Nokia drafts Luthra to defend Rs 5,000 cr dual tax claims: Collating 3m Nokia export docs for Tamil Nadu tax man

Nokia: Troubled
Nokia: Troubled

Luthra & Luthra is defending Finnish cellular giant Nokia’s Indian subsidiary Nokia India in its Madras high court writ contesting the Tamil Nadu VAT department’s claim and in the Supreme Court against a Rs 2,250 crore sales tax guarantee.

Luthra Delhi partner Vikas Srivastava, having briefed senior counsel Arvind Dattar in Chennai, is acting on all advisory and direct and indirect tax litigation for Nokia, and Delhi partner Sanjeev Sachdeva is acting on indirect tax issues.

It is understood that Srivastava eventually argued himself for Nokia in the Madras high court as well as in the Supreme Court.

The SC had on 14 March dismissed Nokia’s appeal against the Delhi HC order asking for Rs 2,250 crore ($368m) to be deposited in an escrow guarantee against the tax department’s claim against it over the proceeds from the sale of its factory in India to Microsoft.

Barely a week later, the Tamil Nadu VAT department then slapped a demand notice of Rs 2,400 crore on Nokia claiming that it was selling handsets in the domestic market instead of exporting them, whereas only exports are exempt from VAT.

It is understood that the Madras HC has asked the company to file all of its export documents; the company has filed part of the documents because filing all would mean turning over 3 million documents to the Tamil Nadu HC.

The company has requested for time to file all documents and in the meanwhile to offer sample checks.

Photo by Pete

Comments

Guest 3 Apr 2014, 08:59
+2 -1
I suppose India in one of the most corrupted country in the world.
Modified Congystani 4 Apr 2014, 05:39
+0 -0
Absolutely rubbish! I have never come across any kind of corruption at any place in this country! Everybody is so happy! You appear to be an anarchist aaptard!
Guest 3 Apr 2014, 17:46
+0 -0
"Tamil Nadu HC"?
kianganz 3 Apr 2014, 18:38
+0 -0
Sure, if it's not capitalised, you can also say the high court in Tamil Nadu or the Tamil Nadu HC.
No Sir 4 Apr 2014, 12:37
+0 -0
It is "High of Judicature at Madras". Or "Madras High Court". NOT Tamil Nadu HC. That's the point Guest is making.
kianganz 4 Apr 2014, 12:48
+1 -0
My point is, as far as I know, that if we had written, "Tamil Nadu High Court", that would have been grammatically (and factually) incorrect, since no high court by that specific name exists.

The actual capitalised proper noun that should only ever be used is The High Court of Judicature at Madaras, which is its actual name.

If you say Madras high court, technically 'high' and 'court' shouldn't be capitalised, because that is not its actual name either.

Therefore, it is similarly fine to call it the Chennai high court, the HC of Madras, or the the high court of Tamil Nadu, or the Tamil Nadu HC (somewhat more colloquially), or the Tamil Nadu high court, or the high court based in Tamil Nadu, because these are simply descriptive and you are not making a claim that it's actual name is any of those.

That's my understanding / LI house style of the rules of grammar, in any case... :)

Best wishes,
Kian

Ps: We had a similar debate a few years ago, if I remember correctly.
Go Kian 7 Apr 2014, 07:04
+3 -0
Le li.