Links
Archives
Wednesday, June 30, 2004
COMPLAINT LETTER SENT TO CENTRAL VIGILANCE COMMISSION ON 03-06-2002
COPY OF LETTER ADDRESSED
TO CENTRAL VIGILANCE COMMISSION ON 3-6-02
FROM :
P. S. MODY
JANMANGAL APT, 2ND FLOOR
40 BMM Society
AHMEDABAD 380 006
DATED 3-6-2002
TO
THE CENTRAL VIGILANCE COMMISION
SAATKARTABHAVAN
NEWDELHI
Copy marked to:
1) THE CHAIRMAN, CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES
2) THE MEMBER INVESTIGATION,CBDT
3) SHRI ROONGTA, THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF INCOME TAX INVESTIGATION, AHMEDABAD
Respected Sir,
SUBJECT: COMPLAINT AGAINST DISLOYAL OFFICERS OF
OFFICERS OF INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT OF
AHMEDABAD.
1) MY REF LETTER TO I.T. DEPT: 18-6-1999 (ENCL)
2) REF LETTER FROM DEPT: DG/AHD/INV/29/99-2000 DATED
19-9-2000
==================================================
1. I am enclosing copies of important letters addressed to various officials of Income Tax Department in Ahmedabad and I have reason to believe that persons referred in para 2 are dishonest, disloyal and their professional conduct is extremely doubtful. Their attitude is aptly described in my letter dated 2-7-2001. On account of alleged illegal acquisition of immoveable property by Dhanyushya belonging to Rupmanglam and Flovin and supported by interim findings as per the letter dated 19-9-2000 by Mr. C.M.Betgiri, what prevented him to take prompt action against Dhanyuhsya in the interest of revenue and suspending the auditors who play major role in frauds shaking the doudnations of trust in the country. This has to be seen in light of speedy action against Andersons as audit firm in case of Enron and the swiftness with which the American Government has acted without granting any favour to the top audit firm.
2. I humbly request you to conduct inquiries on (A) Mr. C.M.Betgiri in his capacity as Director General and Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (currently promoted Memebr CBDT, (B) Mr. V.D. WAKHARKAR, in his capacity as Director General, (C) Mr. D.N. Kar, in his capacity as ADI Unit 1(4) (D) Mr. N.M. Parmar., Ward 11(2).
3. I am giving reasons for conducting probe against erring officials of the Income tax department in Ahmedabad as under:-
(a) How come Mr. D, N. Kar, ADI UNIT 1(4) did not make efforts to collect all the necessary basic evidence from Dhanyushya, Mr. Jalundhwala, Mr. H. Kashiparekh by calling for transfer deeds, minute book records, valuation report for transfer of shares,especially when Dhanyuhsya b/s 96/97 did not reflect ownership of shares belonging to my family, when he was investigating the case from March 1998 till March 1999 and also record their statement thereafter for various explanation.
(b) Why Mr. C.M. Betgiri(Director General of Income Tax-Investigation) on receipt of my letter dated 18-6-1999 did not provide adequate guidelines on contents of the letter to the concerned DDIT so that DDIT can effectively carry out the assignment and report findings to Mr. C.M. Betgiri within amonth instead of sending two additional reminders on 30-10-1999 and 23-02-2000.
(c) How come Mr. C.M.Betgiri did not ask DDIT to summon Mr Kashiparekh, the auditor of Rupmanglam and Flovin for valuation report on shares and record his statement when he could easily assesss from Mr Kashiparekh’s reply annexed in my letter dated 18-6-1999, that he was taking the department for a ride for not giving report on ownership of the companies backed by evidence.
(d) Based on interim findings on account of my recorded by DDIT Mr. R. Diwedi, on 10-5-2000 and the annexures provided as narrated in my letter dated 11-5-2000 and interim report available to Mr. Betgiri, why did he dump the responsibility of further investigation to the assessing officers as stated in his letter dated 19-9-2000 addressed to the undersigned. (It is like asking physician to do the work of pathologist or surgeon).
