You are here: Home » Companies » News » Telecom
Business Standard

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

It said there is duplication of parties, issues, risk of parallel proceedings, inconsistent decision

Press Trust of India  |  New Delhi 

A man casts a silhouette onto an electronic screen displaying a Vodafone logo, in Mumbai. Photo: Reuters
A man casts a silhouette onto an electronic screen displaying a Vodafone logo, in Mumbai. Photo: Reuters

The Delhi High on Tuesday restrained Group's arbitration proceeding against India, under a treaty with the United Kingdom, in connection with a Rs 11,000 crore tax demand raised against the company in relation to its $11 billion deal acquiring stake of Hutchinson Telecom.

Justice Manmohan restrained or its subsidiaries from going ahead with arbitration under the India-Protection Agreement (BIPA) as the telecom major had initiated similar proceedings on the same issue under the the India-Netherlands BIPA.

"This is of the prima facie view that in the present case, there is duplication of the parties and the issues. In fact, the reliefs sought by the defendants under the India-BIPA and by the International Holdings BV (VIHBV), the subsidiary of defendants (group), under the India-Netherlands BIPA are virtually identical.

"This is further of the prima facie view that there is a risk of parallel proceedings and inconsistent decisions by two separate arbitral tribunals in the present case. In the prima facie opinion of this Court, it would be inequitable, unfair and unjust to permit the defendants to prosecute the foreign arbitration," the said in an interim order.

It also issued notice to and sought its response by October 26 on the central government's plea seeking a permanent injunction against the telecom major from proceeding with the arbitration under the India-BIPA.

In its interim order, the was also of the prima facie view that "constitutes the natural forum for the litigation of the defendants' (and its subsidiaries) claim against the plaintiff (Centre)".

The noted that government was of the view that the $11 billion acquisition of stake of Hutchinson Telecommunications International Limited (HTIL) in Hutchinson Essar Limited (HEL) by was liable for (TDS) under the Act.

As had not deducted the tax at source, the government had raised the demand of Rs 11,000 crore which was subsequently quashed by the Supreme on January 20, 2012, the high said.

Thereafter, the government made a retrospective amendment to the Act which re-fastened the liability on Vodafone, the high order noted.

Aggrieved by the imposition of tax, VIHBV invoked the arbitration clause under the BIPA between and Netherlands through a notice of dispute of April 17, 2012 and notice of arbitration of April 17, 2014, the 10 page order said.

While the proceedings under the India-Netherlands BIPA was pending, initiated arbitration under the India-BIPA on January 24 this year.

Challenging the second arbitration, the government, represented by Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Sanjay Jain, has said the two claims are based on the same cause of action and seek identical reliefs but from two different tribunals constituted under two different treaties against the same host state.

The ASG, assisted by central government standing counsel Sanjeev Narula, argued before the high that the arbitration proceedings initiated under the India-BIPA was an abuse of the process of law.

The government lawyers argued that disputes encompassing tax demands raised by a host state are beyond the scope of arbitration provided under the bilateral treaty as taxation is a sovereign function and the same can only be agitated before a constitutional of the host state.

They also contended that laws passed by the Parliament cannot be adjudicated by an arbitral tribunal and do not fall within the ambit of BIPA or any other international treaty.

First Published: Wed, August 23 2017. 02:16 IST