ITAT Chennai Cancels ₹10 Lakh Penalty for ESOP Non-Disclosure
Employee fined Rs 10 lakh over lack of ESOP disclosure in ITR; here's why ITAT Chennai cancelled it
The Economic TimesImage: The Economic Times
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) in Chennai canceled a ₹10 lakh penalty imposed on Mr. Kishore Kumar Rajagopal for failing to disclose employee stock options (ESOPs) in his income tax return for the assessment year 2016-17. The tribunal found the omission to be a bona fide error, not an attempt to evade taxes.
- 01Mr. Kumar faced a ₹10 lakh penalty for not disclosing ESOPs in his tax return.
- 02The penalty was canceled by ITAT Chennai due to the omission being accidental.
- 03The tribunal emphasized that the income from ESOPs was already taxed.
- 04Judicial precedents indicated that penalties under Section 43 of the Black Money Act are discretionary.
- 05The case highlights the complexities of tax reporting for expatriates.
Advertisement
In-Article Ad
The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) Chennai has ruled in favor of Mr. Kishore Kumar Rajagopal, canceling a ₹10 lakh penalty imposed by the Income Tax Department for failing to disclose employee stock options (ESOPs) in his income tax return for the assessment year 2016-17. Mr. Kumar, who received ESOPs from Vedanta Resources PLC (UK) while working abroad, did not include them in the Schedule Foreign Assets (FA) of his return filed on February 22, 2018. The Income Tax Department initiated penalty proceedings under Section 43 of the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015 (BMA), which were upheld by the Commissioner of Appeals. However, during the appeal, Kumar's Chartered Accountant, Prakash Shridhar Hegde, argued that the omission was accidental and that the perquisite value of the ESOPs had already been subjected to tax deducted at source (TDS). The tribunal acknowledged that the omission was due to a lack of clarity in reporting requirements during the initial year of implementation. Citing judicial precedents, ITAT Chennai found that the penalty under Section 43 is discretionary and cannot be imposed for mere technical lapses. Consequently, the tribunal deleted the penalty, emphasizing that there was no intention to conceal income or evade taxes.
Advertisement
In-Article Ad
This ruling clarifies the tax reporting obligations for expatriates and may prevent similar penalties for unintentional omissions in the future.
Advertisement
In-Article Ad
Reader Poll
Do you think penalties for tax reporting errors should be discretionary?
Connecting to poll...
More about Income Tax Appellate Tribunal

Income Tax Department Questions Charitable Registrations Over 'Commercial Receipts'
Business Standard • Apr 13, 2026
Buckeye Trust Ruling Highlights Tax Risks from Ambiguous Trust Deed Clauses
The Economic Times • Apr 13, 2026
ITAT Delhi Rules in Favor of Seller Over TDS Credit Dispute
The Economic Times • Apr 12, 2026
Read the original article
Visit the source for the complete story.



