Jagan assets case:Court to give order on IT petition on Nov 21

After hearing arguments from both the defense and the prosecution, the special court for CBI cases reserved the orders in the matter to November 21. Seeking a direction to the CBI for sharing the material, seized during the searches on the premises of YSR Congress chief and the group of companies, owned by him, the I-T officials in Bangalore and Hyderabad had approached the court last month.

They had filed separate applications in the court, seeking directions to CBI to provide information on the seized material, so that the I-T department could "frame" the pending assessment of Jagan, the group of companies owned by him, and the Emaar Hill Township Pvt Ltd.

Strongly opposing the request for soft copies of the entire seized material, senior defense counsel E Umamaheshwar Rao contended that "no provision has been cited by the I-T Department, seeking the documents" and wanted the petitioners to instead file fresh petitions, listing out the relevant documents that are necessary for finalising the assessment proceedings. "They (IT department) must specify what documents are relevant for completion of assessment. We never failed in responding to their notices and are ready to furnish the required and necessary documents for the purpose of assessment proceedings, as sought," he submitted, adding that the I-T Department already had access and seen the documents seized by CBI.

Referring to another petition by the I-T (Hyderabad) Department on sharing of material, seized by the CBI of Emaar Hill Township Pvt Ltd (EHTPL), in connection with the alleged irregularities in the APIIC-Emaar Properties land deal, the defense counsel termed the I-T Department's contention as "without basis" that CBI, during its course of investigation, detected gross undervaluation of plots.

The public prosecutor submitted that the I-T officials had first approached the CBI for information on the seized documents, but the latter asked them to seek court permission and hence they were now requesting the court for the directive.

"It's only an exchange of information between the government agencies, and they would access only relevant documents required for the assessment," the prosecution counsel said.