NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Wednesday stood firm by its three-year-old direction to the Centre to set up a Special Investigation Team headed by a retired SC judge and comprising officers from investigating agencies to devise the mode and manner to bring back black money stashed by Indian in foreign banks.The Centre had sought recall of that portion of the SC's July 4, 2011 judgment by a bench of Justices B Sudershan Reddy and S S Nijjar which directed setting up of an SIT headed by a retired judge.The application was heard by a bench of Justices Altamas Kabir and Nijjar as Justice Reddy had retired by then. While Justice Kabir agreed with the Centre, Justice Nijjar stood by the judgment he co-authored with Justice Reddy. To resolve the stalemate arising from the split verdict, the application was posted on Wednesday before a bench comprising Justices H L Dattu, Ranjana P Desai and Madan B Lokur.The three-judge bench was highly critical of the Centre's application and wanted to know how it would serve the "interests of justice", as pleaded by the UPA government, if the apex court agreed to drop its direction for setting up of an SIT to recover black money.Solicitor general Mohan Parasaran said it would not be appropriate for the court to replace the existing framework for recovery of black money with a retired SC judge-headed SIT and argued that foreign countries and their banks would claim sovereign immunity not to cooperate with the SIT.But the bench said, "The Supreme Court's July 4, 2011 judgment was a reaction to non-initiation of any tangible steps by the government in last 65 years to recover the black money stashed abroad. There had been no attempt, or a failed attempt, to recover the black money. That is why the Supreme Court stepped in. You people had no inclination to do it. So we set up a body to take steps to recover the black money." The bench also lauded the effort of noted lawyer Ram Jethmalani in bringing the issue before the court."The feel of this court was that no effort was made. Unaccounted monies lying abroad had not been attempted to be brought back. The names of those who had stashed illegal money abroad had not been disclosed. If that money is brought back it would improve the financial condition of the country and reduce the tax burden on citizens," it said while dismissing the Centre's application.The court on July 4, 2011 had included the director of Research and Analysis Wing (RAW) in the SIT. The Centre had objected to this and said RAW director had always been a "faceless and nameless person" given the sensitivity of the post. "How can the RAW director be included and made answerable to the retired Supreme Court judge who heads the SIT?" the Centre had asked.The government also objected to the stinging criticism in the first 20 paragraphs of the judgment, which had appointed former SC judges Justices B P Jeevan Reddy and M B Shah as chairman and vice-chairman of the SIT.