sitemapHome | Registration | Job Portal for CA's | Expert Exchange | Currency Converter | Post Matrimonial Ads | Post Property Ads
News shortcuts: From the Courts | News Headlines | VAT (Value Added Tax) | Placements & Empanelment | Various Acts & Rules | Latest Circulars | New Forms | Forex | Auditing | Direct Tax | Customs and Excise | ICAI | Corporate Law | Markets | Students | General | Mergers and Acquisitions | Continuing Prof. Edu. | Budget Extravaganza | Transfer Pricing | GST - Goods and Services Tax
Latest Expert Exchange
From the Courts »
 M/s A Daga Royal Arts vs. ITO (ITAT Jaipur)
 Gagan Infraenergy Ltd vs. DCIT (ITAT Delhi)
 PCIT vs. Chawla Interbild Construction Co. Pvt. Ltd (Bombay High Court)
 All India Federation of Tax Practitioners vs. ITO (ITAT Mumbai)
  Suresh M. Jamkhindikar vs. ACIT (Bombay High Court)
  Suresh M. Jamkhindikar vs. ACIT (Bombay High Court)
 Mangammal @ Thulasi vs. T.B. Raju (Supreme Court)
 Mahabir Industries vs. PCIT (Supreme Court)
  Oriental Bank Of Commerce Vs. Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax
  Suresh M. Jamkhindikar vs. ACIT (Bombay High Court)
  Union of India vs. Pirthwi Singh (Supreme Court)

Black money: Govt moves SC for recall of order for setting up SIT
July, 16th 2011

Government moved the Supreme Court seeking "recall" and "modification" of its July 4 order for setting up a 13 member Special Investigation Team (SIT) comprising of retired judges to probe all aspects of the black money and also bring back the amounts illegally stashed in bank accounts abroad.

Governmnet is opposed to SIT headed by judges  and chiefs of  CBI, Intelligence Bureau, Enforcement Directorate, Revenue Intelligence and the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) that deals with external intelligence.

The petition , which said the SIT was formed without being prayed, raised ten main grounds among others for recall
of the order in which it has been pulled up for the "laggardly pace" in investigations into the issue of black money stashed

 The application, filed through the Revenue Secretary,contended the July 4 order appointing former judges - Justices
B P Jeevan Reddy and M B Shah as chairman and vice-chairman of SIT was "without jurisdiction" and against the well-
established doctrine of seperation of power.

 Maintaining that a bench of justices B Sudershan Reddy (since retired) and S S Nijjar has impinged upon the domain entrusted to the executive, it said the order is "contrary to the settled legal princple that the function of the court is to see that the lawful authority is duly exercised by the executive but not to take over itself the task entrusted to the executive."

 In the review plea, the government has also maintained that the high-power committee set up with the Revenue Secretary as its head was sufficient to conduct investigations as it had the chiefs of all relevant agencies as its members.

"It impinges upon the well setttled princple that courts do not interfere with the economic policy which is the domain
of the Executive and that it is not the function of the court to sit in judgement over matters of ecnomic policy, which must
necessarily be left to the expert bodies," it said.

 The government argued courts are neither concerned with the judicial review of the economic policy nor it was required
for them to substitute their views on matters which falls within the ambit of the executive.

 "That the judicial review is not concerned with the matters of economic policy as the courts do not substitute their views and judgement for that of the executive as regards the matters which fall within the domain/province of the executive. It is respectfully submitted that the courts do not supplant the views of experts by its own views," the application said.

 While assailing the order for setting up of SIT and making adverse remarks, the government contended the direction
will eliminate and denude the constitutional responsibility of the executive.

"That the said order has the effect of completely eliminating the role and denuding the constitutional responsibility of the executive which itself is answerable to Parliament and it is further respectfully submitted that it directly interferes with the functions and obligations of the executive, more particularly, since it is ordered that SIT will report directly to the Supreme Court, therefore excluding the executive and consequently Parliament also," it said.

The court had said "Unaccounted monies, especially large sums held by nationals and entities with a legal presence in the nation, in banks abroad, especially in tax havens or in jurisdictions with a known history of silence about sources of monies, clearly indicate a compromise of the ability of the State to manage its affairs in consonance with what is required
from a constitutional perspective."

Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2018 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Binarysoft Technologies Pvt. Ltd.
System Testing Solution Manual Software Testing Solutions Automation Software Testing Solutions System Workflow Testing System Manual Testing

Transfer Pricing | International Taxation | Business Consulting | Corporate Compliance and Consulting | Assurance and Risk Advisory | Indirect Taxes | Direct Taxes | Transaction Advisory | Regular Compliance and Reporting | Tax Assessments | International Taxation Advisory | Capital Structuring | Withholding tax advisory | Expatriate Tax Reporting | Litigation | Badges | Club Badges | Seals | Military Insignias | Emblems | Family Crest | Software Development India | Software Development Company | SEO Company | Web Application Development | MLM Software | MLM Solutions