Special Court Resumes Corruption Hearings Against Former Tax Official Chudamani Sharma

Kathmandu. Two corruption cases involving former Inland Revenue Department Director General Chudamani Sharma, related to the illegal accumulation of 'disproportionate assets' and revenue leakage, are being heard at the Special Court. The hearings are being conducted by a bench comprising Special Court Chairman Sudarshan Dev Bhatta and judges Umesh Koirala and Bidur Koirala.

Sharma, along with Tax Settlement Commission Chairman Lumbadhwaj Mahat and member Umesh Dhakal, faces charges of corruption involving the illegal exemption of 10.02 billion 19 lakh 1 thousand 824 rupees in revenue. The Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA) filed the case, concluding that the tax exemptions granted by the commission were not made with honest intent and constituted corruption. The Special Court had previously convicted Sharma and others of revenue leakage in this matter.

Challenging the Special Court's verdict as flawed, Sharma, Mahat, and Dhakal appealed to the Supreme Court. On 2082 Asar 25, a Supreme Court bench consisting of judges Saranga Subedi and Tek Prasad Dhungana questioned the fairness of the trial, declared the Special Court's decision flawed, and remanded the case for a retrial. The current proceedings are a result of that remand.

It was discovered that the Tax Settlement Commission, chaired by Mahat in 2071, had maliciously granted over 10.02 billion rupees in tax exemptions to certain taxpayers. Sharma and Dhakal were members of the commission. The CIAA claimed that the commission acted beyond its mandate to benefit itself, resulting in a significant loss of state revenue.

Additionally, another case was filed against Sharma on 2071 Magh 15, alleging the accumulation of illegal assets during his tenure as Director General of the Inland Revenue Department. Having entered government service in 045, it was found that he had acquired and spent assets worth over 79.3 million rupees by 073.

According to the CIAA investigation, while his legitimate income should have been 36.3 million rupees, the source of over 43 million rupees remained unexplained. In this case, the CIAA has named Sharma and his wife, Kalpana Upreti Sharma, as defendants for the purpose of asset forfeiture.