(e) Why Mr. C.M.Betgiri did not want to assign investigation to his subordinate along with the assistance of Mr. R. Diwedi who had already become conversant with the case and understand the intricacies of four companies in view of the statement recorded on 10-5-2000.
(f) How come Mr. C.M, Betgiri as DG expected various assessing officers t take intiaitive and coordinate simultaneously with other assessing officers to carry simultaneous investigation . Mr. C.M. Betgiri had adequate experience to understand the human psychology that there is resistance to finish the task started by others.
(g) What precautions did he take in the interest of revenue that assurance
(h) given to me by him vide his letter dated 19-9-2000 was going to be honoured by the assessing officers and reported to the DG’s office within reasonable time limit.
(i) How is that immediately after telegram on 15-9-2000 to Mr. C.M.Betgiri, the registered office of Rupmanglam under the signature of Mr. Jalundhwala got transferred to Baroda address as per the ROC records. It appears that there is collsion with Dhanyuhsya and the auditor of Rupmanglam.
(j) How come Mr. V.D.Wakharkar, the new Director General of Income Tax,-Investigation, did not review the decision of assignment to the assessing officers in light of my letters dated 3-10-2000 and 23-10-2000, when a lay man like me can understand the shortcomings. This shows that he was also in collusion with Dhanyuhysa, Jalundhwala, Kashiparekh to avoid further investigation. Incidently, Mr. Wakharkar was working under Mr. C.M.Betgiri.
(k) Why Mr. Wakharkar was complacent to my further letters dated 30-10-2000, 27-11-2000 and telegrams dated 14-12-2001 and 4-1-2001 in light of my comments on involvement of Global TRUST BANK FRAUD. In fact such issues should make him more vigilant to act. Had he taken, necessary action, further scandals involving Global Trust Bank which shook the financial markets would have been nipped in the bud.
(l) Even when I had complained about the harassment by the assessing officer vide my letter dated 4-6-2001 addressed to Mr. Wakharkar on account of reassessment notice, how come ignored to give a detailed reply and take necessary steps to record the statements.
(l) Even when shortcomings and defects of working of the department were highlighted through my letter addressed on 2-7-2001 and copy of this letter marked to Director of Investigation, Mr. Vijay Ranjan on 4-7-2001 and discussed thereafter with Mr. Vijay Ranjan and Mr. Wakharkar,how come, in the interest5 of revenue, the matter was not handled by the investigation department for effectiveness.
(m) Pursuant to my letter dated 26-7-2001 to the Investigation department , What were the findings of the Appropriate Authority and action taken keeping view the annexures given on 10-5-2000 to DDIT , Mr. R.Diwedi.
(n) What prompted Mr. N.P.Gangadharan,ward 8(3) and JCIT to reopen the Assessment of A.Y. 95-96 and A.Y. 96-97. In view of notice issued on 31-5-2001, whether the notice was issued to harass me. What efforts were made by him to collect the necessary information prior to the issue of notice which was against me and my family. I reserve to make additional comments at a later stage.
(n) what are the findings by Mr. R.Nabar , J.C.I.T assessing Dhanyuhsya in response to my letter dated 29-10-2001 and reminder letter dated 24-1-2002 and whether he has collected necessary evidence and has taken any action in the interest of revenue in view of illegal ownership of property owned by Dhnayushya.
(o) What prompted Mr. N.M.Parmar, ward 11(2) to carry reassessment based On presumptions and did not bother to collect necessary evidence of ownership of shares by interrogating J. Jalundhwala and the auditors of
Rupmanglam,,m Flovin and Dhanyushya by exercising his powers to visit their offices in case they were not extending cooperation in interest of justice and fairness to me and my family members by raising huge capital gains tax demand even when Dhanyuhsya balance sheet 96/97 did not reflect the ownership of the shares and reported to DDIT.
(p) Why Mr. N.M.Parmar, has accepted identical valuation of shares alleged be transferred in 1996 and 1998. I am of firm belief that he is in collusion with Mr. Kashiparekh who has been handling files for my brother’s family for the shares shown to be transferred in March 1998. He has not probedthe matter to find the truth.
