BM Farooq is the richest among Rajya Sabha candidates

[email protected] (CD Network)
June 1, 2016

Mangaluru: Jun 1: Congress MLA BA Mohiuddin Bava's younger brother BM Farooq, who is contesting the Rajya Sabha elections on a JD(S) ticket, is the richest among the candidates who have filed their nominations so far.

bmfarooq1Mr Farooq's total assets are valued at around Rs 750.2 crore, as per the details available on the Karnataka legislature website. Farooq, who filed his nominations on Monday, holds Bachelor of Engineering (Mechanical) and Master of Business Administration degrees. He is the CMO of Fiza Developers and Infratech Pvt Ltd, and the owner of Mangaluru United cricket team.

The total value of immovable assets owned by him and his wife Fousia Farooq are worth Rs 688.14 crore.

He is a shareholder in 16 companies, where his shares are worth Rs 21.75 crore. His wife owns shares worth Rs 2.79 crore. Farooq has declared that his movable assets are valued at around Rs 68 crore.

He owns luxurious assets such as Rado, Rolex, Vangeneous, Cherooli watches, an iPhone, and jewellery worth Rs. 1.05 crore. He also owns a row of high-end cars, including Range Rover (Rs. 1.12 crore), Volkswagen Beetle (Rs. 21 lakh), and Toyota Camry (Rs. 24.14 lakh). All his cars bear the fancy registration number 5555.

B.M. Farooq — JD(S)

* Richest among five candidates who have filed nomination papers.

* Combined value of movable assets (including that of wife Fousia Farooq) — Rs. 750.2 cr.

* Immovable assets — Rs. 544.67 cr. (wife's Rs. 74.37 cr.).

* Liabilities — Rs. 87.06 cr. (wife's Rs. 65.4 cr.).

* Annual income — Rs. 3.38 cr. (wife's Rs. 59.94 cr.).

K.C. Ramamurthy — Congress

* Combined value of movable assets (including that of wife Sabitha Ramamurthy) — Rs. 82 cr.

* Retired IPS officer is chairman of CMR Group of Institutions.

* Total income is Rs. 68.13 lakh (wife's - Rs. 4.2 cr.).

* Movable assets — Rs. 21.06 cr.; immovable assets — Rs. 56.19 cr.

* Liabilities declared — Rs. 12.7 cr.

Oscar Fernandes — Congress

* Total income — Rs. 6.35 lakh (wife's income is Rs. 7.86 lakh).

* Value of movable assets in his and wife's name is Rs. 2.95 lakh. Liabilities — Rs. 5.04 cr.

Jairam Ramesh — Congress

* Movable assets — Rs. 5.79 cr.

* Rs. 25,000 in cash and drives a low-end car worth Rs. 4 lakh.

* Total income — Rs. 53.01 lakh, with movable assets worth Rs. 4.74 cr. in his name. His wife Jayashree K.R. has movable assets worth Rs. 8.93 lakh.

Also Read :

BM Farooq issue: Mohiuddin Bava will not betray Congress, says KPCC chief

CM takes on MLA Bava over BM Farooq contesting RS polls on JD(S) ticket

Comments

kris putnam
 - 
Saturday, 10 Mar 2018

wife (in Burka) earning 59 crore per annum WOW!

Kris Putnam
 - 
Saturday, 10 Mar 2018

Farooq's wifes annual income 59 crore (sitting in Burka at home) !! - how is that?

 

 

I will ask my wife to do that. can I get hat kind of income from my wife... Unless she (obviously he) is doing something else!

Mohammed Ali Kulai
 - 
Thursday, 2 Jun 2016

Wish you All the Best!!!

Mohammed Ali Kulai
 - 
Wednesday, 1 Jun 2016

Congrats !.....Wish u all the Best!!!

Sathish
 - 
Wednesday, 1 Jun 2016

Best of luck sir.
We are going to be employees of your company

SK
 - 
Wednesday, 1 Jun 2016

Good Fekugiri by the cunning and useless OSCAR

Nation First
 - 
Wednesday, 1 Jun 2016

A prominent member of a Chor family of Surathkal. Cheating is their family business.

