Another set of diamond traders have landed in trouble over loan default. The CBI has registered a case against Delhi-based diamond traders in connection with not repaying around Rs 16.65 crore loan.
The FIR was registered on Tuesday following a preliminary enquiry initiated on 17, March 2017 by the CBI which found out that there was substance in the case that the diamond traders committed fraud with Canara Bank.
Those named in the FIR for criminal conspiracy, cheating and corruption are M/s Diamond Huts Pvt Ltd, its Directors Suresh Verma and Ashok Verma and unknown officials of the bank.
The bank had sanctioned them credit facility for Rs 15 crore in 2013 but the loaned turned Non-Performing Asset (NPA) resulting in the liability of Rs 16.65 crore by 30 May, 2014, the FIR said.
Initially, the Diamond Huts had approached the bank in February 2012 but the Circle Office had kept the proposal in abeyance as the external risk rating of the borrower was downgraded from BB+ to B. The company was asked to submit a fresh proposal after obtaining the external risk rating based on the audited balance sheet of 2012.
Eighteen months later, the firm once again approached the bank seeking a credit limit of Rs 25 crore. The branch office of the bank flagged that the borrower has a tax dispute of Rs 10.63 crore pending appeal since 2009 and that it has not many provision for the tax liability. The company and its directors have also not filed their IT returns.
It was also found that three properties in Karol Bagh mortgaged as collateral security against the loan was actually leasehold properties whose lease had expired.
However, Canara Bank entered into a consortium of banks and sanctioned credit facility of Rs 15 crore ignoring the issues flagged by its own officers. The firm hypothecated stock (diamonds, gems and jewellery) worth Rs 224 crore besides mortgaging 14 properties as collateral security.
Till March 2014, the firm showed its stock statement to Canara Bank showing the stock value at Rs 271 crore. However, since then the firm did not submit their stock statement and the loan turned NPA in May 2014.
"The stock was not found available with the company", which "fraudulently and dishonestly" sold the stock hypothecated to the bank and the "same was not sufficiently secured by the bank", the FIR said.