4. I humbly request your Honour to seek findings, report and action taken report from the Investigation department pursuant to annexures submitted on 10-5-2000 as narrated in my letter dated 11-5-2000 in light of commitment given vide
Sept 19-9-2000 by Mr. Betgiri pursuant to my letter dated 18-6-1999.
5. In case, no concrete findings been carried out by Mr. Betgiri and Mr.Wakharkar, it is my humble request that present MEMBER-INVESTIGATION is called to furnish the findings by collecting all necessary evidence including MINUTE book records from Mr. Jalundhwala, auditors of Rupamanglam/Flovin and Dhanyuhysa immediately on receipt of this letter. I have already written to present Director General of Income Tax-Investigaqtion, Mr. Roongta on 23-1-2002 to take concrete steps to recover tax from Dhanyuhysa and black lsit the auditors involved. This information is necessary in the interst of revenue as well as natural justice to me.
6. I would like to draw the attention that in the suit filed by me on Dhanyuhysa, Jalundhwala, Core Health Care and Global Trust Bank, they have not been able to produce evidence of ownership of the immoveable property and shares where they have managed to avail term loan of Rs 12.5 crores.
I would be happy to provide additional information and clarification as and when necessary. I would appreciate that the present letter is acknowledged and complaint number is assigned.
Thanking you.
Yours faithfully,
P S. Mody
Enclosure marked to the Central Vigilance Commission:
My letters dated :18-6-1999,11-5-2000, 24-7-2000, 3-10-2000,23-10-2000, 30-10-2000,27-11-2000,4-6-2001, 2-7-2001, 4-7-2001, 26-7-2001,29-10-2001,23-1-2002,24-1-2002.
My telegrams dated 15-9-2000,14-12-2000, 4-1-2001, 20-1-2001 and 15-3-2001.
Copy of letter addressed to P S Mody on 19-9-2000 by Mr. C.M.Betgiri,
The Director General of Income Tax.
Above letter dated 3-3-03 was also addressed to Chief Commissioner of Income Tax . Income Tax Department, Aaaykar Bhavan, Ahmedabad.
The said letter covered up particulars previous correspondence and telegrams to the office of the Director General of Income-Investigation pursuant to the reply given by predecessor Director General of Income Tax =Investigation vide letter
No dated September 19,2000.
FROM :
P. S. MODY
JANMANGAL APT, 2ND FLOOR
40 BMM Society
AHMEDABAD 380 006
DATED 3-6-2002
TO
THE CENTRAL VIGILANCE COMMISION
SAATKARTABHAVAN
NEWDELHI
Copy marked to:
1) THE CHAIRMAN, CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES
2) THE MEMBER INVESTIGATION,CBDT
3) SHRI ROONGTA, THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF INCOME TAX INVESTIGATION, AHMEDABAD
Respected Sir,
SUBJECT: COMPLAINT AGAINST DISLOYAL OFFICERS OF
OFFICERS OF INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT OF
AHMEDABAD.
1) MY REF LETTER TO I.T. DEPT: 18-6-1999 (ENCL)
2) REF LETTER FROM DEPT: DG/AHD/INV/29/99-2000 DATED
19-9-2000
==================================================
1. I am enclosing copies of important letters addressed to various officials of Income Tax Department in Ahmedabad and I have reason to believe that persons referred in para 2 are dishonest, disloyal and their professional conduct is extremely doubtful. Their attitude is aptly described in my letter dated 2-7-2001. On account of alleged illegal acquisition of immoveable property by Dhanyushya belonging to Rupmanglam and Flovin and supported by interim findings as per the letter dated 19-9-2000 by Mr. C.M.Betgiri, what prevented him to take prompt action against Dhanyuhsya in the interest of revenue and suspending the auditors who play major role in frauds shaking the doudnations of trust in the country. This has to be seen in light of speedy action against Andersons as audit firm in case of Enron and the swiftness with which the American Government has acted without granting any favour to the top audit firm.
2. I humbly request you to conduct inquiries on (A) Mr. C.M.Betgiri in his capacity as Director General and Chief Commissioner of Income Tax (currently promoted Memebr CBDT, (B) Mr. V.D. WAKHARKAR, in his capacity as Director General, (C) Mr. D.N. Kar, in his capacity as ADI Unit 1(4) (D) Mr. N.M. Parmar., Ward 11(2).
