 2013 or 2014 ? For FY2014-15 (AY2015-16)
The intention is to collect data on all transactions of receipt and payments, therefore in my view, details of bank acoounts should be SB / current / cash credit etc , wherein deposits and withdrawals can take place. The other point is that Fd/ Rd accounts would as it be part of the balance sheet. Lets not read too much into the requirements, otherwise there will be duplication of data which may create confusion.
The account of minor in which assesee is guardian required to disclose?