IT officials have gone back satisfied: Modi

Offering IPL to any scrutiny by any agency, its commissioner Lalit Modi today said that the Income Tax authorities had sought details relating to two new franchises Kochi and Pune and have gone "satisfied".
    
Debunking reports that he was quizzed by IT officials for seven hours last evening, Modi told PTI in a telephonic interview "they wanted the name of bidders, the process of bidding and the details of the bids for the two new teams... we have complied with everything and they have gone back satisfied about the entire process."
    
Income Tax teams had visited IPL offices in BCCI at Wankhade Stadium as also Lalit Modi's offices in Worli, Mumbai, in the face of a controversy relating to the ownership of the Kochi franchisee after a successful bid of Rs 1,533 crore.
    
On the inquiry part, Modi said, "I was questioned for only 15-20 minutes and they wanted to know formally IPL's position on the bidders and the related issues. We explained it to them. They wanted all the relevant papers and to collect those relevant papers from 2-3 different places, it took some time."
    
The former BCCI chief and Agriculture Minister Sharad Pawar had come out openly in support of Modi last evening saying "there in nothing wrong in disclosing the names of the stakeholders (of IPL franchisees) to the public."
    
His statement came amidst controversy over Modi questioning the ownership of the consortium that won the Kochi franchisee. It was alleged that Minister of State for External Affairs Shashi Tharoor had a hand in his close friend Sunanda Pushkar getting free equity worth Rs 70 crore in IPL Kochi, a charge vehemently denied by the minister.
    
Pawar had also defended Tharoor saying his ministerial colleague's "basic interest" was to bring cricket to the centrestage in Kerala and provide opportunities to players from the state.
    
Asked if IT officials had sought details about other teams that were bid three years ago, Modi said "they had asked few questions on it and after they were told that information is in public domain, they did not seek further details."