TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 1323X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... omic interests of India? - HELD THAT:- Both the parents of the Petitioner have filed their affidavits. The said affidavits of assets, show that the parents of the Petitioner live in Delhi. It is clear from the same that the father of the Petitioner has various properties in India and is engaged in the clothing business by the name of M/s Chitkara Cloth House. The parents of the Petitioner along with the Petitioner s sister, collectively, own immovable properties worth close to Rs. 40 crores as can be made out from the affidavits. Petitioner s wife is stated to be a practicing lawyer in Delhi. The Petitioner s brother is also an entrepreneur based in Delhi. Petitioner s parents have agreed to offer the properties as a security for the quashing of the LOC against the Petitioner, by filing affidavits before the Court. The situation that emerges from the above discussion is that the Petitioner has deliberately concealed the existence of a company in Hong Kong, which was under his control. He did not divulge the details of the same despite being provided with repeated opportunities to do so. As substantial transactions have been carried out in the bank account of the said Hong Kon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rned. - JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH For the Petitioner Through: Mr. Akhil Sibal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Gaurav Gupta Mr. Sharan Mehta, Advocates. (M:7827890225) For the Respondents Through: Mr. Anurag Ahluwalia, CGSC with Mr. Tarveen Singh Nanda, Govt. Pleader, for R- 1 to 3. (M: 9555551536) Mr. Abhishek Maratha Mr. Akshat Singh, Advocates for Income tax Department. (M: 9810819178) JUDGMENT PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J. Brief Facts 1. The present petition has been filed by the Petitioner Mr. Prateek Chitkara, holder of Indian Passport nos. Z2303946 (valid until 31st January 2023) and Z6212946, praying for the quashing of, and seeking the reasons for, the issuance and continuation of the Look-Out Circular (hereinafter LOC ) issued against him at the behest of the Income Tax Department. 2. The Petitioner is an Indian citizen who claims to have deep roots in society, whose parents, wife and brother permanently reside in India. He is an educated and qualified young entrepreneur, who has built various well-recognised businesses including in the hospitality, jewellery and electronics sector. 3. According to the Petitioner, in recognition of his entr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed entity, namely, M/s Wise Sharp Tech Group Limited (hereinafter WSTGL ) which was incorporated in Hong Kong on 13th March 2014. The said company is stated to be struck off on 27th July 2018. 7. Further, information regarding transactions to the tune of about Rs. 300 crores undertaken in the bank account of the Hong Kong based company, was also received from the Competent Authority of Hong Kong. It was found that the Petitioner was the authorized signatory in the said bank account. This information had not been declared by the Petitioner in his income tax returns. 8. It is claimed by the Petitioner, that he has been travelling abroad regularly, for both personal and professional reasons, especially between the years 2016 to 2018, without any hindrance. 9. The Petitioner s case is that, on 18th January 2019, while boarding a flight from Delhi to Dubai to meet his sister and niece, he was stopped by the immigration authorities at the Delhi International Airport. The Petitioner was orally informed by the concerned officer, that a LOC had been issued against him and thus, he would not be permitted to fly out of the country. His request for a copy of the said LOC was also de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Kong company and the control of the company to Mr. Sachiv Batra, without any written agreement to the said effect. 18. He further stated that he had also shared the net-banking passwords and other details with Mr. Sachiv Batra. However, the Petitioner was unable to provide any evidence in support of these statements to the Income Tax Authorities. 19. On 22nd October, 2021, a show cause notice under Section 10(1) of the Black Money Act, 2015 was issued to the Petitioner. 20. Finally, on 30th March, 2022, an Assessment Order under Section 10(3) of the Black Money Act, 2015 was passed. 21. As per the Assessment Order dated 30th March 2022, a total sum of Rs. 187,85,00,650.10/- was assessed as being the undisclosed income of the Petitioner over which he was liable to pay 30% tax in terms of Section 3(1) of the Black Money Act, 2015. Further, a demand for an amount of Rs. 56,35,50,210/- was raised under the Black Money Act, 2015 and penalty proceedings under Section 41 of the Black Money Act, 2015 were initiated against the Petitioner vide the said order. 