Usually, one-third of the salary income is considered as household expenditure of the public servant in a case of disproportionate assets under Section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. This is done for the non-verifiable expenses for the basic necessities of life such as food, clothing, etc., for which generally there may not be any evidence available. Other verifiable expenses (for which separate evidence is available) are usually shown separately.
Since the expenditure on hostel stay of your son is a special expenditure (with evidence), the court or the prosecution may not agree for 50% reduction of this amount from the general household expenditure.
You may instead try to use the following formula for reduction on account of this hostel expenditure. Firstly, suppose there are 4 members in the family, then it is only 25% of the family members being out for residence. Secondly, this hostel expenditure is for 2 years while the general household expenditure may have been for the whole duration of the check period. So, you may be entitled for the corresponding share of the deduction for 2 years. For example, if the check period is of 20 years, then compute the general household expenditure for the relevant 2 years when your son was in hostel (it is better to take one-third of salary of those 2 years). Now, out of the general household expenditure for these 2 years, reduce 25% of the same, presuming that there are a total of 4 members in the family. The amount arrived at in this manner may perhaps be deducted from the general household expenditure, as this would be a fair manner of calculating it.
Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.
.
