vodafone case study ppt

VODAFONE CASE STUDY

Nov 17, 2021

530 likes | 1.01k Views

Vodafone Group Plc is a British multinational telecommunications company. Its registered office and global headquarters are in Newbury, Berkshire, England. It predominantly operates services in Asia, Africa, Europe, and Oceania.

Share Presentation

Presentation Transcript

OVERVIEW Vodafone Group Plc is a British multinational telecommunications company. Its registered office and global headquarters Newbury, Berkshire, England. It predominantly operates services in Asia, Africa, Europe, and Oceania. are in

TIMELINE 1985 1987 1999 2000 2007 2013 The Vodafone analogue network was launched Vodafone is acknowledged as the largest mobile communication s company in the world. Vodafone completed its purchase of AirTouch Communications and changed its name to Vodafone Airtouch plc the Company reverted to its former name, Vodafone Group plc Vodafone entered into a title sponsorship deal with the McLaren Formula One team. Vodafone launches 4g networks

S W O T Weaknesses Opportunities Threats Strengths Being a global brand, the company comes under constant vigilance from global authorities. Vodafone has to constantly fight for market share with competitors due to price wars Untapped rural market can be a huge potential for Vodafone Focus on MNP can help convert competitor customers to their network New entrant's low price offering affects Vodafone's margins Saturation point in getting new customers would eventually differentiate only on service Vodafone has a very high brand visibility and strong brand recall Strong advertising with ZooZoo concepts made Vodafone ads very popular

Phone Number +61 364 132102 Contact Us Email Address Reach out to us for inquiries or comments. [email protected] Website www.globalassignmenthelp.com.au

• More by User

Case Study. Dominican Republic – Measures Affecting the Importation and Internal Sale of Cigarettes 蔡奉真、黃琳君、李炎蒼. Parties and measure in dispute. parties ： Dominican Republic  Honduras Measure in dispute ： 一、多明尼加要求於該國境內銷售之香菸，不論是否進口產品，包裝上均應貼上印花，以證明已經繳稅得以合法銷售。

1.2k views • 37 slides

Serenbe Palmetto, GA. Case Study. Project Summary. Location: Palmetto, Georgia Acreage: 900 Units: Approx. 165 residential units, 115 Live/work units, 6 Commercial units

297 views • 7 slides

Case Study. ADHD and Dysexecutive Functioning Syndrome. Do not use or distribute without written permission. Initial Concerns - Age 6 years, 9 months. Sensory Seeking behaviors Self-regulation Anxious, fearful Trouble with transitions Invading personal space Lack of social awareness

666 views • 26 slides

Case Study. Presented by. Araro Jireh Ary Andana Bambang Wijarnako. The Content. Southwest Airlines at a Glance. What makes SWA Different?. Case Analysis. Recommendation. Southwest Airlines at a Glance. Southwest Airlines at a Glance.

1.29k views • 21 slides

Haemorrhagic Fever In search of the “culprit ”. CASE STUDY. Study case presented by Daniele de Meneghi: UNITO_FMV, Italy ; Carla Rosenfeld: UACH, Chile; Ludovina Padre: UEVORA, Portugal; Carolina Pujol: UABC, Mexico , SAPUVETNET III members of group VII.

837 views • 27 slides

Case Study.

578 views • 7 slides

Case Study. By: Carla Norman. Part A: Getting to know your student. Motivation Survey Strengths: concept of print, return sweep, and word boundary Weaknesses: word formation, letter/sound association, reading comprehension

362 views • 9 slides

Case study. แพทย์หญิง กาญจนา พิทักษ์วัฒนานนท์ อายุรแพทย์ผู้เชี่ยวชาญระบบประสาท แพทย์ประจำศูนย์สมอง โรงพยาบาลสมิติเวชศรีราชา. ชักเกร็ง กระตุก หมดสติ. Syncope Cardiogenic shock Stroke / TIA / SAH / ICH Movement disorder , Tic , Myoclonus , Dystonia Sleep disorder : narcolepsy , cataplexy

456 views • 11 slides

Case Study. Prasun K Jalal MD Baylor College of Medicine. Case no. 1. 53/M, Caucasian Fatigue and lower extremity swelling- 6 m H/O IV drug use in 1970’s Drinks 2-3 beer a day for 20 yrs, stopped 6 m back. Examination. BMI 35 Spider angioma on chest Hepatosplenomegaly

720 views • 38 slides

CASE STUDY. Learning Objectives. To research and revise the case study for Section B of the exam. Warp Documentary.

507 views • 16 slides

Case Study . The Study of an Environmental Impact Statement for a Wind Farm Liam Dervan, EHO Galway. E.I.S. Team, Galway. Under the auspices of; Mr Brendan Lawlor, A/PEHO Team Members; Mr Gerry Leen, SEHO Mr Seamus Mitchell, SEHO Ms Niamh Kelly, EHO

655 views • 45 slides

Case Study. Deirdre Downes. My Father: My Siblings Mother, and Mom likes me best. Many Siblings One Health Care Proxy: the story of Mr. L

294 views • 7 slides

Case Study. Blood Diamonds & Human Rights in Africa. Bell Work . Finish the following words or sentences with as many words or phrases as you can. “Diamonds are …”. Blood Diamonds.

570 views • 11 slides

VODAFONE SPAIN CASE

VODAFONE SPAIN CASE. Olga García Pelayo August 2006. SUMMARY. VODAFONE SPAIN CASE INTRODUCTION CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT PROCESS RESULTS OBTAINED CONCLUSIONS. VODAFONE SPAIN CASE INTRODUCTION. STEPS TAKEN. Since DTMF . Natural dialogues. DTMF. ASR IVR. AUTOMATED SERVICES NOWADAYS.

542 views • 20 slides

Case Study. The Ombudsman Perspective. What safety issues would you look for in this resident’s case?.

362 views • 11 slides

Case Study. The Financial Professional recommended that they put their retirement funds into a product such as an annuity with a guaranteed principal feature. The Financial Professional helped Dan and Sheryl purchase a conservative

519 views • 1 slides

Case Study. Integrated Metadata Driven Statistical Data Management System (IMD SDMS) CSB of Latvia [email protected] METIS 2010. Outline. The main steps for IMD SDMS creation IMD SDMS fundamental elements Costs & benefits IMD SDMS implementation strategy

463 views • 20 slides

Ted A. Bonebrake, M.D. Case Study. Initial Presentation.

