Bengaluru: Divergent views were expressed by former advocate generals of the state on the issue of action against small scale industries minister Ramesh Jarkiholi, who was raided by Income Tax /Enforcement Directorate sleuths resulting in the unearthing of undisclosed property worth Rs 160 crore besides Rs 41 lakh in cash and 12.5 kg of gold ornaments recently.
While Mr Uday Holla felt that the chief minister had the discretionary power to seek Mr Jarkiholi's resignation, Mr B.V. Acharya said a thorough investigation was required by the IT/ED officers to know whether the huge assets had been earned after becoming minister.
Mr Acharya went on to add that provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act (PCA) would be applicable only if a public servant accumulates assets by misusing office. In the case of Mr Jarkiholi, it was important to find out if he had earned the assets after becoming minister or from some other business.
The IT department had powers to levy heavy penalty for evasion of tax but dealing with this case under the PCA, requires an in-depth probe by the officials concerned.
Mr Holla said the IT/ED need not keep the CM in the loop before conducting raids on members of the ruling party since they act independently on receipt of information.
They need not even submit a report on total seizure of property or liquid cash once the raids are over.
However, the state government can seek a report from the IT/ED departments to take further action.
Ultimately, the CM has the prerogative to demand the resignation of any ruling party member post the IT/ED raids.
Mr Acharya said the IT department was bound by its own norms under which they initiate cases against those who have amassed wealth.
If the wealth was earned through legal means and there are records to this effect, the seized property would be returned to the persons concerned. But the investigation by the IT sleuths is the key in establishing whether the assets were made legally without evading tax.