22. In view of the said assessment order, the Petitioner wrote another representation to Respondent No.4 dated 12th A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the LOC dates back to 2018 which is when the show cause notice had been issued and the investigation had commenced under the Black Money Act, 2015. No other grounds appear to be the basis for the issuance of the LOC, except the pending investigation under the Black Money Act, 2015. C. That the Petitioner having cooperated with the authorities, the investigation under the Black Money Act, 2015 having been concluded, and the demand under the same having been raised, the mere pendency of the appeal against the assessment order cannot be a ground to curtail the travel of the Petitioner. Ld. Senior Counsel further submits, that in view of the fact that there is no investigation pending against the Petitioner and that the alleged undisclosed income, which is now the subject matter of proceedings before the Income Tax Department, could at best lead to the imposition of some taxes or penalty. However, four years have gone by since the issuance of the LOC and mere recovery of cash and jewellery etc. would not be sufficient to presume that this is black money. D. That the ground, that the amounts would be liable to be recovered under income tax proceedings cannot lead to the iss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erties in India, the details of which have been set out in Paras 3 and 4 of the affidavit. It is further elucidated by the ld. Senior Counsel, that the Petitioner s family is a well-established business family and that all the immediate family members of the Petitioner reside in India. He further submits that the affidavits of the Petitioners parents have also been placed on record to show that his parents are willing to stand as surety in support of the plea of quashing of the LOC against the Petitioner. J. That the reasons for the issuance of the LOC ought to be communicated to the Petitioner who is entitled to a copy of the LOC at least after he has been stopped from travelling abroad in curtailment of his fundamental right to travel. Ld. Senior Counsel relies upon two judgements of the Karnataka High Court and the High Court of Telangana in W.P.(C) 12185/2022 titled Harshavardhana Rao K. v. Union of India Ors. [Decided on 24th August 2022] and W.P.(C) 14746/2022 titled Kondaveeti Papamma v. Union of India and Ors. [Decided on 28th April 2022], respectively, in support of this position. K. That the issuance of directions under the OMs would not constitute procedur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y Act, 2015. However, in the present case the Petitioner has deliberately avoided the declaration of the assets. D. That it is clear from a reading of the notice of demand itself that, the Petitioner had a bank account of M/s Wise Sharp Tech Group Ltd. where he held the entire shareholding. Ld. Senior Counsel submits that, it was also found that his phone numbers and other contact details were given as the contact person for the account holder. E. That a perusal of the assessment order dated 30th March 2022, passed under the Black Money Act, 2015 as also the statements made by the Petitioner would show that, his replies to questions asked by the Income Tax Department, were completely evasive. Mr. Maratha goes on to state that the various portions of the assessment order as also the statements of the Petitioner would show that the Petitioner has refused to cooperate in the investigation and a large sum of foreign currency has been credited in the bank account of the Hong Kong company, in which the Petitioner had owned the complete shareholding. F. That under the Black Money Act, 2015, an appeal is maintainable under Section 15, if filed within the time specified there ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... utstanding. One set under the Black Money Act, 2015 and the other set under the Income Tax Act, 1961. It is submitted by ld. Senior Counsel that the LOC itself is based purely on the demand of approximately Rs. 56.35 crores raised under the Black Money Act, 2015 and that none of the other amounts as computed in paragraphs 8 and 9 of the written submissions by the Respondent form the basis of the LOC. B. That the penalty of approximately Rs. 169.06 crores imposed under the Black Money Act, 2015 has been set aside by the Ld. Division Bench vide its order dated 12th April 2023. Mr. Sibal further submits that, insofar as the main demand under the Black Money Act, 2015 is concerned, the Petitioner had already filed an appeal which has been lodged within the prescribed time on 20th April 2023. C. That the interpretation of Rule 6(4) of the Black Money Rules, 2015 would entail that only if any liability is not objected to by the assessee, would the same have to be deposited in order to admit the appeal under Section 15 of the Black Money Act, 2015, and not otherwise. D. That an LOC cannot be issued by the Government in every case of Black Money Act proceedings. He submits t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r has been set aside qua the Petitioner, the same was merely done on the basis of the principles of natural justice. He submits that the Income Tax Department has again issued summons to the Petitioner to appear in the month of May. However, the Petitioner has chosen not to appear which shows that there is complete non-cooperation by the Petitioner which is reason enough to justify the issuance of the LOC. Analysis and Findings 32. Look-out-Circulars (LOCs) are circulars which were historically issued by the Government in order to keep a watch on the arrival/departure of individuals, at the behest of law enforcement agencies. With the passage of time however, the purpose of LOCs has expanded, and LOCs were issued in the larger public interest, to ensure that such individuals who are suspected to have committed serious crimes or indulged in anti-national conduct such as terrorism etc. do not escape from investigations as also punishment by courts, by leaving the country. 