Declare PFI as anti-national terror outfit, arrest its leaders: VHP

Mumbai, Feb 12: The Income Tax department's Criminal Investigation wing has identified 2,000 Indian citizens who hold properties in Dubai but had failed to declare it in their IT returns.

In its ongoing crackdown on black money, the agency has identified Indian citizens who purchased properties in Dubai but failed to declare and explain the source of funds used to purchase these properties.

In the past few years, people have used shell companies to route illegal money and buy overseas properties to evade income tax.

However, the tax department has now increased its efforts to track down those involved in major tax evasion cases.

The 2,000 persons and companies identified mainly include businessmen, top professionals, and government officials.

The IT department will initiate action against the accused under the Black Money Act.

Citizens who own properties outside the country but fail to declare the source of funds or income used for the purchase could be prosecuted under the Black Money Act.

Under Section FA (Foreign Assets) of the Income Tax Act, an individual has to declare purchase and ownership of properties, assets, companies owned outside the country while filing the income tax returns annually.

In the recent drive against black money, the IT department identified 2,000 Indian nationals who failed to provide information on the same while filing IT returns.

Of the 2,000 citizens owning properties in Dubai, around 600 could not furnish details regarding purchase details.

Those who haven't been able to explain the source of funds used for the purchase of properties could be prosecuted and their properties can be attached by the agency.

Other than the attachment of the property, they can face a monetary penalty up to 300 per cent of the property value and also face imprisonment under the Black Money Act.

The properties owned by Indians in Dubai raised red flags as this pattern of parking money is used by money launderers, smugglers, underworld gangsters and drug traffickers for making payments.

It is worth mentioning that of the 2,000 citizens identified, most are residing in Mumbai, followed by Kerala and Gujarat.

The clause under section FA (foreign Assets) came into effect in the year 2011-12 and it is mandatory for people owning properties outside India to declare it in their IT returns.

Those identified by IT department could also face action under FEMA (Foreign Exchange Management Act) by the Enforcement Directorate under Section 4.

Recently the Enforcement Directorate (ED) launched a crackdown on black money parked overseas by tracking and identifying immovable assets bought overseas by Indian nationals illegally.

The move is being carried out under rules laid down under Section 4 of FEMA (Foregn Exchange Manipulation Act), 1999. Section 4 of FEMA states that no person resident in India shall acquire, hold, own, possess or transfer any foreign exchange, foreign security or any immovable property situated outside India.

On January 17, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) conducted searches at the residence of a former chief engineer of Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) in connection with an inquiry related to FEMA.

In the raids, the ED officials recovered documents related to the purchase of a property in Dubai in an allegedly illegal manner.

The ex-BMC chief engineer was posted with some of the most crucial wings of the municipal corporation -- the building proposal department and development plan department.

The agency did not disclose the name of the ex-BMC chief engineer but it has been learnt that he had superannuated around seven years ago from the municipal corporation.

ED, in a statement, said incriminating documents with regard to illegal acquisition of a property held in Dubai was recovered during the search operation.

The former BMC chief engineer has stated that he had purchased the property in Dubai at 'Park Island, Bonaire Marsa, Dubai' for Rs 70 lakh in 2012. The property is held jointly in his name, his spouse and son.

The retired BMC officials could not furnish any documents which would help ascertain the value of the property and also could not provide details on how the payments were made to buy the property in Dubai.

The citizens identified by the IT department recently also adopted a similar route to buy property in Delhi. It remains to be seen how the income tax department plans to penalise them.

New Delhi, May 10: Congress leader Rahul Gandhi on Saturday demanded that Prime Minister Narendra Modi ensured audit of donations made to the PM-CARES Fund, and to share the details and the money spent with the people.

"The PM-CARES Fund has received huge contributions from PSUs and major public utilities like the Railways. It's important that the Prime Minister ensure the fund is audited and that the record of money received and spent is available to the public," he tweeted.

The #PmCares fund has received huge contributions from PSUs & major public utilities like the Railways.

It’s important that PM ensures the fund is audited & that the record of money received and spent is available to the public.

— Rahul Gandhi (@RahulGandhi) May 9, 2020
His remarks came amid reports that the central government is accumulating a huge sum of money in the Prime Minister's Citizen Assistance and Relief in Emergency Situations Fund set up as a corpus to fight novel coronavirus and that the amount spent will not be audited by the Comptroller and Auditor General.

The CAG office had clarified that since the fund is based on donations, it has no right to audit a charitable organisation.

On Friday, Rahul Gandhi told the media that the PM-CARES Fund should be audited and people of the country should know about the donors and the donations made.

