HDFC Bank on Friday said an external legal review into concerns raised by former Chairman Atanu Chakraborty's resignation letter found "no contemporaneous support" for his allegations in board or committee records, meeting materials or related communications.In March, Reuters reported that HDFC Bank appointed two domestic law firms and one U.S.-based law firm to review a resignation letter from Chakraborty.Also Read: HDFC Bank board to review findings on Atanu Chakraborty's exit on June 18The review, conducted by Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati and Wadia Ghandy & Co. over three months, examined whether any concerns raised by Chakraborty were evident from the record, whether he had formally recorded any dissent, and whether such dissent, if any, had been addressed.According to the bank, the external law firms reviewed board and committee meeting minutes, agenda papers and thousands of documents covering the two years preceding Chakraborty's resignation. They also interviewed all independent directors, including committee chairpersons, Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer Sashidhar Jagdishan, and senior executives heading key control and assurance functions."The legal review was conducted over a three-month period and involved the review of thousands of documents and interviews of the Independent Directors and several members of senior management," the law firms said in a statement submitted to HDFC Bank's board.The firms said they repeatedly sought to interview Chakraborty during the review but the meeting "did not occur."Also Read: No merit in issues flagged by ex-chair of HDFC Bank: Law firmsAfter completing the exercise, the reviewers concluded that Chakraborty's statement and its implications "were not substantiated by the record and witness interviews."Specifically, they found that board meeting minutes were prepared through "a comprehensive drafting, review and approval process" that gave Chakraborty the opportunity to record any concerns regarding "happenings and practices" that were allegedly inconsistent with his personal values and ethics.The review further found "no contemporaneous support" for Chakraborty's statement in board or committee minutes, meeting materials or communications relating to the review and approval of those minutes. It also said witness interviews did not support or substantiate the allegations.The law firms additionally examined concerns linked to the bank's Dubai operations, which Chakraborty had referred to in public remarks after his resignation."Although Mr. Chakraborty referred to the Dubai matter in post-resignation public statements, no contemporaneous evidence was identified reflecting that he raised any concerns about his personal values and ethics, or that he disagreed with any decisions made by the Board or relevant Board Committees, in connection with the Dubai matter (or any other matters that the Board and those Committees addressed)," the report said."In sum, the contemporaneous evidence reviewed was inconsistent with Mr. Chakraborty's Statement, and External Law Firms' review did not identify any basis for the Statement," it added.Chakraborty resigned as HDFC Bank's chairman earlier this year, citing reasons related to his "personal values and ethics". His resignation prompted the bank's board to commission an independent legal review by external counsel to assess the issues raised in his letter.Reuters had reported in March that the review would be conducted by two Indian law firms along with a U.S.-based law firm, amid heightened scrutiny over the circumstances surrounding Chakraborty's departure.