New Delhi: Liquor baron Vijay Mallya on Tuesday drew flak from the Supreme Court for not making full disclosure of his overseas properties, which asked him to furnish complete details of his assets abroad within a month.
A bench of Justices Kurian Joseph and R F Nariman also pulled up Mallya for not giving details of USD 40 million which he had allegedly received from British firm Diageo in February this year, saying it was of the "prima facie view" that proper disclosure as per its earlier order was not made.
"We are prima facie of the view that the report has not made a proper disclosure in respect of our order of April 7 directing to make complete disclosure of assests and in particular, the receipt of USD 40 million as to when it was received and how it has been dealt till date," the bench said.
The apex court asked Mallya to make a detailed disclosure of his assets abroad like he had done while disclosing his properties in India and that too, within four weeks.
It said that the details Mallya filed earlier in his disclosure statement about his foreign properties do not have reference of cash in hand or bank details and details of assets like he has done for those in India.
At the outset, the bench observed that if Mallya wanted to come clean he would have told the court about the USD 40 million which was a huge amount deposited in the bank account.
"We are not happy the way you (Mallya) filed your statement," the bench observed, adding that it cannot find any details of USD 40 million or where it has been expended, in the report furnished to the apex court by the liquor baron.
"USD 40 million dollar was a cash in hand and you (Mallya) have not told us what you did with that amount. Our direction was disclosure of assets and cash in hand. Nobody knows what happened with USD 40 million," the court said.
During the hearing, Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for consortium of banks, said Mallya has taken the court for a ride and has tried to deceive the court by not giving complete details of his assets.
"Point is what was shown to the court was assets and properties but he (Mallya) did not tell to the court about the USD 40 million he received from Diageo. He has taken court for a ride by not giving complete details," Rohatgi said.
He said that as per Supreme Court rules after a contempt notice is issued and served upon him, he has to appear before the court. But by filing a recall petition against the contempt notice, he has tried to buy time, he said. (More) PTI MNL ABA SJK RKS
Comments
0 comment