Browse Month: October 2017

Doklam standoff resolution: India’s greatest diplomatic victory in decades

The end of the Doklam expansion is one of India’s most spectacular diplomatic victories for decades and, like any real victory, does not need to shout rooftops. From start to finish, the execution of India’s strategy here has been flawless and has achieved what India has always wanted – Status Quo Ante – and a much needed counter of the salami tactics in China.

The scope of victory is understood only when we realize how much a personal defeat for Xi Jinping is actually. Xi, clearly identified as the brain of this Gambit of Bhutan, had made a series of assumptions, which turned out to be erroneous. The first was the belief that India could be punished for its MIND-LIE OBJECTIVE by hiding Bhutan away from India.

The logic was that if Bhutan was hurried enough, it had to open direct talks with China through the embassy and thus open to OBOR. Opinion in Beijing seems uniform with respect to the genesis of this particular confrontation: in fact, Xi put personal immersion into the national interest. The net result of the personalization policy was one of the biggest setbacks China has found in recent memory.

Unambiguously, Chinese actions have simply added to the stature of India as a mature and responsible power of the status quo. What had become clear from day one was that China’s options were limited. On the one hand, if China used force, it would set a precedent by which other countries could also respond to the occupation of Chinese lands, not forgetting to destroy several fundamental principles of nuclear deterrence.

On the other hand, if China did not use force, it would be seen as weak – encouraging other neighbors to land on land and sea. Inadvertently, China has imposed itself on a dilemma “Doing and being doomed, not-do-and-be-doomed.” Knowing this well, India has chosen to give China a way out, even if it could have confused the land in dispute in perpetuity – just like China did. It is not a sign of weakness, it is a sign of confidence.

What exactly happened here is that India has not only found the best way to deal with China, but has also created a model for other countries to follow. China, on land, expects other countries to feel passive and not shoot. What India’s actions have shown is that China has very few options, if other countries choose to crouch on Chinese (or disputed) lands. This is now at the heart of Xi Jinping’s troubles in Beijing.

As his purge of opponents intensifies, to counter his visible mismanagement of the economy, opposition to him within the party also intensifies. Beijing was full of rumors of severe criticism that faced within the party accordingly. In addition, Global Times, with its raucous rhetoric, instead of serving as a force multiplier, worsened its situation in the politburo, preventing it from covering its error.

Normally, all Xi Jinping would have to do was tell GT to reduce it. In this situation, he could not, since such a directive would be chosen by his opponents as a sign of weakness. For Xi, even the stars conspired against him. It was particularly painful for him to welcome the BRICS summit Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Sunday with Indian troops allegedly squatting on Chinese soil – an ironic repetition when his troops squatted on our floor while Xi was held in Ahmedabad.

There was also no possibility of reprogramming the XIX Congress of the Communist Party of China, where it should be criticized harshly, albeit privately. This not only about Doklam, where his personal bump led trigger a Chinese blaze to the earth decade, but also of what is considered his poor personal management of the nuclear issue and missile And the deployment of a preventable missile shield that directly threatens Chinese security.

HC halts 2nd Vodafone arbitration in Rs 11,000-cr tax demand against India

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday restricted the Vodafone Group’s arbitration proceedings against India under a treaty with the UK in connection with a tax claim of Rs 11,000 crore against the company in connection with its Hutchinson Telecom loan $ 11 billion.

Manmohan J. prevented Vodafone or its subsidiaries from proceeding with arbitration under the Bilateral Investment Protection Agreement between India and the United Kingdom (BIPA) as the contracted telecommunications group Similar proceedings on the same issue under the India-Netherlands BIPA .

“In the present case, there is a duplication of parts and problems.” In fact, the reparation requested by the defendants under BIPA India-UK and by Vodafone International Holdings BV (VIHBV), the defendants’ subsidiary ( group Vodafone) under BIPA India-Netherlands are virtually identical.

“At first glance, this Court would be unfair, unjust and unfair to allow the defendants to pursue foreign arbitration,” the court said in an interim order.

He also notified Vodafone and requested its response by October 26 at the central government’s request for a permanent injunction against major telecommunications to proceed with arbitration under the India-UK BIPA.

In its provisional order, the court was also originally “India is the natural forum for the dispute of the claim of the defendants (Vodafone and its subsidiaries) against the applicant (center).”

The court noted that the government considered that the acquisition of 11 billion Hutchinson Telecommunications International Limited (HTIL) at Hutchinson Essar Limited (HEL) by Vodafone was sentenced to a tax deduction at source (TDS) under the Tax Law the rent.

