Skip to main content

CBI failed to challenge 2015 excess spectrum order: Public prosecutor

CBI failed to challenge 2015 excess spectrum order: Public prosecutor
The public prosecutor in the 2G spectrum case, Anand Grover, told the Supreme Court that the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) had not followed his recommendation to challenge a 2015 special court order acquitting all the accused in the excess spectrum case.
Grover made the complaint even as the top court bench monitoring telecom cases demanded a status report from the CBI and the Enforcement Directorate on their investigations into alleged irregularities related to the Aircel-Maxis deal.The public prosecutor had faced the special court's flak last month when it acquitted all the accused, including former telecom minister and DMK leader A Raja and his party colleague and MP Kanimozhi, in the 2G case.
An appeal against the December 22, 2017, judgement is expected to be filed in the Delhi High Court, challenging the acquittal and also seeking expunging of the adverse remarks the special court made against the public prosecutor.But in the excess spectrum case dating back to 2002, where the same court acquitted former telecom secretary Shyamal Ghosh and telecom firms Bharti AirtelBSE 1.36 % and Vodafone India, the CBI has done nothing despite its officials agreeing with his opinion to challenge it, Grover said.

Additional Solicitor General Tushar Mehta claimed that a revision had not been filed in that case because the attorney general had given an opinion against it. He, however, sought more time to take a call on the issue. "Please grant us 10 days or two weeks to deal with it," he said.
Grover asked how the government could interfere on the basis of AG's opinion when the top court was monitoring a caseIn that case, the CBI had argued that the exchequer had suffered a loss of more than ?800 crore after excess spectrum was allotted to these companies at a lower price. But the special judge discharged all without framing charges citing lack of evidence.
In the Aircel-Maxis case, the Maran brothers — Dayanidhi and Kalanithi — were discharged early last year by the same court, saying that they had been charged on a misreading of official documents.
The  Economic Times, New Delhi, 5th January 2018

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

At 18%, GST Rate to be Less Taxing for Most Goods

About 70% of all goods and some consumer durables likely to cost less

A number of goods such as cosmetics, shaving creams, shampoo, toothpaste, soap, plastics, paints and some consumer durables could become cheaper under the proposed goods and services tax (GST) regime as most items are likely to be subject to the rate of 18% rather than the higher one of 28%.

India is likely to rely on the effective tax rate currently applicable on a commodity to get a fix on the GST slab, said a government official, allowing most goods to make it to the lower bracket.

For instance, if an item comes within the 12% excise slab but the effective tax is 8% due to abatement, then the latter will be considered for GST fitment.

Going by this formulation, about 70% of all goods could fall in the 18% bracket.

The GST Council has finalised a four-tier tax structure of 5%, 12%, 18% and 28% but has left room for the highest slab to be pegged at 40%. A committee of officials will work out the fitment and the council…

Firms with sales below Rs.50 crore out of ambit

The tax department has reiterated that the PoEM rules, which require foreign firms to pay taxes in India if the effective control is here, will not apply to companies withaturnover of Rs.50 crore or less inafinancial year. Last month, the tax department had come out with the longawaited Place of Effective Management (PoEM) rules, which require foreign companies in India and Indian firms with overseas subsidiaries to pay local taxes if their businesses are effectively controlled by Indians. Then the rules did not setathreshold above which they were to apply. However, the accompanying press release states that the rules will not apply to companies withaturnover of up to Rs.50 crore inayear. That created confusion whether the threshold will be adhered to. Inacircular to clarify things, the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) said the provision "shall not apply toacompany havingaturnover or gross receipts of ~50 crore or less inafinancial year".

PoEM rules essentially target shell …