SC calls black money plunder of nation

SC calls black money plunder of nation

The Supreme Court on Wednesday expressed displeasure over the government's reluctance in coming forward with full information on the black money stashed by Indians in foreign banks, saying keeping national wealth abroad amounted to "plunder" of the country.

"It is a pure and simple theft of the national money. We are talking about mind-boggling crime. We are not on the niceties of various treaties," remarked a bench comprising justices B Sudershan Reddy and S S Nijjar.

The remark by the bench came when Solicitor general Gopal Subramanium was explaining various steps taken by the government under the Double Taxation Avoidance Act.

The court was unhappy that the government filed an affidavit restricting information relating to the money deposited by 26 persons in Liechtenstein Bank in Germany.

"This is all the information you have or you have something more?," the bench asked.

"We are talking about the huge money. That is the plunder of nation," the bench remarked.

The bench also expressed anguish over the fact that the affidavit filed in a sealed cover and referring to 26 names, had been signed by a mere director-level officer and said it should have been signed by the finance secretary himself.

It reflects the "seriousness" of the government, the bench remarked sarcastically.

"We thought one person who must have been authorised to file the affidavit should have been the finance secretary," said the bench.

The solicitor general, however, tried to pacify the bench saying that it is an established procedure that whenever an affidavit is filed, it is filed with the concurrence at the highest level.

Subramium also accepted that the figure about the black money stashed in foreign banks is mind-boggling, but expressed limitation in sharing all informations about it saying that the authorities have to go on the basis of mutual agreement with various countries where the money is stashed in banks.

The bench also questioned the government for limiting the information provided by it only to the Liechtenstein Bank.

"Why are you limiting the matter to the Liechtenstein Bank only," the bench asked, when the solicitor general said he was making submissions on the averment made in the writ petition.