Pascal Postel Vs DDIT (ITAT Chennai)
The Chennai ITAT considered two appeals by the assessee against CIT(A) orders dated 31.07.2025 concerning Assessment Year 2023-24 under the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015 (BMA). The assessee, an individual resident and citizen of India, held foreign bank accounts, shares in SCI Soum Immo and a residential apartment in France. Following information received through the CRS portal and summons issued under section 131 of the Income-tax Act, the assessee disclosed his foreign assets and foreign interest income in his returns. For AY 2023-24, he disclosed foreign assets in Schedule FA and foreign interest income of Rs.3,88,090, and the return was accepted under section 143(3).
The AO, however, assessed foreign interest income under section 10 of the BMA, including Rs.1,16,55,811 for 2012–2022 and estimated Rs.3,49,67,333 for 1982–2012. After the original assessment dated 23.01.2024, the AO issued a notice under section 12 and subsequently levied interest of Rs.11,66,09,386 under section 40 of the BMA. The CIT(A) restricted the period for section 40 interest and partly allowed the appeal but rejected the assessee’s challenge to the quantum addition.
Before the Tribunal, the assessee argued that section 40(1) could not apply because the foreign source and relevant AY 2023-24 income had been disclosed within the prescribed return-filing period. He also argued that, being above 60 years of age and having no business income, he was not liable to advance tax under section 207(2) of the Income-tax Act and therefore section 40(2) could not result in interest under sections 234B and 234C. The assessee further challenged the rectification and the maintainability of the underlying quantum assessment.