3. I am giving reasons for conducting probe against erring officials of the Income tax department in Ahmedabad as under:-
(a) How come Mr. D, N. Kar, ADI UNIT 1(4) did not make efforts to collect all the necessary basic evidence from Dhanyushya, Mr. Jalundhwala, Mr. H. Kashiparekh by calling for transfer deeds, minute book records, valuation report for transfer of shares,especially when Dhanyuhsya b/s 96/97 did not reflect ownership of shares belonging to my family, when he was investigating the case from March 1998 till March 1999 and also record their statement thereafter for various explanation.
(b) Why Mr. C.M. Betgiri(Director General of Income Tax-Investigation) on receipt of my letter dated 18-6-1999 did not provide adequate guidelines on contents of the letter to the concerned DDIT so that DDIT can effectively carry out the assignment and report findings to Mr. C.M. Betgiri within amonth instead of sending two additional reminders on 30-10-1999 and 23-02-2000.
(c) How come Mr. C.M.Betgiri did not ask DDIT to summon Mr Kashiparekh, the auditor of Rupmanglam and Flovin for valuation report on shares and record his statement when he could easily assesss from Mr Kashiparekh’s reply annexed in my letter dated 18-6-1999, that he was taking the department for a ride for not giving report on ownership of the companies backed by evidence.
(d) Based on interim findings on account of my recorded by DDIT Mr. R. Diwedi, on 10-5-2000 and the annexures provided as narrated in my letter dated 11-5-2000 and interim report available to Mr. Betgiri, why did he dump the responsibility of further investigation to the assessing officers as stated in his letter dated 19-9-2000 addressed to the undersigned. (It is like asking physician to do the work of pathologist or surgeon).
(e) Why Mr. C.M.Betgiri did not want to assign investigation to his subordinate along with the assistance of Mr. R. Diwedi who had already become conversant with the case and understand the intricacies of four companies in view of the statement recorded on 10-5-2000.
(f) How come Mr. C.M, Betgiri as DG expected various assessing officers t take intiaitive and coordinate simultaneously with other assessing officers to carry simultaneous investigation . Mr. C.M. Betgiri had adequate experience to understand the human psychology that there is resistance to finish the task started by others.
(g) What precautions did he take in the interest of revenue that assurance
(h) given to me by him vide his letter dated 19-9-2000 was going to be honoured by the assessing officers and reported to the DG’s office within reasonable time limit.
(i) How is that immediately after telegram on 15-9-2000 to Mr. C.M.Betgiri, the registered office of Rupmanglam under the signature of Mr. Jalundhwala got transferred to Baroda address as per the ROC records. It appears that there is collsion with Dhanyuhsya and the auditor of Rupmanglam.
(j) How come Mr. V.D.Wakharkar, the new Director General of Income Tax,-Investigation, did not review the decision of assignment to the assessing officers in light of my letters dated 3-10-2000 and 23-10-2000, when a lay man like me can understand the shortcomings. This shows that he was also in collusion with Dhanyuhysa, Jalundhwala, Kashiparekh to avoid further investigation. Incidently, Mr. Wakharkar was working under Mr. C.M.Betgiri.
(k) Why Mr. Wakharkar was complacent to my further letters dated 30-10-2000, 27-11-2000 and telegrams dated 14-12-2001 and 4-1-2001 in light of my comments on involvement of Global TRUST BANK FRAUD. In fact such issues should make him more vigilant to act. Had he taken, necessary action, further scandals involving Global Trust Bank which shook the financial markets would have been nipped in the bud.
(l) Even when I had complained about the harassment by the assessing officer vide my letter dated 4-6-2001 addressed to Mr. Wakharkar on account of reassessment notice, how come ignored to give a detailed reply and take necessary steps to record the statements.
(l) Even when shortcomings and defects of working of the department were highlighted through my letter addressed on 2-7-2001 and copy of this letter marked to Director of Investigation, Mr. Vijay Ranjan on 4-7-2001 and discussed thereafter with Mr. Vijay Ranjan and Mr. Wakharkar,how come, in the interest5 of revenue, the matter was not handled by the investigation department for effectiveness.
