Bikram Majithia penalised for inaccurate income tax particulars, says Mohali court

A Mohali court, hearing Bikram Singh Majithia’s bail application in the Prevention of Corruption Act case, has noted that the SAD leader had furnished inaccurate particulars of income in his returns for assessment years 2007-2008, 2008-09 and 2013-14, for which the competent authority has penalised him.

The court finally dismissed the bail application on Tuesday as “at this stage, the source of all these transactions is to be found out... the investigation is undergoing and no ground is made out to grant the concession of regular bail”.

Both the Vigilance Bureau and accused Majithia are relying upon the documents of companies and the documents submitted to the Income Tax Department. While the prosecution claims it to be the “ill-gotten money” during Majithia reign as public servant (Cabinet Minister till January 2009), Majithia’s counsel argued it to be either loans or business transactions interse the companies.

Both the prosecution and the defence highlight that these entries are duly mentioned in the income tax returns of accounts of all the companies and even the assessment under the Income Tax Act of these entries have been done.

“The perusal of these income tax assessment orders passed by the competent authorities shows that when the income was assessed for the relevant year, it was found by the assessing officer that the assessee has furnished inaccurate particulars of the income and the penalty proceedings were initiated. As far as the property at Mashobra is concerned, the prosecution has argued that the market value of the property was much more than the actual in the sale deed,” the order read.

Regarding the financial transactions of foreign companies, the court’s combined reading of all these documents shows that “on one side the companies/family of the accused are showing to be in losses and on the other side, they are even giving and accepting loans without interest to the other companies. Similar is the situation with the family members of the applicant (Majithia).

During the hearing of the bail application, the prosecution also alleged that Sainik Farm in Delhi, which is shown to be as Majithia’s address and his family, is not stated to be registered in the name of any of his family members.

The prosecution also alleged that the “Majithia and his family members have taken loans from these companies without returning the same for years together.” These facts are also considered by the Income Tax authorities in the assessment orders.

The court finally dismissed Majithia’s bail application before noting that “anything stated in this order shall have no effect on merits of the case”. Majithia now has the option to move High Court in the case.