938 views • 63 slides

Relevant Evidence.

263 views • 1 slides

Vodafone. MAR 2008 Marc Swaenen. Vodafone. Uitdagingen. Vodafone is WW leider in mobiele telecommunicatie 206 mln klanten 30/06 naar 221 mln 31/12 Uitdagingen Marktaandeel behouden in verzadigde markten Marktaandeel uitbouwen in niet verzadigde markten Innovatieve produkten lanceren

417 views • 15 slides

CASE STUDY. We are going to analyze and review the zero tolerance policy but in terms of using “common sense.’ Today’s case study will take place in three different school campuses, simultaneously. Keep in mind: The definition of violence. The need for a zero tolerance policy.

919 views • 23 slides

Vodafone Iroda

Vodafone Iroda. Sós Patrik T elekommunikációs P artner. Miért a Vodafone?. Ingyenes cégen belüli beszélgetések – mobil és asztali telefonok közt Nincs vesztett hívás vezetékes számon Rugalmas és könnyen mozgatható: nincs szükség vezetékes hálózatra

370 views • 6 slides

• Submit Post
• Union Budget 2024

Vodafone Case Analysis

Introduction

Vodafone’s journey in India has been a significant case in retrospective amendment made to tax laws. The decision made by the Supreme Court in this case and subsequently the decision made by PCA in Cairn UK case following Vodafone case amounts to a huge loss to the government as the reserve of the government depends upon the collection of tax. Tax avoidance has become a common practice today. Tax avoidance is considered as “legitimate tax planning”. Only after this case, strict provisions to govern tax evasion by non-resident companies through indirect transfers were made. Agreeing to the fact that there must be liberal tax policies in order to attract foreign investment, India need not stoop down too low to attract FDI. Moreover, tax laws in the country must be stabilized and strong tax laws must be enacted to cover these types of transactions in order to help the government. This case is a learning experience to know about indirect transfer of assets, taxability of capital gains, retrospective amendments to tax laws and clarity of tax laws in the country. Though various amendments to tax laws have been made, it has been a continuous defeat to the country regarding these offshore transfers.  This is a landmark judgment pronounced by the Supreme Court of India. It was a 3-judge bench decision consisting of Chief justice S.H Kapadia, Swatanter Kumar and K.S. Radha Krishnan. The case was originally dealt by the Bombay HC.

BOMBAY HIGH COURT

Vodafone India Services Pvt. Ltd vs Union Of India, Ministry Of Finance and Anr. EQUIVALENT CITATION: 2009(4) BomCR258, (2008)220CTR(Bom)649

Vodafone International Holdings (VIH), a Dutch Company procured 100% shares in CGP Investments (Holding) Ltd a company situated in Cayman Island, for USD 11.1 billion from Hutchison Telecommunications International Ltd in the year 2007. CGP, through different organizations and actions controlled 67% of Hutchison Essar Limited (HEL), an Indian Company. Vodafone got command over CGP and its downstream the subsidiaries including HEL through the acquisition. It had acquired telecom licenses to give cell communication in various circles in India starting from November 1994. In September 2007, a show-cause notice was given to the Vodafone Company by the Indian Tax Department to clarify the reason for why tax was not retained on instalments made to HTIL in connection to the above said transaction as said transaction of transfer of shares in CGP had an impact of aberrant or indirect transfer of assets in India. 3

Whether the transfer of shares between two foreign companies, resulting in extinguishment of controlling interest in the Indian Company held by a foreign company, amounted to transfer of capital assets in India and whether such transaction is chargeable to tax in India?

Sec 2(14) of Income Tax Act-Capital Asset

Sec 2(24) of Income Tax Act- Definition of Income Sec 5 of Income Tax Act-Scope of total income

Sec 9 of Income Tax Act- Income deemed to accrue or arise in India Sec 45 of Income Tax Act-Capital gains

Sec 191 of Income Tax Act-Direct Payment Sec 195 of Income Tax Act-Other sums

Sec 201 of Income Tax Act-Consequences of failure to deduct or pay

MAINTAINABILITY

The respondent contended that the writ petition is not maintainable because the petitioner had an effective alternative remedy available under Income Tax Act. 4 The petitioner cannot invoke the writ jurisdiction as there is a failure on part of the petitioner as they did not invoke the jurisdiction under tax law. It was held that where a statute creates a right or liability and gives a special remedy when enforced, the remedy provided by that statute only must be availed of. In the present case, the Act provides for a complete machinery to challenge an Order of assessment, therefor the order can only be challenged by the mode prescribed by the Act and not under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY

The respondent contended that the petitioner has not produced the important documents that are essential for determination of tax charges in India and thereby, the petitioner cannot challenge validity of provisions in issue. It was held that even if the burden of proof does not lie on a party, the Court may draw an adverse inference if he withholds important documents in his possession which can throw light on the facts at issue. 5 Therefore, when the Petitioner has challenged the constitutional validity of the Amendment to Sections 191 and 201 of the

I.T. Act by the Finance Act, 2008, then the same must be in context of certain facts pleaded and proved by evidence in the form of documents on record and not in vacuum or in the abstract.

Section 9 of the Act provides the formal source rule which provides for taxing gains that arise from the transfer of capital assets that are in India. In this case, Hutchison’s gain arose from the sale of shares of CGP, a capital asset located in Cayman Islands. Therefore Hutchison’s gain was not chargeable to tax in India; thereby, Vodafone BV in not required deducting tax at source under the Act.

Chapter X of the Act does not provide to tax all amounts involved in a particular transaction, which are otherwise not taxable. Before bringing any transaction for charging tax, a taxable income must arise. Therefore ordering to pay tax to amounts involved in International Transaction tantamount to imposing a penalty for entering into a transaction as no taxable income has been incurred.

It emphasized that the law restricted the courts from imposing tax liabilities on the basis of economic substance of the transaction. The legal form of the transaction was that Hutchison had transferred shares of a Cayman Island company. Since, the shares were situated in Cayman Islands, the “formal source rule” failed to capture the Hutchison gains in India’s tax net. To sum it up, Petitioner simply argued that it was not legally right to hold that Hutchison gains were taxable in India.

