*12 very senior officers of rank of Chief Commissioners, Principal Commissioners, Commissioners of Income Tax department given compulsorily retirement under Rule 56 by Finance Ministry : Fin Min Sources*
1. Ashok Agarwal (IRS 1985), Joint Commissioner Income Tax
Former Dy director, ED. Remained suspended from 1999 to 2014. Serious complaints of corruption and major extortion from businessmen accused of helping the alleged Godman Chandraswami. CBI launched prosecution on charge of acquiring disproportionate assets worth RS 12 Crore in 2005. Departmental proceedings initiated in early 2000. Initiated more than 40 litigations in CAT, High Court, and Supreme Court to thwart any action and get the departmental proceedings and CBI chargesheets quashed. Hires eminent lawyers like Ram Jethmalalani to defend his cases.
Either Colludes with or coerce departmental officers and government counsels / empaneled lawyers in CAT/High Courts to provide /leak department’s confidential internal documents and force them to dilute his departmental/ prosecution cases. Recently Initiated proceeding in High Court to direct the Government for appointing him as member of CBDT.
2. S K Srivastava ( IRS 1989) – Commissioner( Appeal), NOIDA
Accused of sexual harassment to two lady IRS officers of Commissioner rank.
Managed to get tax evasions petition filed through a Member of Parliament ( Jai Narayan Nishad) stating that the two lady IRS officers of Commissioner rank ( who were in vigilance department when S K Srivastava was suspended) had received huge income from corruption and prostitution. He pressurized the assessing officers to pass orders adding alleged income of bribery and prostitution in their incomes. He also pressurized the commissioner (appeal) to confirm the order. Now the appeals are lying pending in the ITAT. He threatens to expose every officer who does not cooperate with him. Recently, as an instance, he filed a contempt petition against Former Revenue Secretary and the Establishment Officer in a frivolous case. It is his standard tactics to coerce the senior and other departmental officer to fall in his line or else he starts defamatory campaign against such officers.
On the one hand, he has been prolonging conclusion of departmental inquiry cases for the last 10 years by filing as many as 75 petitions in CAT, High Court, and Supreme Court and on the other hand, he has approached UPSC to defer the cases of promotion of his batch and his juniors. Also, he has approached the UPSC to defer the cases of promotion of the batches of the two lady officers and their junior batches. As a result , promotion of three batches are held up for the last two three years. He has been pressurizing for being promoted as Chief Commissioner of Income Tax.
In an as many as eight cases, High Court and CAT have passed strictures and warning and imposed fines for his scandalous allegations against the lady officers and other higher officers. In one case he has been order to undergo civil imprisonment of 15 days for his scandalous allegations against former Chairman and Members of CBDT. He has also filed contempt petitions against former Secretary Revenue.
He also engaged Jethmalani to defend his cases in courts. Either Colludes with or coerce departmental officers and government counsels / empaneled lawyers in CAT/High Courts to provide /leak department’s confidential internal documents and force them to dilute his departmental/ prosecution cases.
3. Shri Homi Rajvansh (IRS 1985 DOB 16.06.61)
a. He had acquired movable and immovable assets worth Rs.3,17,78,462/- in the name of self and his family members.
b. These movable and immovable properties had allegedly been acquired by abusing his official position and by corrupt and illegal means.
c. These movable and immovable properties were acquired without obtaining any prior permission or giving any intimation in this regard to Competent Authority in violation of Rules 18(2) and 18(3) of CCS (Conduct) Rules.
d. Shri Homi Rajvansh was arrested by CBI after absconding from his Headquarters to evade arrest. He was also placed under suspension following his arrest.
e. Shri Homi Rajvansh, while on deputation to NAFED as Addl. Managing Director had allegedly advanced huge amounts (totalling about Rupees Two hundred and Ninety-One crores) to 9 companies without obtaining approval of Competent Authority.
f. These funds were released in unauthorized and irregular manner without ensuring adherence to clauses of agreements and without obtaining bank guarantees.
g. These companies defaulted on repayment and thus caused huge financial loss of hundreds of Crores to NAFED..
h. Shri Homi Rajvansh has been delaying finalization of disciplinary proceedings by resorting to litigation and raising technical and procedural issues. Has been delaying cases for more than ten years by indulging in multitude of litigations
Either Colludes with or coerce departmental officers and government counsels / empaneled lawyers in CAT/High Courts to provide /leak department’s confidential internal documents and force them to dilute his departmental/ prosecution cases.
