Amma's Big day today.

We cannot foresee what the Hon'ble High Court decides. We have no option but to wait for the verdict. 

Gulshan Kumar Ajmani wrote:

We cannot foresee what the Hon'ble High Court decides. We have no option but to wait for the verdict. 

 

Latest news is that the special court decision was stayed by the Karnataka High court. It was declared Jayalalita is innocent.

I have not seen the news, in the evening I could know about it, it is imp for AIADMK as only one year left for TN assembly election. 

The link explains all. More than the issue of elections, it's Jayalalita's release unfazed and unaffected. Her acquittal on all the charges are far more important.

rambabu wrote:

The link explains all. More than the issue of elections, it's Jayalalita's release unfazed and unaffected. Her acquittal on all the charges are far more important.

Unlike Salman Khan, Jaya Lalitha is honorably acquitted.  Now she is as clean as any politician. 

Gulshan Kumar Ajmani wrote:

rambabu wrote:

The link explains all. More than the issue of elections, it's Jayalalita's release unfazed and unaffected. Her acquittal on all the charges are far more important.

Unlike Salman Khan, Jaya Lalitha is honorably acquitted.  Now she is as clean as any politician. 

 

This is what Jayalalita said after her acquittal. " I proved myself as blemish less  as pure gold."

It is great day for AIADMK chief as within a year elections of TN would be held other wise that would impact heavily on TN elections, in previous times she routed DMK, 

Yes. Now her acquittal will change the scenario especially for DMK.

Jayalalita was a top star in her days and has acted in many films earning probably the highest remunerations and according to her she had invested well in properties and had sold them and made huge profits which sounds reasonable.As far as Jewelry and sarees are concerned, they were gifts given to her...So, one can believe that it may be cooked up charge made by the DMK against her.

usha manohar wrote:

Jayalalita was a top star in her days and has acted in many films earning probably the highest remunerations and according to her she had invested well in properties and had sold them and made huge profits which sounds reasonable.As far as Jewelry and sarees are concerned, they were gifts given to her...So, one can believe that it may be cooked up charge made by the DMK against her.

 

That's what she said after her release that it's plot to frame her bythe DMK.

It is worthwhile to point out that there was not any allegation of some concrete scam or fraud or corruption case against Jay Lalitha. This was simply a matter of 'possession of assets disproportionate to known sources of income'.   How you arrive at quantum of disproportionate assets.  every time you earn something and spend less than income, your asset increases. You also get some tax free or exempt income on which you pay no tax but assets increase. Value of assets may also increase owing to change in market prices. This happens with fixed assets more. So this is a complicated issue.  One can always argue that the increase in assets is owing to income in current year for which IT Return/ W.T. return will be filed only after close of year. This is an accounting matter. The High Court also found that Jay Lalitha had some disproportionate assets but this is less than 10%- the permissible limit and hence the allegation is not tenable in law. 

Gulshan Kumar Ajmani wrote:

It is worthwhile to point out that there was not any allegation of some concrete scam or fraud or corruption case against Jay Lalitha. This was simply a matter of 'possession of assets disproportionate to known sources of income'.   How you arrive at quantum of disproportionate assets.  every time you earn something and spend less than income, your asset increases. You also get some tax free or exempt income on which you pay no tax but assets increase. Value of assets may also increase owing to change in market prices. This happens with fixed assets more. So this is a complicated issue.  One can always argue that the increase in assets is owing to income in current year for which IT Return/ W.T. return will be filed only after close of year. This is an accounting matter. The High Court also found that Jay Lalitha had some disproportionate assets but this is less than 10%- the permissible limit and hence the allegation is not tenable in law. 

 

What vivid explanation! I could get a clear idea about some intricacies of taxation. Thank you sir

Great explanation, as honorable court says ten percentages are not enough for grounds of prosecution. More over this case was initiated by DMK 19 years back might have political motives attached with it. 

You need not have any doubts about the motive behind the case. It's a plan to frame Jayalalita .