The issue of shares by the Vodafone to its holding company and receipt of consideration of the same is a capital receipt under the Act 6 . Capital receipts cannot be brought to tax unless specifically/ expressly brought to tax by the Act 7 . It is well settled that capital receipts do not come within the ambit of the word ‘Income’ under the Act, save when so expressly provided as in the case of Section 2 (24) (vi) of the Act. This brings capital gains chargeable under Section 45 of the Act, to tax within the meaning of the word ‘Income’. 8

In this case, attention was drawn to the definition of `Income’ 9 in the Act which includes in its scope amounts received arising or accruing within the provisions of section 56(2) (vii)(b) of the Act. The definition applies to issue of shares to a resident in India. This order relies on the meaning of International Transaction provided in Explanation (i) to Section 92B of the Act. It is submitted that Explanation (i) to Section 92B of the Act only states that capital financing transaction such as borrowing money and/or lending money to AE would be an International Transaction. However, what is brought to tax is not the quantum of amount lent and/or borrowed but the impact on Income due to such lending or borrowing. Similarly, Explanation to Section 92B of the Act, which covers business restructuring, would only have application if said restructuring/ reorganizing impacts income. If there is any impact of income on account of business restructuring/reorganizing, then such income would be subjected to tax as and when it arises whether in present or in future. 10 In this case, such a contingency does not arise as there is no impact on Income which would be chargeable to tax due to issue of shares. 11

The issue of Chapter X of the Act being applicable is no longer an untouched matter because similar provision as provided in Section 92 of the Act was also provided under Section 42(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1922. The Supreme Court held that the action of revenue in seeking to tax a resident in respect of profit which he would have normally made but did not make because of his close association with a non-resident. It observed that it is open to charge tax on notional profits and impose charge on the resident. 12 The aforesaid provision of Section 42(2) of the 1922 Act was incorporated in its new avtar as Section 92 of the said Act. It was thus emphasized that the legislative history supports the stand of the respondent-revenue that even in the absence of actual income, a notional income can be brought to tax. 13

Section 92(1) of the Act uses the word ‘Any income arising from an International Transaction’. Accordingly, we see that, the income of any party to the transaction could be subject matter to charge tax and it does not provide that the income of resident only is taxable. In case of Chapter X of the Act, the matter of real income concept has no applicability. Therefore, the difference between ALP and the contracted price would be added to the total Income.

Chapter X of the Act is a complete code by itself and not merely a machinery provision to compute the ALP 14 . Chapter X of the Act applies wherever the ALP is to be determined by the A.O 15 . The Petitioner itself had submitted to the jurisdiction of Chapter X of the Act by filing/submitting Form 3-CEB, declaring the ALP 16 . It is the hidden benefit in the transaction which is being charged to tax. Therefore, the charging section is inherent in Chapter X of the Act.

OBSERVATION

No express legislation on capital account transaction:

Section 92(1) of the Act states that an income from an international transaction is a condition precedent for the applicability of Chapter X. The meaning of income will not include capital receipts unless it is specifically mentioned as provided in Section 2(24)(vi) of the Act. So, capital gains to be taxed under Section 45 of the Act are deemed to be income under the Act.

Income pre requisite for applicability of Section 56(1):

For application of Section 56 of the Act , an income must arise which can be taxed. Issuing of shares at a premium is on capital account gives rise to no income.

Charge and measure of tax entirely different:

The tax can be charged only on income and in the absence of any income arising, the application of the measure of ALP to the transfer value does not arise. Chapter X of the Act provides that a transaction can be taxed only after working out the income after finding the ALP of a transaction.

No relevance of Section 92(2) in the present case:  

Section 92(2) of the Act deals with a situation where two or more AEs enter into an arrangement whereby they are to receive any benefit, service or facility. This provision is not applicable in this case as there is no situation where there is no allocation of any cost or expense between the petitioner and the holding company.

The transaction entered by the Petitioner amounts to transfer of a capital asset and not a transfer of controlling interest ipso facto in a corporate entity and is chargeable to tax in India.

It was held that any profit or gain arising from the transfer of a company in India has to be considered as a profit and gains of the company which actually owns and controls it. In this case, the income from the transfer is accrued by the HTIL and not Cayman Island Company (CGP). Therefore, the recipient was HTIL. Therefore the interest of the recipient is divested to the petitioner and hence is liable for capital gains tax.

The Effects Doctrine Extra-territorial operation of Section 195 of the I.T Act provides that any state may impose liabilities, even upon persons not within its territory, for conduct outside its borders that has consequences within the borders of its state. Hence, the dominant purpose of entering into agreement by the two foreign companies is to acquire the substantial interest and of which one foreign company is held in the Indian company the municipal laws of the country would be applicable and hence Indian Tax laws will be applied.

If the Hutchison gains were held not to be taxed in India, India would forfeit its right to tax as the country of source. Thereby the taxpayers will try to exploit the unintended loopholes in India’s tax law.

If the Hutchison gains were held taxable in India it would fortify India’s taxing rights as a source country- if you earn value from India, you shall be taxed in India. The entire value earned by HTIL “was only on account of the fruits of the investment made by HTIL in India, goodwill/brand value generated by HTIL for the Hutch brand in India, the telecom licenses granted in India, customer base in India and the prospect of future development and expansion in India 17 .” In the context of capital gains on company’s shares, the settled legal principle is that shares are located where the company’s share register is maintained, normally the place of its incorporation 18 . Rendering Hutchison gains taxable in India would entail imposing “substantial tax liabilities, after the fact, on entities that would avoid such liabilities according to this formal rule” 19 .

SUPREME COURT

Vodafone International Holdings … vs Union Of India & Anr

CITATION-[2012] 1 SCR 573

Whether the Indian Revenue Authority can tax a sale of shares between two non-resident companies on an offshore transaction where the controlling interest of an Indian corporation is purchased on the basis of that transaction?

PRINCIPLES DEALT BY SUPREME COURT

Piercing the corporate veil

Companies are separate legal entities that are independent from its shareholders and management. This is the foundation for company and tax laws. It is a general principle that a holding company is not liable for the acts of the subsidiary.