33. In recent times, the purpose of LOCs has been extended to include individuals alleged to have committed economic crimes, or who may have indulged in scams and siphoning- off private and public fun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng guidelines are hereby laid down regarding issuance of LOCs in respect of Indian citizens and foreigners: a) The request for opening an LOC would be made by the originating agency to the Deputy Director, Bureau of Immigration (BoI), East Block-VIII, R. K. Puram, New Delhi-66 (Telefax: 011-2619244) in the Proforma enclosed. b) The request for opening of LOC must invariably be issued with the approval of an officer not below the rank of (i) Deputy Secretary to the Government of India; or (ii) Joint Secretary in the State Government; or (iii) District Magistrate of the District concerned; or (iv) Superintendent of Police (SP) of the District concerned; or (v) SP in CBI or an officer of equivalent level working in CBI; or (vi) Zonal Director in Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) or an officer of equivalent level (including Assistant Director (Ops.) in Headquarters of NCB); or (vii) Deputy Commissioner or an officer of equivalent level in the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence or Central Board of Direct Taxes or Central board of Excise and Customs; or (viii) Assistant Director of IB/BoI; or (ix) Deputy Secretary of R AW; or (x) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th more than one year validity shall be deemed to have lapsed unless the agencies concerned specifically request BoI for continuation of the names in the LOC. However, this provision for automatic deletion after one year shall not be applicable in following cases: a. Ban-entry LOCs issued for watching arrival of wanted persons (which have a specific duration); b. loss of passport LOCs (which ordinarily continue till the validity of the document); c. LOCs regarding impounding of passports; d. LOCs issued at behest of Courts and Interpol j) In exceptional cases, LOCs can be issued without complete parameters and/or case details against CI suspects, terrorists, anti-national elements, etc. in larger national interest. k) The following procedure will be adopted in case statutory bodies like the NCW, the NHRC and the National Commission for Protection of Children s Rights request for preventing any Indian/foreigner from leaving India. Such requests along with full necessary facts are first to be brought to the notice of law enforcement agencies like the police. The S.P. concerned will then make the request for issuance of an LOC upon an assessment of the si ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Competent Authority, the following amendment is hereby issued: - Amendment- Read as: In exceptional cases, LOCs can be issued even in such cases, as would not be covered by the guidelines above, whereby departure of a person from India may be declined at the request of any of the authorities mentioned in clause (b) of the above- referred OM, if it appears to such authority based on inputs received that the departure of such person is detrimental to the sovereignty or security or integrity of India or that the same is detrimental to the bilateral relations with any country or to the strategic and/or economic interest of India or if such person is allowed to leave, he may potentially indulge in an act of terrorism or offences against the State and/or that such departure ought not to be permitted in the larger public interest at any given point in time. Instead of: In exceptional cases, LOCs can be issued without complete parameters and/or case details against CI suspects, terrorists, anti-national elements, etc.in larger national interest 43. The above clause was to replace clause 8(j) of the OM of 2010 which provided as under: - In exceptio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 09.2018 on the above mentioned subject and to say that request of the Department of Financial Services, Ministry of Finance to include Chairman (State Bank of India)/Managing Directors and Chief Executive Officers (MDs and CEOs) of all other Public Sector banks in the list of officers who can make a request for opening of Look Out Circulars (LOCs) has been considered in this Ministry. 2. It has accordingly been decided with the approval of the Competent Authority, to add the following as sub-para (xv) in para 8(b) of this Ministry s OM October 2010: - (xv)Chairman/Managing Directors/Chief Executive of all Public Sector Banks. 46. Finally, all the above- mentioned amendments were consolidated into the OM of 2010 and the OM dated 22nd February 2021 was issued, containing the consolidated guidelines for issuance of LOCs, which is presently under challenge. 