I-T dept wants to see Amma in court

In a petition before the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (Economic Offences-1), the I-T department asked the court to fix a date for Jayalalithaa’s personal appearance for proceedings under Section 313(a) of the CrPC.

However, Jayalalithaa filed a petition yesterday, seeking that she be discharged from the case as she had not wilfully failed to file the returns. Opposing the petition, department counsel K. Ramasamy said prima facie, a case of ‘‘wilful failure’’ to file returns for 1993-94 had been ‘‘completely established’’.

The Magistrate has posted the case for the next hearing on July 1.

The case has already dragged on long enough. The magistrate had directed her to be present in court three years ago, under Section 313 of CrPC to answer the questions put by the court. Jayalalithaa’s counsel, however, filed a petition for cross-examining the witnesses, which has gone on for three years, till April. The cases have dragged on long enough since 1996 with no signs of ending.

• 1996: The I-T Central Circle, Chennai, filed a complaint against Jayalalithaa under Section 276 CC of Income Tax Act, for failing to file returns for 1993-94. The I-T department assessed her income at Rs 1.04 crore for that period and demanded Rs 96.98 lakh as tax and interests

• 1997: The I-T department filed another case against her for failing to file returns of wealth for 1993-94

• Complaints were filed against Jayalalithaa and her friend, Sasikala, who were managing partners of Sasi Enterprises for failure to file tax returns of the company for 1991-92 and 1992-1993. The High Court stayed the proceedings in all cases. After four years, the stay was vacated in December 2000 and the prosecution completed examination of three witnesses in three months. Defence cross-examination of three witnesses lasted three years and one of the witnesses, Seetharaman, a retired I-T official from Cochin, was called to court at least 50 times.

Now, Jayalalithaa’s arch rival DMK’s S.S.Palanimanickam holds the Revenue Ministry and has declared that the cases would speed up. I-T counsel Ramasamy, however, denies there has been any pressure. ‘‘No one has asked me to speed up the case or file a petition seeking her personal appearance.’’