The Supreme Court held that it is the duty of the court to find the nature of the transaction and when doing it; it must look at the whole transaction and must not deal the elements of the transaction separately.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the transaction, the court must determine whether the transaction made primarily to evade taxes. It can be justified by piercing the corporate veil.

The Supreme Court held that strategic foreign direct investment (FDI) into India must be seen in a holistic manner.

By application of this doctrine, the Supreme Court held that the major purpose in Vodafone was to transfer the shares of CGP and not transferring the rights in HEL (situated in India). The court held that corporate can be pierced and the principal company can be held liable for the acts of the subsidiary company when it is shown that the company has misused to achieve certain wrongful objectives. 20

Tax avoidance and tax planning

The Supreme Court made a detailed difference between tax evasion and tax planning. The court held that tax planning is not illegal, illegitimate or impermissible. The debate over the validity and legality of the decision in Union of India v Azadi Bachao Andolan ((2004) 10 SCC 1)) and its departure from McDowell and Co Ltd v CTO ((1985) 3 SCC 230) on the specific issue of tax avoidance has been settled in this case.

The Court clarified that Justice Reddy’s observations extended only to artificial and colourable devices. Thereby it is wrongful to understand that mean all tax planning is illegal, illegitimate or impermissible.

Limitation Of Benefits clause.

Justice Radhakrishnan (in his concurring judgment) held that in case of absence of LOB clause in the Treaty, and in light of the existence of CBDT Circular No. 789 of 2000 and a TRC certificate, the Revenue cannot at the time of sale, disinvestment or exit from FDI in India, deny benefits to Mauritian companies by stating that the FDI was routed through a Mauritius company from somewhere else.

Tax Residency Certificate

In this case, the court held that the treaty and circular will not restrict the Revenue from denying Treaty benefits, when it is proven that the Mauritian company at the time of disposal of shares, made the transaction with intent to avoid tax. The court also referred to the memorandum of understanding (MOU) signed between India and Mauritius which is to track down transactions tainted by fraud and financial crimes. The court held that Mauritius is a clean jurisdiction to route investments into India and, provided the transaction is not found to illegal or colourable which was designed to evade tax.

Section 9 of the Act  

The Supreme Court explained that section 9(1)(i) gathers in one place various types of income that are deemed to accrue or arise in India. It includes: “All income accruing or arising, whether directly or indirectly, through or from any business connection in India, or through or from any property in India, or through or from any asset or source of income in India, or through the transfer of a capital asset situate in India”.

“The Supreme Court noted that the words “directly or indirectly” in section 9(1)(i) of the Act refer to the income and not the transfer of a capital asset (property). It held that to apply the words “directly or indirectly” to the transfer of a capital asset (such as HEL) “would amount to changing the content and ambit of section 9(1)(i). We cannot re-write section 9(1)(i). The legislature has not used the words indirect transfer in section 9(1)(i).” It noted that, “if the word indirect is read into Section 9(1)(i), it would render the express statutory requirement of the 4th sub-clause in section 9(1)(i) nugatory” 21

The court also made reference to the fact that the Direct Taxes Code Bill 2010 (DTC) proposes the taxation of offshore share transactions, which leads to the inference that indirect transfers are not presently covered by section 9(1)(i).

Transfer of HTIL’s property rights by extinguishment  

The court held that the case concerned the sale of shares and not the sale of assets. The court adopted the “look at” approach (as opposed to the “dissecting” approach) and held that the facts and circumstances of the present case must be viewed holistically. Hutchison has been part of Indian telecom business since 1994, and had been paying income tax in India.

Therefore, the transaction entered into cannot be considered sham or colourable. The court was of the view that the transaction took place only with intent to invest in India and not evade tax. The court also held that non-compete rights and the use of the Hutch brand were not property rights and it could not be subject to tax in India.

Withholding tax obligations: sections 195 and 163 of the Act

The transaction entered into by the companies is between two non-resident entities and was executed outside India. Consideration was also passed outside India. The court held that when a payment is made between two non-residents situated outside India, then the transaction has no nexus with the underlying assets in India. Therefore, Vodafone was not legally obliged to respond to the section 163 notice issued which declares a purchaser of an asset as a “representative assessee”.

The tax is levied on the basis of the source and the source is the location where the sale takes and not where the product is derived or purchased from.

HTIL and VIH are foreign companies and the sale takes place outside India, so the source of revenue is outside India. It could be taxable only when this trade is protected by legislation. The tax laws must be strictly construed and tax can be laid only when the language of the statute unambiguously states so. The provision for charging income tax must not be expanded to impose a tax burden which would otherwise be non-taxable. Therefore indirect movement of capital assents cannot be included by expansion of the provision. The present transaction was carried out between two non-resident persons in a contract conducted outside India where the consideration was also rendered outside India and VIH is therefore not legally obligated to respond to the notice referred to in section 163 relating to the purchaser’s care as a representative measure.

The selling of HTIL’s CGP shares to Vodafone or VIH amount to transfer of capital assets under the scope of Section 2(14) of the Income Tax Act and therefore not chargeable under capital gains tax on all rights and entitlements resulting from the shareholder agreement, etc., which form an integral part of CGP ‘s shares. The order of High Court of the demand of nearly Rs.12, 000 crores by way of capital gains tax would amount to imposing capital punishment for capital investment and it lacks authority of law and therefore is quashed.

GROUNDS ON WHICH THE ORDER CAN BE REVERSED

1. On bringing the retrospective amendment which states that any income which arises either directly or indirectly by means of or by reason of transfer of assets in India shall be deemed to accrue or arise in India and can be

2. The explanation inserted by finance Act 2012 to sec. 9(1)(1) in its 2 nd exception provides that CGP Investments is a 100 % subsidiary company of Hutchison company and is wholly controlled by the latter company. Therefore the exception provided in the explanation is not applicable and hence capital gain arising through sale is taxable at source.