(m) Pursuant to my letter dated 26-7-2001 to the Investigation department , What were the findings of the Appropriate Authority and action taken keeping view the annexures given on 10-5-2000 to DDIT , Mr. R.Diwedi.
(n) What prompted Mr. N.P.Gangadharan,ward 8(3) and JCIT to reopen the Assessment of A.Y. 95-96 and A.Y. 96-97. In view of notice issued on 31-5-2001, whether the notice was issued to harass me. What efforts were made by him to collect the necessary information prior to the issue of notice which was against me and my family. I reserve to make additional comments at a later stage.
(n) what are the findings by Mr. R.Nabar , J.C.I.T assessing Dhanyuhsya in response to my letter dated 29-10-2001 and reminder letter dated 24-1-2002 and whether he has collected necessary evidence and has taken any action in the interest of revenue in view of illegal ownership of property owned by Dhnayushya.
(o) What prompted Mr. N.M.Parmar, ward 11(2) to carry reassessment based On presumptions and did not bother to collect necessary evidence of ownership of shares by interrogating J. Jalundhwala and the auditors of
Rupmanglam,,m Flovin and Dhanyushya by exercising his powers to visit their offices in case they were not extending cooperation in interest of justice and fairness to me and my family members by raising huge capital gains tax demand even when Dhanyuhsya balance sheet 96/97 did not reflect the ownership of the shares and reported to DDIT.
(p) Why Mr. N.M.Parmar, has accepted identical valuation of shares alleged be transferred in 1996 and 1998. I am of firm belief that he is in collusion with Mr. Kashiparekh who has been handling files for my brother’s family for the shares shown to be transferred in March 1998. He has not probedthe matter to find the truth.
4. I humbly request your Honour to seek findings, report and action taken report from the Investigation department pursuant to annexures submitted on 10-5-2000 as narrated in my letter dated 11-5-2000 in light of commitment given vide
Sept 19-9-2000 by Mr. Betgiri pursuant to my letter dated 18-6-1999.
5. In case, no concrete findings been carried out by Mr. Betgiri and Mr.Wakharkar, it is my humble request that present MEMBER-INVESTIGATION is called to furnish the findings by collecting all necessary evidence including MINUTE book records from Mr. Jalundhwala, auditors of Rupamanglam/Flovin and Dhanyuhysa immediately on receipt of this letter. I have already written to present Director General of Income Tax-Investigaqtion, Mr. Roongta on 23-1-2002 to take concrete steps to recover tax from Dhanyuhysa and black lsit the auditors involved. This information is necessary in the interst of revenue as well as natural justice to me.
6. I would like to draw the attention that in the suit filed by me on Dhanyuhysa, Jalundhwala, Core Health Care and Global Trust Bank, they have not been able to produce evidence of ownership of the immoveable property and shares where they have managed to avail term loan of Rs 12.5 crores.
I would be happy to provide additional information and clarification as and when necessary. I would appreciate that the present letter is acknowledged and complaint number is assigned.
Thanking you.
Yours faithfully,
P S. Mody
Enclosure marked to the Central Vigilance Commission:
My letters dated :18-6-1999,11-5-2000, 24-7-2000, 3-10-2000,23-10-2000, 30-10-2000,27-11-2000,4-6-2001, 2-7-2001, 4-7-2001, 26-7-2001,29-10-2001,23-1-2002,24-1-2002.
My telegrams dated 15-9-2000,14-12-2000, 4-1-2001, 20-1-2001 and 15-3-2001.
Copy of letter addressed to P S Mody on 19-9-2000 by Mr. C.M.Betgiri,
The Director General of Income Tax.
Above letter dated 3-3-03 was also addressed to Chief Commissioner of Income Tax . Income Tax Department, Aaaykar Bhavan, Ahmedabad.
The said letter covered up particulars previous correspondence and telegrams to the office of the Director General of Income-Investigation pursuant to the reply given by predecessor Director General of Income Tax =Investigation vide letter
No dated September 19,2000.