47. The question before this court is, whether Clause L of the OM of 2021 would be legally valid, especially in respect of the phrase detrimental to the economic interests of India and in respect of other clauses which permit indefinite continuation of LOCs, non-communication of reasons either prior or po ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it and under what circumstances, the subordinate courts can intervene? The questions are answered as under: A. Recourse to LOC can be taken by investigating agency in cognizable offences under IPC or other penal laws, where the accused was deliberately evading arrest or not appearing in the trial court despite NBWs and other coercive measures and there was likelihood of the accused leaving the country to evade trial/arrest 52. In W.P.(C) 774/2015 titled Priya Parameswaran Pillai v. Union of India Ors. [2015VIIAD(Delhi)10] [Date of decision: 12th March 2015], the ld. Single Judge observed that merely because there were some revenue implications due to notices issued by the Income Tax Authorities, the alleged violations of tax laws were not demonstrative of being inimical to the economic interests of the country. Thus, the LOC was quashed in this case. 53. The ld. Division Bench of Madras High Court in Karti P. Chidambaram v. Bureau of Immigration, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India and Ors. [W.P. No. 21305/2017, decided on 23rd July, 2018] [2018 SCC Online Mad 2229] considered the OM s of 2000 and 2010 and observed that LOCs are subject t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dia. 29. In such context, it does not lie in the mouth of the petitioner to say that his rights of travel touch his personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Article 21(6) is a sufficient handle to curtail such right, since the individual right of the writ petitioner has to give way to the public interest of India. 57. In Mr. Chaitya Shah v. Union of India Ors. [2021:BHC- AS:16392-DB], a ld. Division Bench of the Bombay High Court was dealing with a case where a substantial amount had been invested in a company called M/s Gitanjali Gems of Rs. 50 crores and various banking operations and transfer of money was found. The Court observed that the words economic interest of India and larger business interest are not empty words. The relevant paragraph of the said judgment is extracted below: xxx xxx xxx 32. In the present case the SFIO is investigating into the affairs of the aforementioned companies and its investigation overrides the investigations by other investigating agencies. Therefore recourse to LOC was not unfounded as the Petitioner has definite connection with the investigation as discussed hereinabove. From the facts of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 having been commenced against the Petitioner. The Petitioner did not hold any foreign assets and any undisclosed assets. 60. In Vikas Chaudhary (supra), the Court primarily dealt with the question as to whether an LOC could be interfered with in a writ petition and what would be the circumstances which could be held to be detrimental to the economic interests of the country. 61. The Court noted that the phrase detrimental to the economic interests of India was introduced for the first time in the Office Memorandum (hereinafter OM ) dated 5th December, 2017. The said phrase did not exist in the previous OM dated 27th October, 2010. However, it continues to exist in all the subsequent OM s. In this context, the Court observed as under: xxx xxx xxx 36. However, the matter does not end here and the crucial issue which needs to be now determined is as to whether the Clause detrimental to the economic interests of India introduced vide the amendment in 2017, with a specific rider that the same would be used only in exceptional circumstances, could have, in the facts of the present case, been resorted to, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ow: Mr. Zoheb next contends that assessment for two Assessment Years being 2018-19 and 2019-20 for the individual is complete while the same is pending with respect to the companies. Ongoing investigation has revealed that there are proposed additions upwards of Rs. 14,83,93,68,371/- and penalties upwards of Rs. 2,66,13,000/-. It is also submitted that the Appellant is investigating into the offences under the Black money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015 and has submitted FT TR references to the authorities in Dubai and under special enactments such as this Act, an FIR is not a pre-requisite for commencement of the investigation and on a complaint being filed, it is treated as a complaint case. It is thus urged by the learned counsel for the, Appellant that if the impugned judgment quashing the LOC is not stayed, grave prejudice shall be caused to the investigation and if Respondent No.1 is permitted to travel abroad, it shall be detrimental to the core economic interests of the country and will be a contravention of the very object for which OMs dated 05.12.2017 and 22.02.2021 have been issued. It is emphasised that the OM dated 05. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... can be raised by way of a writ petition and the Court has to determine whether the extraordinary writ jurisdiction is to be exercised or not in favour of a person seeking relief. While LOCs cannot be resorted to for every case involving a loan transaction, the facts of the present case reveal that a large amount of public funds of public sector banks and financial institutions are at stake. The question as to whether the LOC would be valid or not would have to be determined in the facts and circumstances surrounding each case. xxx xxx xxx 30. In view of the above discussed factual and legal position, as the funds amounting to approximately Rs. 1,400 Rs. 1,700 crores belonging to public sector banks and financial institutions are at stake, it would be in the larger public interest as also in the economic interest of India to not exercise discretion in favour of the Petitioner. Thus the LOC against the Petitioner is not liable to be quashed, at this stage. 66. In Rahul Surana v. The Serious Fraud Investigation Office, Chennai and Ors. [W.P.No. 2477/2020, decided on 7th March, 2022], the Madras High Court observed that though the investigation had commenced, no concre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... utiously moreso when the petitioner s son has not returned to India for the last two years and is not co-operating. Thus, considering the allegations of siphoning off huge amounts and the investigation under the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign income and assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015 being at initial stage I am not inclined to suspend the LOC at this stage. The petition is thus dismissed. Pending application(s), also stands disposed of. 72. In some cases, the Court has allowed permission to travel after adequate security has been provided. (See - Ratul Puri v. Union of India Ors.) 73. Recently, in W.P.(C) 5674/2023 titled Apurve Goel v. Bureau of Immigration Anr vide judgement dated 19th September 2023, the court quashed an LOC holding that there must be proper application of mind by the authorities on the facts of each case before the opening of a LOC. The operative portion of the same is extracted below: 25. A perusal of the above cases shows that there has to be proper application of mind by the authorities on the facts of each case before opening of a Look Out Circular which not only impedes the right to travel but also cast an aspersion/stig ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g Respondent is only the custodian of LOCs, who maintains LOCs and takes action against LOC subjects at Immigration Check Posts at the behest of originating agency. 75. Further, Respondent No. 2 and 3 have submitted that the guidelines contained in the OM of 2021, do not violate the fundamental rights of a person under Article 21 of the Constitution of India as these are guiding principles that have to be ensured while opening/issuing the LOC. Being an executive function, it is within the domain of the Union of India to issue such guidelines for the effective and smooth discharge of various government functions. Additionally, such guidelines are also important to avoid any undue/ unreasonable action against any person who is not covered by the OM of 2021. 76. Reference is made to Para 6(J) of the OM of 2021 to explain that the LOC would remain open unless a deletion request is received from the Originator itself who must review the LOCs opened at its behest on a quarterly or annual basis and submit the proposals to delete the LOC, if any, immediately after such a review. 77. It is also submitted by the Respondents that the practice of issuance of LOCs has constitutional, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce of a FIR/ECIR by authorities such as the Enforcement Directorate etc. and cooperation rendered by the Petitioner in the said investigation. [See Deept Sarup Aggarwal v. Union of India Anr. [2020: DHC: 3439]] v) Proceedings under the Black Money Act, 2015 having been initiated and the facts indicate undisclosed foreign income and assets, as also foreign transactions. [See Vikas Chaudhary v. Union of India Ors. [2022 SCC Online Del 97]; See Income Tax Dept. v. Vikas Chaudhary Ors. [2022 SCC Online Del 3376]] vi) Loan taken from a bank for a family business and its impact on the education of a young person in the family, who is a guarantor in respect of the said loan. [See Noor Paul v. Union of India Ors. [2022 SCC Online P H 3408]; See Bank of India v. Noor Paul Ors. [Special Leave to Appeal (C). 7733/2022]] vii) Allegations of commission of offences under the IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and whether a person is accused in the same. [See Karti P. Chidambaram v. Bureau of Immigration [2018 SCC Online Mad 2229]] viii) Subject not accused of any offence on account of being a minor at the time of the commission of the alleged of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al Ors. v. Regional Director (E), Ministry of Corporate Affairs, Kolkata [WP(C) 9502/2022 dated 25th July 2022] ; Dhruv Tewari v. Directorate of Enforcement [2022 SCC Online Del 1893]] 82. The term detrimental to economic interest used in the OM is not defined. Some cases may require the issuance of a LOC, if it is found that the conduct of the individuals concerned affects public interest as a whole or has an adverse impact on the economy. Squandering of public money, siphoning off amounts taken as loans from banks, defrauding depositors, indulging in hawala transactions may have a greater impact as a whole which may justify the issuance of LOCs. However, issuance of LOCs cannot be resorted to in each and every case of bank loan defaults or credit facilities availed for business etc. Citizens ought not to be harassed and deprived of their liberty to travel, merely due to their participation in a business, whether in a professional or a non-executive capacity. The circumstances have to reveal a higher gravity and a larger impact on the country. 