4. Shri B B Rajendra Prasad (92092)
CBI, Visakhapatnam registered a case RC 08(A)/2017-CBI VSP on 01.05.2017 against Shri B.B. Rajendra Prasad on the allegations of obtaining illegal gratification in lieu of passing favorable appeal order in one case.
Shri B.B. Rajendra Prasad was arrested by the CBI and the bribe consideration was recovered. He was also placed under suspension on 02.05.2017 following his arrest by CBI.
CVC also directed vigilance inspection of the orders passed by Shri B.B. Rajendra Prasad during his tenure as CIT(A)-30, Mumbai.
Shri B.B. Rajendra Prasad had allegedly acquired assets to the tune of Rs. 2.73 Crores, which are disproportionate to his known sources of income.
CBI has filed a DA case against Shri B.B. Rajendra Prasad on 31.07.2017.
5 .Shri Ajoy Kumar Singh CIT, (87067)
a. CBI, ACB, Mumbai, had registered a Disproportionate Assets (DA) case (RC: 8(A)/ 2007-Mum) against Shri Ajoy Kumar Singh, the then Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai, on 22.02.2007.
b. Shri Ajoy Kumar Singh was arrested by the CBI in connection with the case.
c. He was also placed under suspension w.e.f. 25.10.2009 following his arrest by CBI.
d. Hon’ble High Court of Bombay, vide order dated 08.10.2009 directed the CBI to file the Charge sheet on the basis of its report dated 08.09.2009.
e. Hon’ble High Court of Bombay had also directed the Income Tax Department to take expeditious action against Shri Ajoy Kumar Singh under the Service Rules applicable to him on the basis of CBI report dated 08.09.2009.
f. Criminal Prosecution is pending against Shri Ajoy Kumar Singh and the matter is being processed for initiation of disciplinary proceedings as advised by CVC and decided by Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Shri Ajoy Kumar Singh (87067) in respect of the DA case filed against him by CBI.
6 . SHRI B. ARULAPPA, CIT ( 90116)
a. Shri B. Arulappa proved to be ineffective as a Supervisory officer as he failed to ensure assignment of important cases having large tax implication to senior and experienced officers.
b. Shri B. Arulappa proved to be ineffective as a Supervisory officer as he failed to ensure that pending major audit objections are duly answered and settled which resulted in loss of RS 15.69 Crores.
c. Shri B. Arulappa proved to be ineffective as a Supervisory officer as he failed to monitor whether the re-opened assessment involving major RAP objection is completed to its logical conclusion as mandated in the Manual of Office Procedure and Audit Manual.
d. Assessment completed by the ITO, Ward 3(3), Trichy on 31.03.2015 in the case of M/s. Vasan Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. for assessment year 2009-10 (which was reopened u/s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961) by accepting the income returned and without discussing any of the issues raised in the audit objections raises serious doubts about the integrity of Shri B. Arulappa for assigning the case to the junior most officer in his charge.
7. Shri Alok Kumar Mitra (Civil List No. 92030)
Involved in many cases of corruptions and extortion. Passed many wrong and malafide assessment orders which were later on reversed by the appellate authorities.
Despite several complaints and departmental findings against him he managed to avoid action by filing cases in CAT etc.
Either Colludes with or coerce departmental officers and government counsels / empaneled lawyers in CAT/High Courts to provide /leak department’s confidential internal documents and force them to dilute his departmental/ prosecution cases.