In the wake of Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) UN High Commissioner, Michele Bachelet, has filed an intervention in the Supreme Court petition challenging the constitutionality of the Citizenship Amendment Act, as she is critical of CAA. Responding to her, India’s Foreign Minister S. Jai Shanker strongly rebutted her criticism, saying that the body (UNHCR) has been wrong and is blind to the problem of cross border terrorism. The issue on hand is the possibility of scores of people, mainly Muslims, being declared as stateless. The problem at hand is the massive exercise of going through the responses/documents from over 120 crore of Indian population and screening documents, which as seen in Assam, yield result which are far from truthful or necessary.

The issue of CAA has been extensively debated and despite heavy critique of the same by large number of groups and despite the biggest mass opposition ever to any move in Independent India, the Government is determined on going ahead with an exercise which is reminiscent of the dreaded regimes which are sectarian and heartless to its citizens, which have indulged in extinction of large mass of people on grounds of citizenship, race etc. The Foreign minister’s assertion is that it is a matter internal to India, where India’s sovereignty is all that matters! As far as sovereignty is concerned we should be clear that in current times any sovereign power has to consider the need to uphold the citizenship as per the principle of non-discrimination which is stipulated in Art.26 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political (ICCPR) rights.

Can such policies, which affect large number of people and are likely to affect their citizenship be purely regarded as ‘internal’? With the World turning into a global village, some global norms have been formulated during last few decades. The norms relate to Human rights and migrations have been codified. India is also signatory to many such covenants in including ICCPR, which deals with the norms for dealing with refugees from other countries. One is not talking of Chicago speech of Swami Vivekanand, which said that India’s greatness has been in giving shelter to people from different parts of the World; one is also not talking of the Tattariaya Upanishad’s ‘Atithi Devovhav’ or ‘Vasudhaiva Kutumbkam’ from Mahaupanishad today.

What are being talked about are the values and opinions of organizations which want to ensure to preserve of Human rights of all people Worldwide. In this matter India is calling United Nations body as ‘foreign party’; having no locus standi in the case as it pertains to India’s sovereignty. The truth is that since various countries are signatories to UN covenants, UN bodies have been monitoring the moves of different states and intervening at legal level as Amicus (Friend of the Court) to the courts in different countries and different global bodies. Just to mention some of these, UN and High Commissioner for Human Rights has often submitted amicus briefs in different judicial platforms. Some examples are their intervention in US Supreme Court, European Court of Human Rights, International Criminal Court, and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. These are meant to help the Courts in areas where UN bodies have expertise.

 Expertise on this has been jointly formulated by various nations. These interventions also remind the nations as to what global norms have been evolved and what are the obligations of individual states to the values which have evolved over a period of time. Arvind Narrain draws our attention to the fact that, “commission has intervened in the European Court of Human Rights in cases involving Spain and Italy to underscore the principle of non-refoulement, which bars compulsory expulsion of illegal migrants… Similarly, the UN has intervened in the International Criminal Court in a case against the Central African Republic to explicate on the international jurisprudence on rape as a war crime.”

From time to time organizations like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have been monitoring the status of Human rights of different countries. This puts those countries in uncomfortable situation and is not welcome by those establishments. How should this contradiction between ‘internal matter’, ‘sovereignty’ and the norms for Human rights be resolved? This is a tough question at the time when the freedom indices and democratic ethos are sliding downwards all over the world. In India too has slid down on the scale of these norms.

In India we can look at the intervention of UN body from the angle of equality and non discrimination. Democratic spirit should encourage us to have a rethink on the matters which have been decided by the state. In the face of the greatest mass movement of Shaheen bagh, the state does need to look inwards and give a thought to international morality, the spirit of global family to state the least.

The popular perception is that when Christians were being persecuted in Kandhmal the global Christian community’s voice was not strong enough. Currently in the face of Delhi carnage many a Muslim majority countries have spoken. While Mr. Modi claims that his good relations with Muslim countries are a matter of heartburn to the parties like Congress, he needs to relook at his self gloating. Currently Iran, Malaysia, Indonesia and many Muslim majority countries have spoken against what Modi regime is unleashing in India. Bangladesh, our neighbor, has also seen various protests against the plight of Muslims in India. More than the ‘internal matter’ etc. what needs to be thought out is the moral aspect of the whole issue. We pride ourselves in treading the path of morality. What does that say in present context when while large section of local media is servile to the state, section of global media has strongly brought forward what is happening to minorities in India.   

The hope is that Indian Government wakes up to its International obligations, to the worsening of India’s image in the World due to CAA and the horrific violence witnessed in Delhi.