Short answer: since 1 October 2024, the Black Money Act's ₹10 lakh penalties for leaving foreign assets out of a return (sections 42 and 43) do not apply to assets other than immovable property with an aggregate value not exceeding ₹20 lakh. The Finance Act, 2026 extended the same limit to the prosecution provisions (sections 49 and 50), with retrospective effect from that date. The threshold does not remove the duty to report in Schedule FA, the income tax on the foreign income, or the 30% tax and 90% penalty on a foreign asset whose source you cannot explain.
For many people who received the department's foreign-assets email in the last few days, that is the difference between a ₹10 lakh exposure and a return correction.
Why this is being asked now
Since around 24 September 2026 the Income Tax Department has been emailing taxpayers that its records indicate they "may have overseas financial interests". The message points to the Foreign Assets Information now shown in the Annual Information Statement (AIS), the department's consolidated record of what third parties have reported about you, and to FAST-DS, the foreign assets disclosure scheme open until 31 December 2026. What the email is, and how to read it, is covered in the overseas financial interests email.
Many recipients hold small balances: vested RSUs, a savings account left open after a posting abroad, a small pension pot. The ₹20 lakh threshold is most of the answer to whether they need to act, but it is narrower than usually described.
What the proviso says, and where it sits
The Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015 (the Black Money Act) has four provisions aimed at reporting failures by residents. Each applies only to a person who is resident and ordinarily resident (ROR) in India for the year; years in which you were non-resident or not ordinarily resident are outside them altogether.
| Section | What it punishes | Consequence | ₹20 lakh proviso |
|---|---|---|---|
| 42 | Not filing a return by the end of the assessment year, while holding a foreign asset or having foreign income | Penalty of ₹10 lakh | Substituted by Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024, w.e.f. 1 October 2024 |
| 43 | Filing a return but leaving out, or misstating, a foreign asset or foreign income | Penalty of ₹10 lakh | Substituted by Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024, w.e.f. 1 October 2024 |
| 49 | Wilful failure to file the return | Rigorous imprisonment 6 months to 7 years and fine | Inserted by Finance Act, 2026, with retrospective effect from 1 October 2024 |
| 50 | Wilful failure to report the foreign asset or income in a filed return | Rigorous imprisonment 6 months to 7 years and fine | Inserted by Finance Act, 2026, with retrospective effect from 1 October 2024 |
The wording is the same in all four:
this section shall not apply in respect of an asset or assets (other than immovable property), where the aggregate value of such asset or assets does not exceed twenty lakh rupees.
Before the 2024 amendment, sections 42 and 43 excluded only bank accounts with an aggregate balance of up to ₹5 lakh at any time during the year; brokerage accounts, shares and pension funds had no floor. For prosecution, the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) first aligned its practice by an instruction of 18 August 2025, directing that prosecution under sections 49 and 50 not be started where the section 42 or 43 penalty was not imposable. The Finance Act, 2026 then put the limit into the statute.
Two details matter. Section 42 applies only if the return is not filed before the end of the relevant assessment year, so a late return filed within that year avoids it regardless of value. And section 43 bites on a return furnished under section 139(1), (4) or (5) of the Income-tax Act, 1961: the original, belated and revised returns. That is why a revised return cures a Schedule FA omission and an updated return does not.
What "aggregate value" means: unsettled
This is the part most summaries skip, and it is the part that decides borderline cases.
The proviso says "aggregate value" and nothing more. It does not give a date, a method or a currency rule for assets other than bank accounts. The possible readings:
| Measure | Where it comes from | Why it may not apply |
|---|---|---|
| Highest value at any time in the year | The old ₹5 lakh proviso used this test; published summaries of CBDT's 2025 prosecution instruction use the same phrase | The new statutory wording dropped it |
| Closing value | The simplest reading of "value" | No textual support for choosing the year end |
| Fair market value under the Black Money Rules (Rule 3) | Governs the "value of an undisclosed asset" for the 30% tax | Different phrase; and for a bank account it means the sum of all deposits since opening, which can dwarf the balance |
| FAST-DS valuation | FAST-DS Rules, 2026 | Applies only to a declaration under the Scheme |
The Explanation to section 42 adds a currency rule for foreign bank balances: the State Bank of India telegraphic transfer buying rate "as on the date for which the value is to be determined". That date is not stated anywhere, because the Explanation was written for the old proviso.
No binding ruling or circular settles this. The practical approach is to test the highest aggregate value of all your foreign assets other than immovable property at any point in the Indian financial year (April to March, the Act's "previous year"), converted at the SBI TT buying rate. Schedule FA already asks for peak values, so the figures usually exist. If you are under ₹20 lakh on one measure and over on another, plan as though you are over.
A related open point is what goes into the aggregate. The safer reading counts every foreign asset other than immovable property that you held, not only the one left out. Someone who reported a ₹30 lakh brokerage account and forgot a ₹2 lakh savings account should not assume the ₹2 lakh account is covered.
How a bank account is valued under FAST-DS, and why it differs from the balance, is set out in how a foreign bank account is valued under FAST-DS.
From when: 1 October 2024, and the argument about earlier years
A return furnished on or after 1 October 2024 is plainly within the new proviso. In practice that is the return for FY 2024-25 (AY 2025-26) onwards, plus any belated or revised return for an earlier year filed after that date.
For returns filed before 1 October 2024, the position is arguable, not settled. The penalty amendment is prospective on its face, and the prosecution amendment was made retrospective only to the same date, not earlier. Against that, the Supreme Court in CIT v. Vatika Township (2014) accepted that a provision conferring a benefit on the taxpayer can be read as applying to past periods, and a penalty order passed today on an old default is being passed under today's law. No appellate ruling on the ₹20 lakh point has been found. Take a considered view for the specific year rather than assuming it either way.