Back
PRATHIBA M. SINGH
Manoj Vasudev Pardasany – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Prathiba M. Singh, J.(Oral)
1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.
2. At the outset, Ld. counsel for the Respondent-Income Tax department submits that on the last date, the counter affidavit was on record and that he had instructions in the matter. The presence of the Income Tax official is accordingly exempted.
3. The present petition has been filed by Mr. Manoj Vasudev Pardasany seeking quashing of the Look Out Circular ('LOC') issued against him. The Respondents in the present case are the Principal Director of Income Tax (Inv.)-1, Income Tax Department and other concerned authorities of the Union of India i.e., the Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Secretary, Ministry of Home and the Foreigners Regional Registration Officer.
4. The brief facts in this case are that a search and seizure operation was conducted by the Income Tax department on 1st November, 2019 against the Petitioner. Thereafter, a LOC is stated to have been issued qua the Petitioner. After the search and seizure was conducted, proceedings were initiated against the Petitioner both under the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015 (hereinafter 'Bla
The central legal point established is the requirement for valid grounds and periodic review of Look Out Circulars (LOCs) as per the Office Memorandum, and the absence of prosecution under the releva....
The issuance of Look-Out Circulars must be justified by valid grounds such as cognizable offences or compelling economic interests; mere allegations without formal charges do not suffice.
The issuance of a LOC must be based on exceptional circumstances and supported by substantial evidence. Mere suspicion is not sufficient to curtail an individual's right to travel abroad.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a preventive/detentive Look Out Circular (LOC) leading to the detention of the petitioner was unwarranted, and the petitioner should only be s....
The court emphasized the authority of the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) and the necessity of the Petitioner's presence for effective investigation into the affairs of Gitanjali Gems Limit....
The issuance and continuation of a Look-Out Circular must be justified by compelling reasons, specifically regarding flight risk or evading justice; lack of fresh evidence can render it arbitrary.
Look Out Circulars cannot be issued without a cognizable offense, violating fundamental rights, as established by the relevant Office Memorandum.
The issuance of Look Out Circular against a UK citizen was unconstitutional, infringing on the right to travel without due cause, lacking sufficient grounds under the governing Office Memorandum.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
