New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (5) TMI 463 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT

2015 (5) TMI 463 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT - TMI - Possession of disproportionate assets / surplus income - known source of income - offence punishable under Section 13(1)(e) read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Actand under Section 120-B of Indian Penal Code - Held that:- It is well settled law that according to Krishnanand Agnihotri’s case [1976 (12) TMI 187 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA], when there is disproportionate asset to the extent of 10% the accused are entitled for acquittal. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ies and also added the cost of construction i.e., ₹ 27,79,88,945/- and marriage expenses at ₹ 6,45,04,222/- and valued the assets at ₹ 66,44,73,573/-. If we remove the exaggerated value of cost of construction and marriage expenses, the assets will workout at ₹ 37,59,02,466/-.The total income of the Accused, firms and companies is ₹ 34,76,65,654/-. Lack of proportion amount is ₹ 2,82,36,812/-.

The percentage of disproportionate assets is 8.12%. It .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

minimum evidentiary value. The Trial Court has not appreciated the evidence in a proper perspective. Though the Trial Court in its judgment mentioned that the accused availed loan by the Indian Bank, but it has not considered the same as income. Therefore, the Trial Court has erred in not considering the loans as income. Even the valuation though disputed by the defence the Trial Court has failed to examine the evidence relating to cost of construction at that relevant time and simply arrived a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

X X X X X X X X X X X In the case of KRISHNANAND AGNIHOTRI V/S. STATE OF M.P reported in AIR 1977 SC 796; wherein paragraph No. 33 reads as under: It will, therefore, be seen that as against an aggregate surplus income of ₹ 44,383.59 which was available to the appellant during the period in question, the appellant possessed total assets worth ₹ 55, 732.25. The assets possessed by the appellant were thus in excess of the surplus income available to him, but since the excess is compar .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nd convicting the appellant on the basis of such presumption. Applying the principle laid-down in above mentioned Krishnanand agnihotri s Case, statements showing the calculation of Total Assets and Income of accused Nos. 1 to 4, firms and companies and arriving at the percentage of disproportionate assets thereof, are as under: PARTICULARS AMOUNT (IN RUPEES) TOTAL AMOUNT (IN RUPEES) Assets as per DV & AC i) Cost of construction: As per DV & AC Less: As per records and finding Total (A) .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

; Namadhu MGR 4,00,00,000 6. Super Duper TV Pvt. Ltd., 1,00,00,000 7. Rental Income 3,22,000 8. Income Assessed by DV & AC 9,34,26,054 TOTAL INCOME 34,76,65,654 DISPROPORTIONATE ASSETS : Total Assets - Total Income ₹ 37,59,02,466-Rs. 34,76,65,654 = ₹ 2,82,36,812 Percentage - Disproportionate Assets X 100 Income ₹ 2,82,36,812 X 100 ₹ 35,76,65,654 = 8.12% It is well settled law that according to Krishnanand Agnihotri s case, when there is disproportionate asset to the e .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

secution has mixed up assets of Accused, firms and companies and also added the cost of construction i.e., ₹ 27,79,88,945/- and marriage expenses at ₹ 6,45,04,222/- and valued the assets at ₹ 66,44,73,573/-. If we remove the exaggerated value of cost of construction and marriage expenses, the assets will workout at ₹ 37,59,02,466/-.The total income of the Accused, firms and companies is ₹ 34,76,65,654/-. Lack of proportion amount is ₹ 2,82,36,812/-. The percen .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

true and that the guilt of the appellants has been established beyond all reasonble doubt. It is not for the appellants to satisfy the appellate Court that the first court had come to a wrong finding. In an appeal by some of the convicted persons, it is open to this Court as an appellate Court to examine the entire evidence. The powers of the appellate Court under this Section are the same as those of the Trial Court. If after examining the evidence, this Court is in a position to say that the f .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Court has erred in not considering the loans as income. Even the valuation though disputed by the defence the Trial Court has failed to examine the evidence relating to cost of construction at that relevant time and simply arrived at a conclusion that 20% of the cost has to be reduced without appreciating the evidence placed on record. This 20% reduction is calculated on surmises and conjectures. The Trial Court has assessed the Marriage Expenses at ₹ 3,00,00,000/-. There is no acceptable .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version