NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Tuesday sought responses of former finance minister P Chidambaram’s wife Nalini, son Karti and daughter-in-law Srinidhi on separate appeals filed through the income tax department difficult a Madras HC judgment quashing their prosecution underneath the black money law.
Solicitor normal Tushar Mehta tried his highest to convince a bench of Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justice Sanjiv Khanna to stay the HC’s November 2 judgment which quashed prosecution launched in opposition to the Chidambarams and Karti-owned Chess Global Advisory Services underneath the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act.
While issuing notices to Nalini, Karti, Srinidhi and Chess Global, the bench said, “The SG prays for period in-between keep of the judgment of the HC at the floor that the said judgment may be acted upon in different identical circumstances. While we decline the prayer for keep, as the same would amount to grant of final aid, we make it clear that as the HC judgment is underneath scrutiny of the SC, till appropriate orders are passed, the same shall now not be taken as a precedent.”
On November 2 final 12 months, an HC bench of Justices S Manikumar and Subramoniam Prasad had allowed the appeals through the Chidambarams, who had wondered the validity of sanction accorded through the I-T department for initiation of felony prosecution in opposition to them on the Egmore special court.
The I-T department had alleged that return of income for evaluate 12 months 2016-17 of the three did not point out details of overseas assets. However, after issuance of understand underneath the Black Money Act, a revised return was once filed on August 28, 2017, with details of overseas assets. “The revised return was once now not a voluntary act, however given simplest on receipt of understand. That is the explanation why they were asked to show motive why they be now not prosecuted underneath the Black Money Act,” the I-T department had said.
According to the tax department, the trio did not reveal a property price Rs 5.37 crore they collectively own in Cambridge, UK, which would amount to offence underneath the Black Money Act. The department had also alleged that Karti did not reveal his overseas bank account with Metro Bank in the United Kingdom and the investments he had made in Nano Holdings LLC in the United States. It was once also alleged that Karti had did not reveal investments made through Chess Advisory in contravention of the Black Money Act.
The HC, while quashing the prosecution, had said, “It is an admitted undeniable fact that the overseas asset in each and every case was once bought with money that was once disclosed within the books of account of the assessee (and tax paid) and which was once remitted via banking channels underneath schemes approved through the RBI. There isn't any allegation of black money or unaccounted money or money that has escaped tax or money that was once remitted via illegal channels. It is not disputed through the income tax department - that the supply of funding was once tax paid money remitted via banking channels in line with schemes approved through the RBI.”
Solicitor normal Tushar Mehta tried his highest to convince a bench of Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justice Sanjiv Khanna to stay the HC’s November 2 judgment which quashed prosecution launched in opposition to the Chidambarams and Karti-owned Chess Global Advisory Services underneath the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act.
While issuing notices to Nalini, Karti, Srinidhi and Chess Global, the bench said, “The SG prays for period in-between keep of the judgment of the HC at the floor that the said judgment may be acted upon in different identical circumstances. While we decline the prayer for keep, as the same would amount to grant of final aid, we make it clear that as the HC judgment is underneath scrutiny of the SC, till appropriate orders are passed, the same shall now not be taken as a precedent.”
On November 2 final 12 months, an HC bench of Justices S Manikumar and Subramoniam Prasad had allowed the appeals through the Chidambarams, who had wondered the validity of sanction accorded through the I-T department for initiation of felony prosecution in opposition to them on the Egmore special court.
The I-T department had alleged that return of income for evaluate 12 months 2016-17 of the three did not point out details of overseas assets. However, after issuance of understand underneath the Black Money Act, a revised return was once filed on August 28, 2017, with details of overseas assets. “The revised return was once now not a voluntary act, however given simplest on receipt of understand. That is the explanation why they were asked to show motive why they be now not prosecuted underneath the Black Money Act,” the I-T department had said.
According to the tax department, the trio did not reveal a property price Rs 5.37 crore they collectively own in Cambridge, UK, which would amount to offence underneath the Black Money Act. The department had also alleged that Karti did not reveal his overseas bank account with Metro Bank in the United Kingdom and the investments he had made in Nano Holdings LLC in the United States. It was once also alleged that Karti had did not reveal investments made through Chess Advisory in contravention of the Black Money Act.
The HC, while quashing the prosecution, had said, “It is an admitted undeniable fact that the overseas asset in each and every case was once bought with money that was once disclosed within the books of account of the assessee (and tax paid) and which was once remitted via banking channels underneath schemes approved through the RBI. There isn't any allegation of black money or unaccounted money or money that has escaped tax or money that was once remitted via illegal channels. It is not disputed through the income tax department - that the supply of funding was once tax paid money remitted via banking channels in line with schemes approved through the RBI.”
SC seeks reply from P Chidambaram, kin on high court relief to them in I-T case
![SC seeks reply from P Chidambaram, kin on high court relief to them in I-T case]()
Reviewed by Kailash
on
April 17, 2019
Rating:
