Arguing that that clause 8 of UASL guidelines is "ambiguous", promoters of Loop Telecom on Thursday denied allegations in a Delhi court that Khaitan's was not 'benami' company ofEssar Group.
Seeking bail for Loop Telecom promoters I P Khaitan and Kiran Khaitan, Senior advocate Parag Tripathi said that allegation of benami transaction against them cannot be substantiated as the funds transferred between them and Essar Group were duly recorded and audited.
"The very foundation is based on ambiguity in clause 8 of the UASL guidelines. The clause is ambiguous and this is clear from the government's stand as it has not come forward as the complainant in the case," he told Special CBI Judge O P Saini.
"The fact that the government has not come forward as a complainant, it is clear that there is ambiguity in clause 8 of the UASL guidelines," Tripathi said while opposing framing of charges against his clients.
Last week CBI told a Delhi court that promoters of Essar Group and Loop Telecom resorted to false and dishonest impression to procure 2G spectrum thereby violating Unified Access Services Licences (UASL) guidelines.
"The basic case of the prosecution (CBI) is that they (accused) have violated clause 8 of the UASL guidelines and false and dishonest impression (made by them) is the crux of the matter," Special public prosecutor UU Lalit had told designated CBI Judge O P Saini.