top of page

A New Light on Black Money Act: Beneficial Owner vs Fiduciary Capacity

Beneficial Owner vs Fiduciary Capacity

The recent ruling by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in Jaipur in the case of Krishna Das Agarwal has stirred up a significant dialogue in the realm of Indian Income Tax Law. In a significant decision, ITAT has clarified the taxability norms under the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015 (Black Money Act), with regard to the fiduciary capacity and beneficial ownership. This blog post delves deep into the case, its findings, and the implications it holds for the future.

A Gist of the Case:

Krishna Das Agarwal, a senior citizen and a recipient of appreciation certificates from the Income Tax Department, is a member of a group that incorporated a UAE-based company, Agrasen Polymers FZE. Following a search operation at Agarwal's premises in July 2018, the Revenue made an assessment under Section 10(3) of the Black Money Act, leading to an addition of Rs.146.42 Cr in Agarwal's income. This addition was based on alleged undisclosed credits in foreign bank accounts and investments outside India from Assessment Years (AYs) 2016-17 to 2019-20. The CIT(A), on appeal, deleted additions to the tune of Rs.122.68 Cr, retaining additions of Rs.23.74 Cr.

ITAT's Game-Changing judgment:

In a path-breaking move, ITAT deleted the addition made in Agarwal's hands, pointing out that Agarwal was not the beneficial owner of the bank accounts. It held that the foreign bank accounts and foreign investments were solely the assets of Agrasen Polymers FZE, and not of Agarwal. ITAT's ruling was based on the following key facts and findings for Beneficial Owner vs Fiduciary Capacity -

  1. No Non-Disclosure: ITAT pointed out that Agarwal had made due disclosure about his fiduciary capacity and financial interest in the UAE company in his original return. There was no 'non-disclosure' as alleged by the Revenue.

  2. Company as Separate Legal Entity: ITAT accepted Agarwal's contention that the UAE-company was a separate legal entity, having its Place of Effective Management (POEM) outside India, and that the taxability of any amount in Agarwal's hands would be unconstitutional and illegal.

  3. Beneficial Ownership: ITAT clarified that the foreign bank accounts and foreign investments were the assets of the foreign company, and Agarwal was not the provider of the consideration for these assets. Thus, he did not fall within the definition of 'beneficial owner'.

  4. No Evidences of Undisclosed Income: The tribunal noted the absence of any evidence indicating that any funds belonged to Agarwal in his individual capacity, or that any of his income was taken abroad and not taxed in India.

Impactful Conclusion:

This ruling has come as a beacon of hope for taxpayers in fiduciary capacities, particularly those with financial interests in foreign entities. The crux of the judgement rests on the distinction between 'fiduciary capacity' and 'beneficial ownership'. The decision not only reinforces the legal principle of separate corporate personality but also provides clear guidelines about the application of the Black Money Act.

In summary, the ITAT, with its profound understanding of the Black Money Act and the principles of beneficial ownership and fiduciary capacity, has set a landmark precedent. The ruling provides much-needed clarity and is expected to reduce litigation around similar issues in the future.

However, it is noteworthy that each case is unique, and the principles established in this case should be applied judiciously, considering the specific facts and circumstances. This ruling is indeed a positive development, but the taxpayers must ensure proper disclosure and compliance to avoid falling foul of the law. This case has certainly brought some interesting insights to light, and it's clear that the realm of Indian Income Tax Law remains as dynamic and intriguing as ever.

The Gravity of Filing Schedule Foreign Assets (FA) Correctly

While the above case offers a sigh of relief to many in similar situations, it is equally important to remember the crucial role that accurate and timely filing of Income Tax Returns (ITRs) plays in a taxpayer's financial life. One of the primary aspects to consider, especially for those with foreign interests, is the 'Schedule Foreign Assets (FA)'.

The 'Schedule FA' in your ITR necessitates detailed reporting of your foreign assets and income from any source outside India. It includes:

  • Details of Foreign Depository Accounts held (including any beneficial interest).

  • Details of Foreign Custodial Accounts held (including any beneficial interest).

  • Details of Foreign Equity and Debt Interest held in any entity (including any beneficial interest).

  • Details of Foreign Cash Value Insurance Contract or Annuity Contract held (including any beneficial interest).

  • Details of Financial Interest in any Entity held (including any beneficial interest).

  • Details of Immovable Property held (including any beneficial interest).

  • Details of any other Capital Asset held (including any beneficial interest).

  • Details of account(s) in which you have signing authority (including any beneficial interest).

  • Details of trusts, created under foreign laws, in which you are a trustee, beneficiary, or settlor.

  • Details of any other income derived from any source outside India which is not included in the items above or income under the head business or profession.

The importance of filing these details correctly cannot be overstated. Misreporting or underreporting of foreign assets and income can lead to severe implications under the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015 (Black Money Act).

The Black Money Act was specifically enacted to deal with the issue of black money in the form of undisclosed foreign income and assets. The Act provides for separate taxation of any undisclosed income in relation to foreign income and assets. Such income is taxable at a flat rate of 30 percent, without any exemption, deduction, or set-off of any carried forward losses which are otherwise available under the Income-Tax Act.

Non-disclosure or inaccurate disclosure of foreign assets can result in heavy penalties and even prosecution. Under the Act, the penalty for non-disclosure of income or an asset located outside India is three times the amount of tax payable thereon, i.e., 90 percent of the undisclosed income or the value of the undisclosed asset. In addition to the penalty, the Act also provides for rigorous imprisonment for a term of 3 to 10 years for wilful attempt to evade tax in relation to a foreign income or an asset located outside India.

Therefore, it is crucial to provide complete and accurate details of all foreign assets and income while filing your ITR. It's a legal obligation that also assures peace of mind, knowing you are in compliance with the law. If you're unsure about the process or your foreign asset details, it's advisable to seek help from a tax professional or consultant. As they say, it's always better to be safe than sorry, especially when it involves legal compliance and your hard-earned money.

94 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All


bottom of page