Don’t miss the latest developments in business and finance.

Panama papers case: SC asks Centre to file six reports of MAG

Image
Press Trust of India New Delhi
Last Updated : Mar 07 2017 | 1:48 PM IST
The Supreme Court today asked the Centre to place before it in a sealed cover all the six reports of the Multi-Agency Group (MAG) constituted by the government to probe the Panama papers case.
The direction came after the Centre told the bench headed by Justice Dipak Misra that the Multi-Agency Group has completed the sixth report of its ongoing investigation and the government is prepared to place all reports before the court.
"We direct the Union of India to file all six reports in a sealed cover within four weeks," the bench also comprising Justices A M Khanwilkar and Justice M M Shantanagoudar said.
The Centre had constituted a multi agency group consisting of officers of the Central Board of Direct Taxes(CBDT), Reserve Bank of India (RBI), Enforcement Directorate and Financial Intelligence Unit to investigate the Panama case.
Solicitor General (SG) Ranjit Kumar, appearing for the Centre, told the court that the bench should first go through reports of the MAG and thereafter decide whether it could be shared with the petitioner or not.
The submission by the SG came after petitioner advocate M L Sharma said the report should also be given to him so that he can argue the matter further.

Also Read

At the outset, Sharma argued that the government agencies were not investigating this case properly and they have concealed material facts from the apex court.
To this, the bench said, "How can you say that they are not doing it (probe)? They have said they are investigating the matter and when a stand is taken by respondents (Centre, RBI and others) that they are investigating, how can we say anything at this stage?"
The apex court had on November 24 last year sought a response from the petitioner on the plea of market regulator SEBI that it has been dragged as a party in a PIL seeking a court-monitored CBI probe against Indians whose names have figured in the Panama papers for allegedly holding bank accounts in foreign countries.
The Centre had sought dismissal of the PIL, saying MAG has already been set up to ensure "speedy and coordinated" probe against Indians whose names have figured in the Panama papers.
The Centre had on October 3, 2016 informed the court that
Rs 8,186 crore, illegally kept in offshore banks by Indians, has been brought under tax ambit despite constraints like non-sharing of information by Swiss authorities.
The Department of Economic Affairs of the Finance Ministry had said "an undisclosed income of Rs 8,186 crore (including protective assessment of Rs 1,485 crore) has been brought to tax, on account of deposits made in unreported foreign bank accounts".
Earlier, the Centre had also said that about Rs 1,282 crore has been levied in 159 cases pertaining to concealment of tax due to the goverment.
"So far 164 prosecution complaints have been filed in 75 cases. The apex court-appointed SIT on blackmoney has been kept updated on the progress in these investigations," it had said.
The Finance Ministry, however, had refused to respond to the allegations relating to an interim plea of advocate Sharma seeking a direction that the offshore portfolio investors, who invest in the Indian stock market through participatory-notes, should not be allowed to withdraw money till further orders.
It had said the issue related to SEBI which was the competent authority in this regard.
The ministry had also opposed the contention raised in the PIL that re-appointment of U K Sinha as SEBI chief was illegal and hence should be quashed.
Seeking dismissal of the PIL, it had said the SIT on black money has been kept informed on regular basis about the development made in the probe.
The PIL had sought a court-monitored CBI probe into the Panama papers leak which contained an unprecedented amount of information, including more than 11 million documents covering 2,10,000 companies in 21 offshore jurisdictions.
Each transaction spanned different jurisdictions and may involve multiple entities and individuals.
The plea also suggested that a direction be given to CBI to lodge FIR and conduct investigation against the SEBI chairman, his associates and share brokers for alleged offences, including under the Prevention of Corruption Act and Prevention of Money Laundering Act.
(Reopens LGD6)
At the outset, the petitioner told the court that an FIR should be lodged in the matter and probe should be conducted under the monitoring of the apex court.
However, the bench said, "they are already investigating the matter. What can the Supreme Court do in this?"
The counsel for the Centre said that the Multi-Agency Group (MAG) has been continously doing investigation in the matter which was being monitored by different agencies.
He said the investigation involved assistance of certain foreign countries and the MAG is analysing the replies received from other nations.
To this, the apex court told the petitioner, "whenever you file a PIL and whosoever is the petitioner, he has to remain within the boundary. You have sought a probe. They are doing it. We will ask them to file the reports before us. We can comment anything only when we will see the report".
Senior advocate Arvind Datar, representing the SEBI, told the bench that the petitioner has levelled a series of allegations starting from Panama papers to businessman Vijay Mallya and others.
When the petitioner tried to counter Datar's submissions, the bench said, "you can't make wild allegations".
The Centre told the bench that MAG consists of officials from different agencies and it was "virtually a special investigating team (SIT)".
"Five reports have been submitted by the MAG. They have submitted the reports to the coordinating agency and also to the SIT constituted by the government on the directions of the Supreme Court in the blackmoney matter," he said, adding that the agency has also prepared the sixth report.
To this, the bench said, "We want investigation reports to be filed before us. You (Centre) can give names in a sealed cover and we can form an SIT (to probe the matter)".
The Centre, however, said, "We will file all the reports. The court can go through it and then see whether there is a need to have an SIT in the matter".
The bench then said it would first go through the reports prepared by MAG and would then see whether there is a need for having a separate team or an SIT to probe the matter.
The bench, which asked the Centre to place before it in a sealed cover all the six reports of MAG, has fixed the matter for further hearing on April 18.

More From This Section

First Published: Mar 07 2017 | 1:48 PM IST

Next Story