THIRUVANANTHAPURAM: The CPM on Friday said it would not protect Veena T, the daughter of Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan, in the controversy over her firm Exalogic Solutions, but will defend the CM against the political vilification against him.
“Veena does not want the protection of the CPM and CM. There is no need to protect her. CPM is defending the political attack against the CM,” CPM state secretary M V Govindan told reporters after the state secretariat meeting. He said the party secretariat had not entered into the merit of the issue and evaluated the agreement between Exalogic and CMRL.
However, Govindan accused the Interim Settlement Board of the Income Tax department of acting in a way to frame Veena, who had submitted all the documents before it, even while approving to settle the issue of Congress leaders receiving funds from Cochin Minerals and Rutile Ltd (CMRL) without receipt.
Govindan said the issue began after CMRL approached the board to reevaluate the actual cost after the I-T department deducted the tax amount. “It was in the evaluation that the agreement between Exalogic and CMRL came out. The financial dealings between the two companies were through bank accounts. It is not a ‘masapadi’ (payment received through illegal means), but a service,” he said.
“When the board accused Exalogic of not paying the GST, the latter submitted the documents. Congress leaders received crores from CMRL without receipt, but the board, without any objection, admitted it as reliable material, and gave tax exemption. However, it was not ready to accept the documents that prove the fund transfer (between Exalogic and CMRL) was as per law,” Govindan said.
He said not a single LDF leader received payments. “Pinarayi Vijayan made it clear that the PV (mentioned in a CMRL official’s note) is not him,” he said.
‘Two different cases’
On the party taking interest in a case involving the CM’s daughter, even as it did not defend the son of the late Kodiyeri Balakrishnan, the former CPM secretary, in a similar situation a few years back, Govindan said the two cases were entirely different. “In his son’s case, Kodiyeri himself had said neither he nor the party will extend any help,” he said.