The SC through its landmark judgment has removed certain uncertainties revolving around the imposition of taxes in the country. By means of this verdict certain principles have been established and recognized by the SC including:

• Principles relating to tax policies and plans
• The validity of tax avoidance by providing the taxpayers the right to reduce their liabilities to a maximum extent by legitimate arrangement of their income and business affairs provided nothing contrary to such act is specified in the enactments.
• The establishment of corporate structures by multinational companies for business and commercial purpose.
• The application of the principle of lifting of the corporate veil in all transactions done with an objective of evading taxes.
• Lastly the need for a holistic view or approach when dealing with cases involving companies having made investments in tax neutral countries. It further urges to avoid the misconception that presence of corporate structures in tax free countries is necessarily a scheme for avoiding tax.

In short, the SC through its judgment has distinguished tax avoidance from tax evasion and along with certain other significant principles recognized tax avoidance as a legitimate activity while penalizing tax evasion, further highlighting its view on the need for a legitimate tax planning.

CRITICISMS TO THE SC JUDGEMENT:

The judgment pronounced by the SC in this case has been to subject to severe criticisms. The SC is loathed for providing such a verdict. It is argued that SC has set a precedent that brings into jeopardy thousands of crores of potential revenue.it was also pointed out that tax avoidance through artificial devices is now a days very much prevalent in the industry and many large firms gain huge sums of money through such schemes. It was opined that the judgment in McDowell though reverted by 2 other decisions (Azadi Bachao Andholan and Wallfort) has dealt with the issue in the right perspective. The Mauritius companies are considered to be ‘post box companies’ and its remarked that the benign attitude of the tax authorities has led to a blatant evasion of taxes. The SC is blamed for not setting right the mistake it made by transgressing the McDowell judgment in the Vodafone verdict. The SC verdict is condemned on the basis that despite being aware of the transaction’s true nature as being transfer of Indian asset the SC has shown ignorant behaviour by providing such a verdict. This act of SC is viewed as a welcoming gesture for the foreign companies to evade taxes in India, jeopardizing crores and crores of potential revenue to the country and the attitude of courts towards such artificial tax evading devices. This judgment as a contract to the judgment in the 2G scam is considered to be arbitrary in nature.

CASES IN WHICH VODAFONE CASE HAS BEEN CITED

1. M/S Shri Vishnu Eatables (India) … vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income … on 3 October, 2016

“It is necessary for the Assessing Officer to decide the issue of objection to applicability of chapter X, if raised by the assessee, before referring the transaction to the TPO as it is a basic issue and would prevent loss of man hours on both sides in computing the ALP if it is finally concluded that Chapter X is not applicable.” 22 [3]

2. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal – Mumbai

Exind Trading P. Ltd, Mumbai vs Ito 6(2)(4), Mumbai on 7 November, 2019 It was held that the Vodafone case and CBDT Circular was not applicable in this case.

3. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal – Mumbai

Income Tax Officer-1(3) (2), … vs Singhal General Traders Private … on 24 February, 2020

“The premium on share issue was on account of a capital account transaction and does not give rise to income and hence, not liable to transfer pricing adjustment.” 23

4. Allahabad High Court

Rakesh Mahajan vs State Of U.P. And 4 Others on 4 December, 2019

“The legal relationship between a holding company and WOS is that they are two distinct legal persons and the holding company does not own the assets of the subsidiary and, in law, the management of the business of the subsidiary also vests in its Board of Directors.” 24

5. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal – Delhi

M/S. New Delhi Television Ltd., … vs Dcit, New Delhi on 14 July, 2017

“If an actual controlling Non-Resident Enterprise (NRE) makes an indirect transfer through “abuse of organisation form/legal form and without reasonable business purpose” which results in tax avoidance or avoidance of withholding tax, then the Revenue may disregard the form of the arrangement or the impugned action through use of Non-Resident Holding Company, re-characterize the equity transfer according to its economic substance and impose  the tax on the actual controlling Non-Resident Enterprise.”25 [4]

INTERNATIONAL LAW AND VODAFONE CASE

The Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague, Netherlands, held that an amendment to Indian tax laws was in violation India and the Netherlands agreement.

The international arbitration proceeding was initiated by Vodafone International Holdings

B.V. (VIH or Vodafone) against the government of India regarding the retrospective amendment made to Indian tax

Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) held that the imposition of taxation through a retrospective amendment to domestic tax laws for imposition of tax, was in violation of “fair and equitable treatment” provided under the Agreement between the Republic of India (India) and the Kingdom of Netherlands (Netherlands). Moreover, any attempt to enforce tax demand on Vodafone would amount to breach of international obligations.

The objective of the agreement is for Promotion and Protection of Investments (India- Netherland BIT). This award does not mark the end of dispute as the Indian Government has the opportunity to challenge it before the High Court of Singapore.

The full text of the arbitration award is not in public domain. But it is known that the imposition of a tax liability based on a retrospective amendment is held to be breach of fair and equitable treatment laid down in Article 4(1) of the India-Netherland BIT.

Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague ruled that the demand made by India for Rs 22,100 crore by retrospective amendment as capital gains and withholding of imposition of tax for a 2007 deal on Vodafone Company was breaching the provision of agreement regarding fair and equitable treatment.

Recently, the Indian government has challenged the arbitration award in Singapore Court. The government is of the opinion that the matter of taxation is not covered under the treaty and taxation is a sovereign right of the country.

CAIRN’s DISPUTE

Cairn UK Holdings Limited, a company incorporated in the U.K. (Cairn UK), had a wholly- owned subsidiary, Cairn India Holdings Limited, a company incorporated in Jersey (Cairn Jersey). Cairn Jersey owned subsidiaries in India. In the year 2006, Cairn UK transferred its entire shareholding of Cairn Jersey to Cairn India. Subsequently, Cairn India acquired the entire business of the Cairn group in India.

In 2014, pursuant to a survey action carried out at the premises of Cairn India, the Indian income-tax authorities was of the view that the transfer of shareholding in Cairn Jersey had the effect of transferring the business in India and therefore, in view of the retrospective amended income-tax laws, Cairn UK was liable to pay capital gain tax in India. This action was challenged by Cairn UK and is currently sub-judice before the High Court of Delhi in India. While the proceedings were ongoing in India, Cairn group also initiated arbitration proceedings against the Indian Government under Article 9 of the Agreement between the Government of the Republic of India and the Government of Great Britain and Northern Ireland for Promotion and Protection of Investments (India-UK BIT).

