9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (4) TMI 865X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and have been deposited abroad in a third country in the NatWest Bank, London - Nothing prevented or prohibited the petitioners from bringing the proceeds to India, but the petitioners-assessees by their own conduct have slashed away and kept the money in their bank accounts in London - In the result the writ petition are dismissed X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i on 22-3-2006. The same was forwarded to the Central Authority, U.K. and acting on the same, the competent court of U.K. issued a restraint order dated 20-4-2006 in respect of the said funds in the name of Ravina and Associates Private Limited. 9. Investigations have further revealed that NTPC had entered into three contracts with the said Russian company on 14-3-2005 and advance payment of $ 53,633,554 was released by NTPC to the Russian company on 31-3-2005. It has come to light that the Russian company had transferred $ 10,373,621.06 and $ 10,372,441.07 to the account of Ravina and Associates Private Limited at NatWest Bank, London on 5-5-2005 and 18-5-2005 respectively, immediately after the NTPC made the said payment. Further amount of Rs. 3,33,06,123.61 equivalent to $ 762,686.83 was transferred by the Russian company to Ravina and Associates Private Limited in their account in Deutsche Bank, New Delhi on 20-4-2005. Another payment of $ 825,481.77 was transferred by the Russian company to Ravina and Associates Private Limited. 10. CBI has stated that the bid form dated 4-11-2004 for Barh Super Thermal Power Plant did not have any provision for payment of commission to any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 00 3. 2002-03 2001-02 1-8-2002 Rs. 1,67,719 4. 2003-04 2002-03 22-12-2003 Rs. 1,79,390 5. 2004-05 2003-04 21-9-2004 Rs. 1,69,135 13A. As noticed above, the criminal complaint was registered and investigation was started by the CBI on 6-3-2006 and thereafter the letter of rogatory was issued by the Special Judge, CBI, Delhi. Information was received that in addition to bank accounts of Ravina and Associates Private Limited in NatWest Bank, London, Ravina Khurana has a personal account in the same bank. Subsequently, Ravina Khurana revised her returns on 12-2-2007 as per the details given below :-- A.Y. F.Y. Date of Income Self filing of disclosed assessment revised tax return payable 1. 2000-01 1999-00 12-2-2007 6001100 1951730 2. 2001-02 2000-01 12-2-2007 13017618 4532911 3. 2002-03 2001-02 12-2-2007 3862130 1150193 4. 2003-04 2002-03 12-2-2007 1336890 388570 5. 2004-05 2003-04 12-2-2007 11079890 3622264 The self assessment tax was not paid. 14. These returns were filed after the period of filing of revised returns under section 139(5) of Act had expired and, therefore, proceedings for re-opening of assessment under sectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s to be accounted for and taxed in India. The said contention per se and ex facie is too far-fetched to be accepted or even considered. The accounts of the two petitioners are audited and they had/have access to expert and professional advice. The amounts involved are substantial. The plea raised is preposterous, especially, keeping in view the amount involved. The present case is apparently one wherein funds have not been brought to India, have been slashed and kept abroad in a clandestine manner. The contention of the CBI is that this is corruption or bribe money. This aspect, however, is to be examined in the criminal proceedings. 18. The contention of the two petitioners that the Income-tax department should recover the taxes due along with interest from the bank account at NatWest Bank, London, on the basis of the principles of equity and fair play, has no merit. The conduct of the two petitioners has already been referred to and hardly justifies exercise of equitable and discretionary jurisdiction in their favour. The petitioners do not have any regard for law. Further, the money in the NatWest Bank, London is subject matter of the restraint order passed by the court of U.K. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