As Vodafone did not deduct the tax at the source, the government had raised Rs 11,000 crore request which was subsequently overturned by the Supreme Court on January 20, 2012, declared the Supreme Court.

Subsequently, the government made a retrospective amendment to the Income Tax Law that reassigned the responsibilities to Vodafone, the order of the High Court was noted.

Affected by the imposition of the tax, HIVBV invoked the arbitration clause under BIPA between India and the Netherlands by a dispute notice on April 17, 2012 and a notice of arbitration of April 17, 2014, Order of 10 pages.

While proceedings under the India-Netherlands BIPA were pending, Vodafone began arbitration under the India-UK BIPA on January 24 of this year.

Due to the second arbitration, the government, represented by Deputy Attorney General Sanjay Jain said that the two claims are based on the same cause of action and call for the same relief, but from two different courts constituted accordingly. investment against the host State itself.

ASG, assisted by the permanent central government lawyer, Sanjeev Narula, argued before that court that the arbitration procedure under the BIPA India in the United Kingdom was an abuse of the judicial process.

The government lawyer argued that disputes that include tax returns by a host state are beyond the scope of arbitration under the bilateral investment treaty, because taxation is a sovereign function and can not be agitated before a court Constitutional law of the host State.

They also argued that laws passed by Parliament can not be tried by an arbitral tribunal and are not the responsibility of BIPA or any other international treaty.

I-T dept seeks Rs 32,320 cr from Hutchison over its 2007 deal with Vodafone

The income tax department has slapped a claim of Rs 32,320 million in taxes, interest and penalties at Hutchison’s Hong Kong-based for its alleged capital gains it has had on the sale of its 11 billion mobile company in India to the Vodafone Group of the United Kingdom in 2007.

In a document submitted to the Hong Kong billionaire stock exchange Li Ka-shing of Hutchison CK Holdings Ltd said that its unit, Hutchison Telecommunications International Ltd (HTIL) was notified of a demand of about Rs 7.900 crore in taxes, Rs 16,430 crore as interest, and another Rs 7,900 crore in penalty.

CK Hutchison’s unit continued to challenge the validity of these taxes, he said. This is the first time that the Hong Kong tax application has been increased. So far, the Indian government had followed the Vodafone tax.

Vodafone was fined for the first time with a tax claim of Rs 7.99 billion rupees in order not to withhold tax payments it made to Hutchison. The exceptional after including the interest and the penalty is more than 20,000 crures.

He challenged the rate and the Supreme Court in January 2012 ruled that the company was not required to pay tax on the acquisition of assets in India Hutchison.

Subsequently, the government in May 2012 changed the tax laws with retroactive effects and required taxes. Vodafone challenged this rate and the question is referred to an international arbitration panel.

In addition to Vodafone, retrospective legislation has been used to impose greater tax liability of Rs 10,247 crore on another British company Cairn Energy Plc. This issue is also referred to an international arbitration panel.

HTIL, a wholly-owned indirect CK of Hutchison Holdings Ltd, received the tax office for a November 24 tax bill, claiming for the year 2016 the proceeds from the sale of its entire 67 percent stake in the Indian company on Vodafone.

“HTIL term between February 13, 2017, the assessment of income tax on a car dated January 25, 2017 in relation to the tax of about Rs 7.900 crore in capital gains” in the 2007 transaction frame plus the general interest of about Rs 16,430 crore, “according to the document.

In addition, “HTIL received August 9, 2017, the Tax Administration on the admission of a penalty order dated July 3, 2017 and a fine of about Rs 7.9 billion rupees,” he added.

Taxes can not validly imposed HTIL, according to the applicant, who added that the order issued by the ISR based on the retroactive legislation to annul the Supreme Court of India in January 2012, which ruled that the acquisition ( Vodafone) was not exempt from taxation in India, they are in violation of the principles of international law. ”

“Accordingly, the company continues to believe that order would have no effect on the company’s financial situation or the results of its operations for some time,” he said without saying what course of action to take.

In 2007, Vodafone acquired a 67 percent stake in the mobile phone business owned by Hutchison Whampoa, which is now part of CK Hutchison. The evaluation project included earnings of around Rs 37.4 billion in sales between 2007 and Vodafone International Holdings BV.

The agreement came about when HTIL was a listed company. Subsequently, HTIL was privatized and ceased operations. Neither Htil nor its subsidiaries have a presence in India.