BINDING FORCE OF VODAFONE CASE

The “Doctrine of Stare Decisis,” as prevalent in common law legal systems. It means “to abide by the precedents and not to disturb settled points.” There is no similar doctrine in civil law systems or under International Law. The International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) and the UN Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) provides that the award shall be final and binding upon the parties to the dispute. In absence of any prevalent rule of binding precedent of earlier awards, the international arbitration tribunals, functioning under ICSID and UNCITRAL, do consider previous awards to have a persuasive value.

Whether the Vodafone arbitral award would have any persuasive value in arbitration proceedings of Cairn UK would depend upon the factual matrix in both the cases.

Both cases involved indirect transfer of Indian assets prior to retrospective amendment in 2012 coming into effect.

Thereby the case was decided in favor of Cairn UK and it was not liable for capital gains tax.

CONSEQUENCE OF THE CASE

The government has got excessive flak for retaining India’s “retrospective” tax on asset transfers after it recently lost a case against Vodafone in an international arbitration court. Two broad critiques are important to note.

1. Governments should never make tax changes with retrospective

2. Tax laws must be stable in order to attract foreign (or even domestic) investment.

3. Vodafone must have been aware that asset transfers in India would attract capital gains By shifting the relevant jurisdiction to a tax haven, it seems to have got a lower price from Hutchison, a majority owner of the telecommunications company. Therefore, the objective appears to be a case of tax avoidance by using a grey area in Indian tax law.

Professionals have said that there is a need for clarity and certainty in tax laws to attract foreign investments. A liberal tax policy would attract Foreign Direct Investment into India. Some professionals say that the SC could have considered this issue and that is the reason why the decision is in favour of the foreign investor (Vodafone).

The arbitration tribunal also held that the terms of the agreement was not complied by India and it is established that India has contravened the provisions of the agreement. Therefore, the government must stop taking measures to recover tax from Vodafone.

AMENDMENTS IN TAX LAW RELATING TO VODAFONE CASE

In 2012, the government of India changed the Supreme Court’s decision by proposing an Amendment to the Finance Act, which gave the power to Income Tax Department to retrospectively tax such deals.

RETEROSPECTIVE TAXATION

Retrospective taxation gives the state a power to make a rule on taxing certain products, items or services and deals and levy tax on companies even before the date the Act was passed.

Most of the countries use this method to rectify any gaps in their taxation laws that existed and allowed companies to take advantage of such loopholes. Many countries have retrospectively charged tax on companies.

Retrospective amendments are generally given to taxation laws to “clarify” the previously existing laws. It ends up hindering companies which interpreted the rules, knowingly or unknowingly in a different way. These retrospective amendments had been criticised by various investors as, this type of change in laws would affect foreign fund flow into India.

In this case, the Parliament passed the amendment to the Finance Act in 2012, by retrospective effect and subsequently made Vodafone liable for tax payment. Thereby, this case was called ‘retrospective taxation case’.

EFFECT OF RETROSPECTIVE AMENDMENT:

The onus to pay taxes fell on Vodafone after the government enacted the retrospective amendments. This amendment was criticized by investors globally. The amendment was held to be a badly drafted law as it had affected to nullify the decision of the highest court of the Nation. Following such criticisms India tried to settle matters amicably with Vodafone but all its attempts faced failure.

Does the legislature have the right to declare any decision of the court of law to be void or of no effect?

In Shri Prithvi cotton mills limited and another v. Brouch Borough Municipality and others 6 1969(2) SCC 283 the court remarked that even if the legislature has competence it cannot merely pass a law to which the verdict of the court shall not bind as such an act is a tantamount to reversing the decision of the court by exercise of judicial power which the legislative authority does not possess. A court’s decision can only be altered when unless it is fundamentally incorrect.

In Cauvery water disputes Tribunal, a constitutional bench held that legislature is authorized to change the basis of the verdict and thus the law in general affecting a class of persons at large but the legislature cannot bring any laws overriding the court’s decision such that it affects the rights and liabilities of an individual person.

Similarly, in State of Tamil Nadu v. State of Kerala and another 9 (2014)12 SCC 696 the court held that as per the doctrine of separation of powers enriched in the constitution all the 3 organs are independent and thus a law can be set aside only when it breaches the principles of equality as enriched in the article 14 of the constitution. Further it declared that the HC and SC are empowered to determine the validity of any law of the legislature.

From the above decisions its clear that the legislature cannot bring into effect any law which overrides court’s verdict and affects the rights of an individual alone as in the landmark case of Vodafone. But it has the right to effect laws affecting a class of people in general.

As the Supreme Court decided in favor of Vodafone, subsequent amendments to the Act were brought in by the legislative authorities to reverse the judgment. The Act was amended such that it provides for the following:

INCOME THROUGH TRANSFER OF CAPITAL ASSET SITUATED IN INDIA: –

SECTION 9: it provides that the following income shall be deemed to accrue or arise in India:

All income arising directly or indirectly

• Through any business connection in India or
• From or through any property in India or
• Through any asset or source of Income in India or
• Through the transfer of capital asset situate in

The following explanations 4, 5, 6 and 7 was inserted through Finance Act 2012 to section 9(1)(1).

Explanation 4 : it clarifies that the word “through” shall mean and include and shall be deemed to have always included “by means of”, “in consequence of” or “by reason of”.

Explanation 5 : through this it is clarified that an asset or capital asset being shares or interest in a company or entity registered or incorporated outside India shall be deemed to have been situated in India, if the share or interest derives, directly or indirectly, its value substantially from the assets located in India.

But in order to make explanation 5 operational the Finance Act 2015 provided certain clarifications:

Explanation 6 : For the purpose of this clause, it is hereby declared that-

1. Substantial – any share or interest of a foreign company shall be deemed to derive its value substantially from the assets situated in India, if on specified date the value of Indian assets-

• Exceeds the amount of 10cr rupees; and
• Represents at least 50% of all the assets owned by the company or

2. Value of asset – the value of the asset shall be fair market value of such asset without reduction of liabilities, if any in respect of the

3. Specified date – it is the date on which the accounting period of the company or entity ends preceding the date of transfer. If on the other hand the book value as on date of transfer of the assets exceeds at least 15% of book value as on the last balance sheet date preceding the date of transfer, than instead of the date mentioned above the date shall be the specified date of valuation.

