The Supreme Court has directed the Centre to submit a comprehensive list of all pending Black Money Act cases across various High Courts before considering any transfer requests. According to latest reports from The Times of India, a bench of justices asked the Union government to first furnish a list of similar matters pending in various high courts before proceeding with the transfer proceedings. The court has declined to immediately transfer Anil Ambani's plea from Bombay High Court to Delhi High Court, citing broader implications of such a decision. This development comes after the Centre and Income Tax Department had approached the Supreme Court seeking the transfer and consolidation of petitions challenging the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015. During today's hearing, a Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana questioned the Centre's request to transfer the matter, with the Bench indicating it was hesitant to order a transfer and observed that a decision by the Delhi HC could subsequently enable the Centre to seek a decision from the Bombay HC.
The Centre and the Income Tax Department have approached the Supreme Court seeking the transfer and consolidation of petitions pending before various High Courts challenging the Black Money (Undisclosed Foreign Income and Assets) and Imposition of Tax Act, 2015. According to reports from Bar and Bench, the government has specifically sought the transfer of industrialist Anil Ambani's petitions from the Bombay High Court to the Delhi High Court, contending that the proceedings in Mumbai had made little progress. The Union government has particularly sought the transfer of Anil Dhirajlal Ambani's petitions out of the Bombay High Court, arguing that the matter has been put in 'cold storage' at the High Court. This case is now being heard as Union of India v Anil Dhirajlal Ambani. The Centre's counsel, Advocate Zoheb Hossain, submitted that the Bombay HC matter had gone into 'cold storage', while similar proceedings before the Delhi HC were 'ripe for hearing'. The Union government has particularly sought the transfer of Anil Dhirajlal Ambani's petitions out of the Bombay High Court, arguing that the matter has been put in 'cold storage' at the High Court. This case is now being heard as Union of India v Anil Dhirajlal Ambani. The Centre's counsel insisted that the pendency of these matters has huge revenue implications, adding that in 2026, the Bombay High Court had stayed coercive action against Anil Ambani under the Act. The government has now expanded this initiative to include bank fraud cases involving Anil Ambani and Reliance Communications from various High Courts to the Delhi High Court.
The development comes after the Bombay High Court on June 8, 2026 directed that no coercive action, including prosecution or penalty proceedings, be taken against Ambani pending disposal of his writ petition challenging provisions of the Black Money Act. A Division Bench of Justices B.P. Colabawalla and Firdosh P. Pooniwalla noted that similar constitutional challenges were pending before it and had received interim protection. Ambani had approached the Bombay HC in 2022, challenging the constitutional validity of provisions invoked against him over alleged undisclosed foreign assets. The proceedings relate to the Income Tax Department's allegation of ₹420 crore tax evasion concerning ₹814 crore allegedly held in two Swiss bank accounts. The Bombay High Court allowed his appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to proceed but barred coercive action pending the writ petition. The Centre's counsel, Advocate Zoheb Hossain, stressed the significant revenue implications of the pending cases, stating that 15-20 matters concerning the Act were pending before the Delhi HC and several others before different High Courts.
A Bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, along with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V Mohana, had earlier adjourned the matter after the Centre sought two weeks to compile details of similar cases pending before different High Courts. As reported by Bar and Bench, CJI Kant remarked that 'the cases can be decided by the Delhi High Court first and then the decisions can be cited before the Bombay High Court'. Senior Advocate Zoheb Hossain, appearing for the Income Tax authorities, said several challenges to the 2015 legislation were pending before the Delhi and Bombay High Courts. Hossain then requested that the matter be adjourned so that Solicitor General Tushar Mehta could argue the case. Accordingly, the matter was adjourned to a future date. The bench observed that a decision from the Delhi High Court would resolve the issue and told the counsel that efforts should focus on getting a verdict from the Delhi High Court, with the bench adding that 'then maybe you can request the Bombay High Court to decide'. When CJI Kant questioned Hussain saying, 'They will come and say that the Delhi High Court matters should be transferred to Bombay,' the central government counsel requested that 'the matter may be kept back' and sought two weeks to submit detailed information about the cases pending across different High Courts.
Seeking an adjournment, Hossain said Solicitor General Tushar Mehta would make submissions in the matter, given the significant revenue implications involved. According to Bar and Bench, Hossain said they will make a complete list of similar cases before different High Courts and submit it before the Court. The Income Tax authorities said they would place before the Supreme Court a comprehensive list of cases concerning the Black Money Act pending before various High Courts and seek their expeditious disposal, citing the wider public interest involved. The government has now expanded this initiative to include bank fraud cases involving Anil Ambani and Reliance Communications from various High Courts. The Centre's counsel requested the bench to follow the precedent of earlier transferring matters in other High Courts that challenged Section 171 of the GST Act to the Delhi High Court, following which the latter decided upon the matter. The government has also requested some sort of expeditious disposal because huge public interest is involved in these consolidated proceedings. With the latest Supreme Court directive, the Centre must now compile and submit this comprehensive list before any further transfer proceedings can proceed.