8. Chander Saini Bharti (94086)
a. Shri Chander Sain Bharti was apprehended by CBI in connection with a trap case and the bribe money of Rs. 30 lakh was recovered from angadiya (courier) used by him.
b. Shri Chander Sain Bharti was found using hawala channels for transferring the ill-gotten money.
c. Shri Chander Sain Bharti acquired assets worth Rs 1,63,12,939 (in his and his wife’s name). However their combined income from known sources was Rs 1,16,05,314 and household expenditure was Rs 1,08,09,344. Thus, Shri C. S. Bharti and his wife have amassed disproportionate assets to the tune of Rs 1,55,16,969 which is 133.71% of their known sources of income.
d. Shri Chander Sain Bharti had failed to give prior intimation, to the department, of acquisition/ purchase of immovable properties in his name or in the name of his wife/ family members as required under the CCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964.
Either Colludes with or coerce departmental officers and government counsels / empaneled lawyers in CAT/High Courts to provide /leak department’s confidential internal documents and force them to dilute his departmental/ prosecution cases.
9. Andasu Ravindar (91110)
a. He was apprehended by CBI with an amount of Rs. 50,00,000/- with him.
b. Sh. Andasu Ravindar could not satisfactorily explain the source of that amount.
c. Sh. Andasu Ravindar received loans for himself and or his family members from various persons which were not intimated to the department as discussed in para 11 above.
d. Sh. Andasu Ravindar used his official position to influence financial dealings entered into by the parties related to him in his personal as well as official capacities
e. Sh. Andasu Ravindar acquired assets in his name and in the name of his wife Smt. Andasu Kavitha, to the tune of Rs. 81,01,322/- which are disproportionate to their known sources of income .
f. Sh. Andasu Ravindar abused his official position and obtained pecuniary advantage in the matter pertaining to the survey conducted on M/s A.S. Shipping Agencies Pvt. Ltd.
g. Sh. Andasu Ravindar accepted bribe M/s Aban Offshore Ltd., Chennai with whom he had official dealings.
10. Vivek Batra (92075)
a. Shri Vivek Batra has been accused by CBI in 2005 of abuse of his official position to accumulate assets disproportionate to his known sources of income amounting Rs 1.27 Crore.
b. Shri Vivek Batra has been alleged to be involved in dubious transactions related to accommodation entries of Share Capital and false capital Gains.
c. A reference had been made by the ADG (V) West Zone regarding non submission of requisite details regarding foreign travels by Shri Vivek Batra in spite of issue of letter in this regard. It has been reported that he undertook 10 private foreign visits in the last eight years.
d. Shri Vivek Batra is facing serious allegations of destruction of Government Records to scuttle a vigilance inspection.
e. Shri Vivek Batra is alleged to be behind formation of a Benami Company M/s. Deva Exim Pvt. Ltd. and purchase of 5 shops in Mahavir Rachna, Plot No. 54, Sector 15, CBD, Belapur, New Mumbai.
f. Shri Vivek Batra had made a complaint dated 18th September, 2012 to the Finance Minister against Shri Sanjay Puri, DIT (V)-II working in the Office of the DGIT (V), New Delhi. An inquiry was conducted into the complaint by Shri P. S. Tomar, DIT (V)-I, who examined the witnesses and CCTV footage to ascertain the facts of the matter. Shri P. S. Tomar, DIT (V)-I concluded that the complaint was factually incorrect, false and baseless and apparently filed with a view to discourage/ pressurize Officers working in the Directorate of Vigilance. The matter was placed before the Chairperson, CBDT who gave approval for issue of an administrative warning to Shri Vivek Batra, Addl. CIT cautioning him against making false allegations against any officer of the Department in future.
g. Shri Vivek Batra was facing a criminal case regarding forging the Will of Shri Ashok Malik (Father-in-law of Shri Vivek Batra) in collusion with his wife Ms. Priyanka Batra.