4. Mode of determining FMV: the fair market value will be determined as per the rules prescribed.

5. Taxation on proportional basis: the capital gains arising out of the transfer of shares of assets located outside India of any company registered outside India will be taxed proportionally as specified in the

Explanation 7 provides for certain exceptions; they are as follows:

Exemption in case foreign company or entity (whose share or interest get transferred) directly owns Indian assets

Exemption shall be available to the transferor of a share of, or interest in, a foreign entity if the transferor (along with its associated enterprises), at any time in the twelve months preceding the date of transfer,

a. Neither holds the right of control or management of such foreign company or entity;

b. Nor holds voting power or share capital or interest exceeding 5 per cent of the total voting power or total share capital of such foreign company or entity;

Exemption in case foreign company or entity (whose share or interest get transferred) indirectly owns Indian assets

 In case the transfer is of shares or interest in a foreign entity which does not hold the Indian assets directly then the exemption shall be available to the transferor if the transferor (along with its associated enterprises), at any time in the twelve months preceding the date of transfer-

a. Neither holds the right of management or control in relation to such foreign company or the entity

b. Nor holds any rights in such company which would entitle it to either exercise control or management of the company or entity that directly owns the assets situated in India or

c. Nor entitle it to voting power exceeding 5 percent of total voting power of the company or entity that directly owns the assets situated in India.

Impact of the explanations on the final verdict:

From explanation 4 added it can be deduced that any income which arises either directly or indirectly by means of or by reason of transfer of assets in India shall be deemed to accrue or arise in India and is taxable in the hands of Hutchison company, Hong Kong.

Similarly, explanation 5 brings within its scope the transfer of shares of CGP investments, Mauritius being a company incorporated outside India. It provides that the shares are situated in India as such and shares derive its substantial value from the business of a company located in India.

This way through such amendments the coverage of section 9(1)(1) has been increased retrospectively to include indirect transfers.

Impact of the exemptions given in Explanation 7:

As the Vodafone case revolves around indirect transfers the second exemption provided is of importance. From the second exemption it can be seen that to be relieved from tax burden in case of transfer of shares of a foreign entity, here which is shares of CGP Investments, Mauritius, which indirectly holds Indian assets the transferor or the seller in the given case being Hutchison, Hong Kong must not manage, control or hold any rights which may provide for such control over the foreign entity whose shares are being transferred i.e., CGP Investments.

But, CGP Investments being a 100 % subsidiary company of Hutchison, Hong Kong is completely controlled by the latter and thus, Hutchison does not come within the scope of this exception. Hence, any capital gain arising from sale of the shares of CGP Investments is taxable at source in its hands.

Thus, in a way it can be concluded that the amendments brought about through the finance act 2015 become rationally comprehensive in budget 2012. Thereby, through such amendments the coverage of section 9(1)(1) has been increased retrospectively to include indirect transfers to cancel the effect of the SC verdict.

SECTION 2(14) 0F THE INCOME TAX ACT

“ capital asset” means property of any kind held by an assessee, whether or not connected with his business or profession, but does not include:

(i) Any stock- in- trade, consumable stores or raw materials held for the purposes of his business or profession;

(ii) For personal effects, that is to say, movable property (including wearing apparel and furniture, but excluding jewellery) held for personal use by the assessee or any member of his family dependent on him.

(iii) Agricultural land in India, not being land situate-

(iv) 6 per cent Gold Bonds, 1977, or 7 per cent Gold Bonds, 1980, or National Defence Gold Bonds, 1980, issued by the Central Government;

(v) Special Bearer Bonds, 1991, issued by the Central Government;

(vi) Gold Deposit Bonds issued under the Gold deposit Scheme,1999.

Both the Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court held in this case that “controlling interest” is not a capital asset. The Finance Bill added the following Explanation:

The following explanation was added to the existing provision

Explanation: For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that

1. ‘property’ includes and shall be deemed to have always included

2. Any rights in or in relation to an Indian company,

3. Including rights of management or control or any other rights whatsoever”

Therefore, as per the amendment , the rights of the Hutchison Hong Kong in Indian company shall be included in the term capital asset under section 2(14) including the right of management and control (i.e.,) right to appoint directors , right to access to hutch brand in India and non-competing agreement . Hence, in this case the capital asset in India has been transferred by Hong Kong to Vodafone.

SECTION 2(47) IN THE INCOME TAX ACT

Transfer”, in relation to a capital asset, includes, (i)the sale, exchange or relinquishment of the asset; or

(ii) the extinguishment of any rights therein; or

(iii) the compulsory acquisition thereof under any law; or

(iv) in a case where the asset is converted by the owner thereof into, or is treated by him as, stock- in- trade of a business carried on by him, such conversion or treatment; or

(v) any transaction involving the allowing of the possession of any immovable property to be taken or retained in part performance of a contract of the nature referred to in section 53A of TOPA Act ; or

(viii) Any transaction (whether by way of becoming a member of, or acquiring shares in, a co- operative society, company or other association of persons or by way of any agreement or any arrangement or in any other manner whatsoever) which has the effect of transferring, or enabling the enjoyment of, any immovable property.

For the removal of doubts, it is hereby clarified that “transfer” includes and shall be deemed always to have included,

• Disposing of or parting with an asset or any interest therein, or
• Creating any interest in any asset in any manner whatsoever, directly or indirectly, absolutely or conditionally, voluntarily or involuntarily,
• By way of an agreement (whether entered into in India or outside India) or otherwise,
• Notwithstanding that such transfer of rights has been characterised as being effected or dependent upon or flowing from the transfer of a share or shares of a company incorporated outside India.”

Therefore, as per amendment, in this case, the transfer made by Hutchison Hong Kong to Vodafone is of the rights of Indian company including rights of management and control, as it has by transferring the shares of CGP Mauritius, disposed of or parted with the rights of the Indian company and through indirect means, created interest of Vodafone in Indian company. It has done this by way of agreement .Transfer of rights take place by way of transfer of shares by a company incorporated in Mauritius.

