NEW DELHI: A day after the Enforcement Directorate (ED) told the Supreme Court that P Chidambaram had 17 bank accounts and 10 properties abroad , the former finance minister refuted the allegations on Tuesday and dared the investigating agency to provide details of such assets and accounts on affidavit in court.Countering the ED’s allegations, the Congress veteran filed a fresh affidavit saying he was ready to be prosecuted for perjury if the agency proved he owned overseas properties or bank accounts and also requested the court to direct the ED to file the transcript of his questioning on three occasions to establish he had been evasive in his replies and was not cooperating in the probe.Chidambaram’s counsel Abhishek Manu Singhvi urged a bench of Justices R Banumathi and A S Bopanna to direct the agency to place on record, by way of an affidavit, details of alleged accounts and properties along with proof of ownership.Meanwhile, the apex court extended Chidambaram’s protection from arrest in the INX Media case till Wednesday.Referring to the court’s Emergency-era judgment in the ADM Jabalpur case, senior advocate Singhvi contended that even then it was held that courts could not rely on sealed cover report filed by police to decide preventive detention when fundamental rights of citizens were suspended. He urged the court not to go through the sealed cover probe report against Chidambaram to decide on his anticipatory bail plea.“The petitioner submits on oath before this court and even at risk of facing perjury, if found to be not stating the complete truth, that he has no account or any property abroad, much less 17 accounts and 10 properties, as alleged by ED. It is further submitted that each and every asset owned by him has been disclosed in statutory filings and he has no asset other then the assets disclosed therein,” according to Chidambaram’s affidavit.His counsel Singhvi contended the scheduled offence for which the former minister has been charged was not part of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act when the alleged offence was committed and it should not be applied retrospectively.He said Chidambaram had replied to all queries put to him during questioning and he could not be forced to reply in a way the ED wanted him to. “I am not obliged to answer what they want to hear. I am free to answer out of my choice,” Singhvi said while pointing out that the former minister had replied to queries on his foreign assets and bank accounts while admitting that his son had an account in a foreign bank.He said vague, bald and unsubstantiated allegations had been levelled by ED and the agency never took the plea of Chidambaram influencing witnesses and tampering with evidence in the high court and is now raising the issues in SC .“There is nothing that prevents the agency from interrogating the accused in respect of any documentary evidence that is in its possession while not arresting him. The contention that he should be in custody for the purpose of confronting him with documentary evidence is completely misplaced in law,” the affidavit said.The plea said the only reasonable way is to allow him to be interrogated by confronting him with the documents relied upon by the agency and then if custodial interrogation is necessary because of the responses — then alone could he be arrested.“The petitioner has never opened and operated any bank account abroad. The allegation qua the co-conspirator of allegedly opening a bank account of shell company has nothing to do with him. He is not involved directly, indirectly or in any way to the sale of property purchased out of laundered money by one shell company to another shell company. These allegations are false,” the affidavit added.