Chandigarh, September 8
A year after a Ludhiana court permitted the Enforcement Directorate (ED) to inspect judicial file regarding a complaint filed by the Income Tax Department against Chief Minister Capt Amarinder Singh, the Punjab and Haryana High Court today stayed the order.
The Bench also stayed another order upholding the same. The HC order would remain in operation during the pendency of the proceedings. The Bench also made it clear that Amarinder Singh, his son Raninder Singh and other petitioners were not required appear in the trial court.
Senior counsel Akshay Bhan and Siddharth Aggarwal submitted on petitioners’ behalf that complaints were filed under the Income Tax Act and the IPC. Information in the form of master-sheets was received by the Director-General of the Income Tax, Chandigarh, after being earlier received from Paris on June 28, 2011, by Foreign Tax and Tax Research (FTamp;TR) Division of Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT).
This was in the form of a pen drive. On July 14, 2011, it was forwarded to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Inv.), CBDT, New Delhi. On July 22, 2011, this information was handed over to the DGIT (Inv.), Chandigarh, and a certificate under Section 65B of the Indian Evidence Act received from the competent authority. The documents were appended with the complaint. It is on the basis of this information that the complaint was filed in the Ludhiana court.
It was argued that as per the international convention between the two countries, taking information from the documents attached with complaint was not justified. Additional Solicitor-General Satya Pal Jain, however, submitted that these issues were never raised before the courts below.
Justice GS Sandhawalia said there were restrictions on sharing information once the complaint was based on information received under a convention. Prima facie, the ED would not be entitled to the information in view of the apparent legal bar.
Justice Sandhawalia added permitting inspection would render the litigation infructuous. Not raising the issue in same letter and spirit before the courts below would not divest the HC from examining whether the ED had the authority to look into documents barred by the international conventions between India and France. In the absence of bar, the ED could have easily obtained information from the Income Tax Department. — TNS
Appearance not required in trial court
The HC order will remain in operation during the pendency of the proceedings. The court also made it clear that Amarinder Singh, his son Raninder Singh and other petitioners are not required appear in the trial court
Punjab and Haryana High Court stays access to judicial file in Capt Amarinder Singh’s case
{$excerpt:n}
