The main issue in the case of disproportionate assets is that all the “known sources of income” [as defined in Explanation to Section 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988] and all “expenses” should be properly accounted for while computing the disproportionate assets.
So, if gross salary is to be considered as income of the public servant, then all the deductions from such salary (such as GPF, Income Tax, etc.) should be separately shown as expenses. So, the resulting effect would be that only the net income would come into calculation.
On the other hand, if the net salary (after accounting for the deductions) is considered as the income of the public servant, then such deductions cannot be shown separately as expenses, since they have already been considered once while calculating the net salary which was considered as income. In such a scenario, showing expenses separately also, would amount to double calculation of the expenses, which would be unjust and impermissible, since that would be unfair to the public servant who is accused of such an offence.
In my view, the first option is the better way, i.e., to take gross salary as income of the public servant, but then showing all the deductions from salary as expenses separately. This is a more transparent method of accounting for the deductions in the computations for finding out the disproportionate assets of the public servant.
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.