Samad
 - 
Wednesday, 1 Jun 2016

please calculate his zakath, as its compulsory obligation in islam , and send the poor people, at his door step, its their rights! just in case if he do not pay zakath, then how can we expect he will work for poor?? once he gets elected..???

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
May 21,2020

Mangaluru, May 21: The Supreme Court has awarded Rs 7.64 crore compensation to the next of kin of a man who was killed in a crash-landing of Air India Express Flight 812 from Dubai in Mangalore on May 22, 2010. The accident killed 158 out of 166 passengers on board.

The family of the 45-year-old Mahendra Kodkany, which include his wife, daughter and son, were earlier granted Rs 7.35 crore as compensation by National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC). This compensation will now get enhanced after adding 9 per cent interest per annum (on the amount yet to be paid), to be paid by Air India.

Kodkany was the regional director for the Middle East for a UAE-based company. The aircraft overshot the runway and went down a hillside and burst into flames.

A bench comprising Justices D.Y. Chandrachud and Ajay Rastogi said: "The total amount payable on account of the aforesaid heads works out to Rs 7,64,29,437. Interest at the rate of nine per cent per annum shall be paid on the same basis as has been awarded by the NCDRC. The balance, if any, that remains due and payable to the complainants, after giving due credit for the amount which has already been paid, shall be paid within a period of two months."

The apex court noted that in a claim for compensation arising out of the death of an employee, the income has to be assessed on the basis of the entitlement of the employee. The top court said: "We are unable to accept the reasons which weighed with the NCDRC in making a deduction of AED (UAE currency) 30,000 from the total CTC. Similarly, and for the same reason, we are unable to accept the submission of Air India that the transport allowance should be excluded. The bifurcation of the salary into diverse heads may be made by the employer for a variety of reasons."

The top court observed that the deceased was evidently, a confirmed employee of his employer. "We have come to the conclusion that thirty per cent should be allowed on account of future prospects", added the court.

The top court noted that if the amount which has been paid by Air India is in excess of the payable under the present judgement, "we direct under Article 142 of the Constitution (discretionary powers) that the excess shall not be recoverable from the claimants," said the court.

Comments

A.Rahman
 - 
Friday, 22 May 2020

First of all  A Salute To Lawyer One Who Handled This Case Against Carriers Mismanagement Wrong Action.

 

Sure this is the second victory for the lawyer against arriers mismanagement.

 

Over all it is the sign  of a profesional ; qualified  eligble  lawyers efforts and right decision from a capable knowlegable judge. Suit case operating lawyers cannot handle such specilized cases.

They lawyer may handled rest of the vicitms cases or he not. But for his siincere efforts for the past ten years delcares whatn he  is. Am personally met him and  witnessed his court appearance  hope and wish him all the best and success .

 

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
February 12,2020

Mumbai, Feb 12: The Income Tax department's Criminal Investigation wing has identified 2,000 Indian citizens who hold properties in Dubai but had failed to declare it in their IT returns.

In its ongoing crackdown on black money, the agency has identified Indian citizens who purchased properties in Dubai but failed to declare and explain the source of funds used to purchase these properties.

In the past few years, people have used shell companies to route illegal money and buy overseas properties to evade income tax.

However, the tax department has now increased its efforts to track down those involved in major tax evasion cases.

The 2,000 persons and companies identified mainly include businessmen, top professionals, and government officials.

The IT department will initiate action against the accused under the Black Money Act.

Citizens who own properties outside the country but fail to declare the source of funds or income used for the purchase could be prosecuted under the Black Money Act.

Under Section FA (Foreign Assets) of the Income Tax Act, an individual has to declare purchase and ownership of properties, assets, companies owned outside the country while filing the income tax returns annually.

In the recent drive against black money, the IT department identified 2,000 Indian nationals who failed to provide information on the same while filing IT returns.

