Late Harshad Mehta's wife Jyoti, in her newly launched website dedicated to Harshad, has come out to defend her late husband, who had died due to a heart attack in police custody 20 years back on December 30, 2001. Via her website (harshadmehta.in), she has accused the custodian in the case, banks, and the Income Tax Department of opposing fund release and attaching assets falsely to the Mehta family members.
Jyoti says many facts have emerged after Harshad's death and that the family had taken steps to contest those "false claims". She accused the then Congress government of unleashing the tax department and CBI on Harshad after he claimed in June 1992 that he attended a meeting convened by then prime minister Narasimha Rao. Jyoti says the allegations that Harshad caused losses worth ₹5,000 crore to banks are "baseless".
"Despite being prevented by the I-T Department and custodian the entire principal amount of ₹1,716.07 crore claimed by banks already stands paid even though the decrees are still under challenge to banks," she writes in her detailed account on the website. Jyoti says banks will not lose a penny even though her family has suffered a loss worth more than ₹20,677.28 crore.
Contrary to the tax claims of over ₹30,000 crore on Harshad and his family, she says the Mehtas were liable for not more than ₹100 crore. She claimed that these claims were made immediately after Harshad met PM Rao.
"In the said meeting, the Hon’ble Prime Minister conveyed that the foreign currency situation of the country was alarming as there were reserves of only about 7 days and if they were not shored up the country could default and become a ‘banana republic’ and which would jeopardise the plans of the government to turnaround the situation. The Hon’ble Prime Minister wanted to dispel the environment of gloom and revive the animal spirits and build up confidence in the economy by boosting the stock markets since it was widely considered to be a barometer of the economy," she writes.
The I-T Department, as part of a pre-determined plan, foisted fake claims against the family, she says, adding the taxman illegally blocked ₹3,285.46 crore.
Notably, the assets of every Mehta family member and their corporate entities were attached at that time. Jyoti claims even the assets of several family members and corporate entities not linked at all were also attached.
"There was a clear discrimination by the custodian who has not followed the uniform policy as he has not notified family members and corporate entities while notifying several other persons," she accuses.
She claims that after 25 years, the claims made by the I-T Department, along with the custodian, have fallen flat after the intervention of the court. "The I-T Department has refunded ₹814.33 crore to the custodian and further refunds of more than ₹5,500 crore are already overdue and have not been paid for the past few years since several false affidavits have been filed by the I-T Department before Hon’ble courts," she adds.
She accused the Mehtas have suffered huge financial losses to the tune of ₹20,677.28 crore due to the "premature and completely illegal" sale of their investments in immovable properties and largely in shares of blue chip companies. These firms were liquidated by the custodian only to release monies to the I-TDepartment and banks, despite it being a violation of law, she says.
Jyoti has alleged the custodian in the case acted in collusion with the tax department and banks. She says it presented a completely "false assets and liabilities picture". She says "the custodian has been governed by several ulterior objects" to persecute Mehtas and to maximise assets under his control.
The family has accused the custodian of falsely claiming that he does not deal with the attached assets without the court's prior permission and that he takes several decisions all by himself. She says he failed to recover ₹5,000 crore worth of assets of the Mehtas after the special court orders in 1992 onwards. She says he also failed to recover the assets worth ₹463.56 crore from 10 notified entities.
The custodian is opposing the release of monies to the family as it'll expose his failures and illegalities, she claims. "In the years 2012-13 the custodian opposed the release of ₹3 crore annually for legal expenses and yet we have recovered assets of about ₹2,500 crore, brought down the claims of I-T Department from ₹30,000 crore to about ₹4,000 crore and already secured refund from I-T Department of ₹814.33 crore and further refunds of ₹5,500 crore are overdue," she writes.
Jyoti says the efforts are being made by the family to contest the balance claims of revenue and false decrees of banks and to recover attached assets of about ₹5,000 crore.
