Bhubaneswar, Dec 2 (PTI) The vigilance department of Odisha government has referred the disproportionate asset case relating to the suspended IFS officer and his son to the Income Tax department and Enforcement Directorate, official sources said on Wednesday.
While the alleged benami transaction in the case has been referred to the Income Tax department, the probe into suspected money laundering has been handed over to Enforcement Directorate (ED), the sources said.
Meanwhile, the special vigilance judge of Bhubaneswar granted the police prayer and remanded the suspended IFS officer Abhay Kant Pathak and his son Akash Kumar Pathak to three days in police custody.
A case had been registered under Prevention of Corruption Act relating to acquisition of huge disproportionate assets by the suspended IFS officer.
An official statement of the vigilance department said in view of cash deposits of Rs 9.48 crore and deposits by transfer and clearing of Rs. 5.29 crore totaling Rs. 14.77 crore made in the three bank accounts of Akash Kumar Pathak and in absence of any income tax returns, there is prima-facie indication of tax evasion.
'There is also suspicion of benami transactions and properties, it said.
The official said the vigilance department has referred the matter to the Income Tax Department for investigation under Income Tax Act, 1961 and Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988.
The alleged money laundering activities has been referred to the Enforcement Directorate for undertaking investigation under Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, he said.
This apart, the official said three bank officials of the concerned private banks where the money was deposited are being examined by the SIT (special investigation team) at the vigilance cell unit here.
Both Pathak and his son were arrested by vigilance sleuths on November 27 and sent to judicial custody till December 9.
The vigilance department had detected that the suspended IFS officer was in possession of disproportionate assets worth Rs 9.35 crore beyond his known sources of income, which is 435 percent of total income from all his sources.
Pathak could not account for the sources of assets satisfactorily, the vigilance department said.
Pathak had claimed that he would produce all evidence in his support in the court. PTI AAM KK KK KK