Of the 2,000 citizens owning properties in Dubai, around 600 could not furnish details regarding purchase details.

Those who haven't been able to explain the source of funds used for the purchase of properties could be prosecuted and their properties can be attached by the agency.

Other than the attachment of the property, they can face a monetary penalty up to 300 per cent of the property value and also face imprisonment under the Black Money Act.

The properties owned by Indians in Dubai raised red flags as this pattern of parking money is used by money launderers, smugglers, underworld gangsters and drug traffickers for making payments.

It is worth mentioning that of the 2,000 citizens identified, most are residing in Mumbai, followed by Kerala and Gujarat.

The clause under section FA (foreign Assets) came into effect in the year 2011-12 and it is mandatory for people owning properties outside India to declare it in their IT returns.

Those identified by IT department could also face action under FEMA (Foreign Exchange Management Act) by the Enforcement Directorate under Section 4.

Recently the Enforcement Directorate (ED) launched a crackdown on black money parked overseas by tracking and identifying immovable assets bought overseas by Indian nationals illegally.

The move is being carried out under rules laid down under Section 4 of FEMA (Foregn Exchange Manipulation Act), 1999. Section 4 of FEMA states that no person resident in India shall acquire, hold, own, possess or transfer any foreign exchange, foreign security or any immovable property situated outside India.

On January 17, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) conducted searches at the residence of a former chief engineer of Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC) in connection with an inquiry related to FEMA.

In the raids, the ED officials recovered documents related to the purchase of a property in Dubai in an allegedly illegal manner.

The ex-BMC chief engineer was posted with some of the most crucial wings of the municipal corporation -- the building proposal department and development plan department.

The agency did not disclose the name of the ex-BMC chief engineer but it has been learnt that he had superannuated around seven years ago from the municipal corporation.

ED, in a statement, said incriminating documents with regard to illegal acquisition of a property held in Dubai was recovered during the search operation.

The former BMC chief engineer has stated that he had purchased the property in Dubai at 'Park Island, Bonaire Marsa, Dubai' for Rs 70 lakh in 2012. The property is held jointly in his name, his spouse and son.

The retired BMC officials could not furnish any documents which would help ascertain the value of the property and also could not provide details on how the payments were made to buy the property in Dubai.

The citizens identified by the IT department recently also adopted a similar route to buy property in Delhi. It remains to be seen how the income tax department plans to penalise them.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
May 9,2020

Bengaluru, May 9: The Karnataka government may not extend the daily working hours from 8 to 12, with Labour Minister A Shivaram Hebbar saying on Saturday that the move would neither benefit the industries nor workers.

Hebbar said that the proposal has not been discussed and it may come for final deliberations next week. He also noted that some States have already extended the working hours. More than extending working hours, there should be employment to be given. If there are no jobs what can be done by extending working hours? If it is done (working hours extended to 12 hours), it would neither benefit workers nor industries. Let's see what happens, he said.

Asked if the government was in favour of the extension, he said, "I don't think it will be ready for the (12 hour) proposal." Meanwhile, the Minister also said that their top priority now was to see that all MSMEs start operating again, salaries are paid to employees and there are no job losses for any reason. If industries don't reopen, how can workers get their employment? We should think in parallel, Hebbar said adding, the government was keeping the interests of both MSMEs and workers in mind.

He urged the Centre to offer a relief package to the MSME sector, saying it is facing very difficult times due to the adverse impact of the COVID-19-induced lockdown, and also noting its role in generating large-scale employment and feeding large industries.

The BJP-led government has done whatever within its limitations to help the MSMEs, he said. Earlier this week, the Chief Minister B S Yediyurappa announced that the monthly fixed charges of electricity bills of MSMEs would be waived for two months. MSMEs have suffered huge production losses due to the lockdown. It takes some time for them to revive, Yediyurappa had said. The Chief Minister had also said payment of fixed charges in the electricity bills of the large industries will be deferred without penalty and interest for a period of two months.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.