Either Colludes with or coerce departmental officers and government counsels / empaneled lawyers in CAT/High Courts to provide /leak department’s confidential internal documents and force them to dilute his departmental/ prosecution cases.
11. Sh Swetabh Suman CIT (88078)
1. Shri Swetabh Suman was arrested by CBI in New Delhi on April 13, 2018 for allegedly demanding Rs 50 lakh for giving relief in a shell company matter to a businessman. The amount was recovered from a middle-man and searches were carried out by CBI on the premises linked to Shri Swetabh Suman in Guwahati, Jorhat, Shillong, Noida and Delhi. A sum of Rs 40 Lakh (approx) allegedly meant for Shri Swetabh Suman and his accomplices was also recovered from one of the accused and middleman. The matter is under investigation by CBI.
2. Complaints were received against Shri Swetabh Suman relating to acquisition of immovable properties i.e. Bungalow at Dehradun, indulging corruption at a large scale, taking bribes, allowing issue of refunds or completing the scrutiny assessments by taking money from the parties etc. All complaints against Sh. Swetabh Suman received in the Department were forwarded to CBI for investigation. The CBI report on disproportionate assets was processed and sanction for prosecution was issued on 21.05.2010 and RDA for major penalty was initiated by way of issue of a Memorandum dated 08.02.10 under Rule 14 of CCS(CCA) Rules.
3. As per CBI press release dated 14.02.2019 the Court of Special Judge, CBI Cases, Dehradun (Uttarakhand) had sentenced Shri Swetabh Suman to undergo seven years Rigorous Imprisonment with fine of Rs.3.5 crore; his mother Smt. Gulab Devi to undergo one year Rigorous Imprisonment with fine of Rs.10,000/- and two other persons, namely Arun Kumar Singh & Rajinder Vikram Singh, both to undergo four years Rigorous Imprisonment with fine of Rs.20,000/- each in a disproportionate assets case. The Hon’ble Court has also ordered the confiscation of the properties of the accused Swetabh Suman including the house at Dehradun, 01 plot at Noida, the Hotel at Bodh Gaya (Bihar) and a Honda City Car.
4. It has been reported in the press release that the investigation into the matter established that Shri Swetabh Suman abused his official position as a public servant to acquire immovable / movable assets from his ill-gotten money amounting to Rs. 3,13,90,408/- (approx) in his name and in the name of the co-accused persons. The Trial Court found the accused guilty and convicted them.
5. A Vigilance inspection was carried out in respect of the work done by Shri Swetabh Suman Addl. CIT, Range-I, Dehradun. The vigilance inspection had shown irregularities in scrutiny assessments completed by Sh. Swetabh Suman, scrutiny assessments where approval was given by Sh. Swetabh Suman, surveys u/s 133a of the I T act authorized by Sh. Swetabh Suman and approval of refunds.
6. Information was furnished by SP, CBI, Delhi regarding seizure of certain confidential official files of the Office of CCIT, Dehradun during house search of Shri Swetabh Suman at Jamshedpur. It was found later that CCIT, Dehradun had lodged a complaint with the Police on 18.01.2005 regarding theft of these Income Tax files and FIR vide crime No. 18/2005 had been registered u/s 380 and 411 IPC.
12. Ram Kumar Bhargava (145FF)
Shri Ram Kumar Bhargava while holding the charge of TRO-4, Kanpur, initiated recovery proceedings against Ms Vaijanti Gupta. In the process he treated Mr. Jitendra Kumar Shaw as assessee in default being a sundry debtor of Vaijanti Gupta and started recovery proceedings against Mr. Jitendra Shaw. Sh Bhargava is alleged to have issued notice u/s 226(3) of the IT Act without jurisdiction and is alleged to have attached the housing loan account of Shri jitendra Kumar Shaw maintained in the bank.
Forwarded as received
