tax, penalty that proceedings should be initiated and completed U/s 10 of the BMA before invoking the provisions of Chapter of V particularly Section 50 read with Section 55 is not tenable. Section 10 deals with assessment of undisclosed foreign income and asset. As per section 2(11), undisclosed asset located outside India means an asset held by the assessee in his name or in respect of which he is a beneficial owner, and he has no explanation about the source of Investment in such asset or the explanation given by him is in the opinion of the Assessing Officer unsatisfactory. The provisions of Section 50 (falling under chapter V) are attracted for failure to furnish in a return of income filed any information about an asset (including financial interest in any entity) located outside India. Thus it can be seen the proceedings under s 10 and proceedings under 5.50 are separate and distinct. It is pertinent to point out here that even assuming that the assessee has provided explanation to the satisfaction of the A.0, regarding the source of investment of asset located outside India, still prosecution under s.50 is attracted for failure to furnish any information of asset located outside India in return of Income filed in the prescribed form setting forth such details in the prescribed manner. It therefore follows that the process of sanctioning prosecution can commence even before completion of assessment U/s 10(3) of the BMA, 2015. The scheme of the Act makes It clear that assessment and prosecution are not only distinct and separate but the two proceedings are independent and irrespective of the outcome of the assessment under s.10(3) of the BMA, 2015. Besides, it has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.Jeyappan Vs S.K. PERUMAL, 1984 AIR 1693 that the pendency of assessment proceedings cannot act as a bar to institution of criminal prosecution for offences punishable under the provisions of law''.