83. The various decisions considered above reveal that the issues as to the legality and validity of issuance of LOCs under the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... come Tax Act, 1961, the statements which have been made by him, do point towards concealment. It can be seen from the record that, the Petitioner claimed to have obtained a loan from one Mr. Jason Cheng but had not repaid the same for getting the control of the Hong Kong company. 92. When confronted with the transactions worth Rs. 300 crores which were carried out in the bank account of the Hong Kong company, the Petitioner tried to evade the same and blamed one Mr. Sachiv Batra who is a resident of Paschim Vihar, New Delhi, for undertaking the said transactions. The Petitioner s stand in his statements was that he had accepted Rs. 2,00,000/- as cash sale consideration in terms of an oral agreement to transfer the title to the shares in the company, as well as the control of the company, to Mr. Sachiv Batra. He further stated that he had also shared the net-banking passwords and other details with Mr. Sachiv Batra, which allowed him to operate the bank account. 93. During the course of investigation, the Petitioner s standard reply to most questions was that he was not able to recall anything. The allegation of non-cooperation, concealment and suppression of information does ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015 [ 2015 Act ]. According to those respondents a demand of Rs. 5,63,55,210/- was raised and is still outstanding against the petitioner. While the aforesaid orders passed by the Assessing Authority presently form subject matter of a statutory appeal which has been preferred by the petitioner, the Court deems it apposite to notice the following undisclosed foreign assets which were found to have been held by the petitioner and which had led to the initiation of proceedings under the 2015 Act. Those facts as duly recorded in the course of proceedings taken under the 2015 Act read as under: - 11. Based on the above facts of the case, it is clear the Mr. Prateek Chitkara was holder of the following undisclosed foreign assets : Sl. Asset Relevant Financial Years Amount/Value Amount (INR) 1. Total Credits in the account no. 582-288742-838 with HSBC Bank (Hong Kong) 2014-19 USD 4,19,48,161.87 HKD 1,705.69 EUR 1,13,951.69 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e filed their affidavits. The said affidavits of assets, show that the parents of the Petitioner live in Delhi. It is clear from the same that the father of the Petitioner has various properties in India and is engaged in the clothing business by the name of M/s Chitkara Cloth House. The parents of the Petitioner along with the Petitioner s sister, collectively, own immovable properties worth close to Rs. 40 crores as can be made out from the affidavits. 102. The Petitioner s wife is stated to be a practicing lawyer in Delhi. The Petitioner s brother is also an entrepreneur based in Delhi. 103. The Petitioner s parents have agreed to offer the properties as a security for the quashing of the LOC against the Petitioner, by filing affidavits before the Court. 104. The situation that emerges from the above discussion is that the Petitioner has deliberately concealed the existence of a company in Hong Kong, which was under his control. He did not divulge the details of the same despite being provided with repeated opportunities to do so. Furthermore, substantial transactions have been carried out in the bank account of the said Hong Kong based entity, which was also not reveal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0), 16/2(7-16), 17(8-0), 24(8-0), 25/1(7-16), 56//4/2(6-16), 5/1/2/ (5-2), 5/3(1-7) situated at Village Chappar Mangoorpur, H, B.No. 443, sub Tehsil Mustafabad, Jagdhari, Distt. Yamuna Nagar as per Jamabandi for Year 2006-2007. B) One Residential House bearing No. 348-L, Situated at Sarni Chowk, Model Town, Yamuna Nagar, Tehsil Jagadhari, Distt. Yamuna Nagar, admeasuring 71ft. x 50ft., wherein 4 rooms, one kitchen, one bathroom, store, toilet constructed. C) One Plot measuring 2k-0M, approximately around 2000 sq. yards, being part and parcel of Khewat no.808 khatuni no. 1054 bearing khasara no. 33/23/2 situated at mauja mustafabad, HB NO. 444, Sub Tehsil Mustafabad, Tehsil Jagadhari, District Yamuna Nagar vide Jamabandi for year 2002-2003. D) One Shop, Situated at Mauja Mustafabad, Tehsil Jagadhari, Distt. Yamuna Nagar, admeasuring 27ft. X 18.5ft. E) One Shop, Situated at Mauja Mustafabad, Tehsil Jagadhari, Distt. Yamuna Nagar, admeasuring 10ft x 8ft. F) One Residential House, Situated at Mauja Mustafabad, Tehsil Jagadhari, Distt. Yamuna Nagar being part and parcel of House No.44, admeasuring 40ft x 32ft. G) Land admeasuring: 1 Bigha 4 Biswas and 7 Bis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