SECTION 195 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT- Other sums

(1) Any person responsible for paying to a non- resident, not being a company, or to a foreign company, any interest shall, at the time of credit of such income to the account of the payee or at the time of payment thereof in cash or by the issue of a cheque or draft or by any other mode, whichever is earlier, deduct income- tax thereon at the rates in force.

Explanation 2 has been inserted in section 195(1) to clarify the obligation to comply with section 195(1) and to make deduction thereunder applies and shall be deemed to have always applied and extends and shall be deemed to have always extended to all persons, residents, non-residents, whether or not the non- resident has: –

(i) A residence or place of business or business connection in India.

(ii) Any other presence in any manner whatsoever in India.

Therefore as per amendment, the presence of Vodafone establishment in India or the residence or place of business of Vodafone or its business connection in India is not necessary for deduction under section 195 but Vodafone had sufficient nexus in India.

Retrospective amendments are amendments which have backwards operation i.e., they come into effect from a past date. In India the finance minister has recognized the power to legislate retrospective laws and amendments. But the question as to the constitutional legitimacy of such amendments is a debatable question; though it is held valid in certain situations majorly it is held to be inconsistent. Thus, as a check on such amendments their use is restricted only to exceptional cases.Vodafone was considered to be one such exceptional case were the amendments introduced in Finance act 2012 were given effect from the past date. It was a revolutionary but a clever move made by the GOI to tax the Vodafone company which faced severe criticism from the global investors. The arbitration also held it to be violative of the India-Netherlands BIT.

The Senior advocate and architect behind Vodafone’s win Harish Salve opined his view on the retrospective amendments being a crusher of India’s image in the minds of the overseas investors and citizens. He criticized the instability shown by our government. He stated that the prosperity of the country depends upon the economic and political institutions of the country, on their stability and transparency.

Hence, though the government is granted the power to legislate laws and amendments with retrospective effect, its scope is restricted to exceptional cases and so before making any retro operative law consideration of its necessity, applicability and effects by the government is vital.

Vishnupriya. B | 4 th year B.B.A.LL. B(Hons) SASTRA Deemed to be University. Thirumalaisamudram | [email protected]

Abirami. A. B | 4 th year B.B.A LL. B (Hons) SASTRA Deemed to be University. Thirumalaisamudram | [email protected]

Nithya Parvathy.RG

Soundarya .A.

3 http://ramauniversityjournal.com/law/pdf_dec2019/03.pdf

4 Institute of Chartered Accountants of India v. L.K. Ratna & Ors (1986) 4 SCC 537

5 Krishnaji Ketkar vs Mahomed Haji Latif & Ors on 19 April,1968 AIR 1413, 1968 SCR (3) 862

6 Bombay High court Judgment para 14(f)

7 Cadell Weaving Mill Co. P. Ltd. vs Commissioner Of Income-Tax on 6 February, 2001

8 Section 45 Income Tax Act

9 Section 2(24) (xvi) Income tax Act

10 Bombay High court Judgment para 13(e)

11 Bombay High court Judgment para 16(i)

12 Mazagaon Dock Ltd. V. CIT [1988] 34 ITR 368

13 Taxation of notional income: a comparison of tax regimes-Manu Patra

14 Bombay High Court Judgment para 18(f)

15Bombay High Court Judgment para 6(g)3

16 Bombay High Court Judgment para 18(b)

17 Writ Petition No. 1325 of 2010, decision delivered on September 8, 2010 paragraph 54

18 Brassard v. Smith 39 (1925) AC 371 as quoted in paragraph 95 of the Judicial    Opinion

19 Weisbach, David A. 2002. “An Economic Analysis of Anti-Tax-Avoidance Doctrines”

20 United States v. Bestfoods [141 L Ed 2d 43: 524 US 51 (1998)]

21 Victory for Vodafone in Indian Supreme Court: the final conclusion or another twist in the tale? by Aditi Mukundan and Mansi Seth, Nishith Desai Associates

22 Judgment para 16

23 Judgment para 7

24 Judgment para 68

25 Judgment para 5.12

• Vodafone tax case
• « Previous Article
• Next Article »

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

• Join Our whatsApp Channel
• Join Our Telegram Group

One Comment

Very well written article.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Post Comment

Notice: It seems you have Javascript disabled in your Browser. In order to submit a comment to this post, please write this code along with your comment: 87da1511bda62d3230b19e6829c13552

Subscribe to Our Daily Newsletter

Latest posts.

Customs Duty on Import of Share Certificates for Dematerialization into India

Bankruptcy Orders: Process, Implications and Protections

CPC Bangalore Income tax department to observe grievance redressal month

An Overview of ITR 4 – Presumptive Taxation Scheme

Domination of AI on Corporate Boardrooms & Decision-Making

Cross-Border Insolvency: Insights into India’s Legal Landscape

Legally reduce your Tax burden: Strategies for every taxpayer

CBIC & DGFT: Manipulative Interpretation by JNCH Customs – Part 1  

Complexities of Cross-Border Insolvency: A Comprehensive Guide

Personal Guarantor Liability in Corporate Insolvency: Legal Analysis

Featured posts.

New FVUs and Return Preparation Utility for e-TDS/TCS Statements

GST Implications on Hotels & Restaurant Industry

All about Income Tax Returns for individuals FY 2023-24 AY 2024-25

Failure to consider evidence | Order Set Aside, Petitioner Granted Opportunity

Malabar Parota: Akin to Flat Breads – 5% GST applicable not 18%: Kerala HC

Deceased Partner’s Heirs Not Liable for Firm’s Obligations: SC

Multiple Data provided by AIS/TIS/Form 26AS: Whether helps or confuses Assessee?

NFRA imposes penalty of 4.5 Cr on CA and CA Firm for Audit Lapses

How to Respond to DRC-01C Notice for ITC Mismatch: GSTR-2B vs. GSTR-3B

• TRP for UPSC Personality Test
• Interview Mentorship Programme – 2023
• Daily News & Analysis
• Daily Current Affairs Quiz
• Baba’s Explainer
• Dedicated TLP Portal
• 60 Day – Rapid Revision (RaRe) Series – 2024
• English Magazines
• Hindi Magazines
• Yojana & Kurukshetra Gist
• PT20 – Prelims Test Series
• Gurukul Foundation
• Gurukul Advanced – Launching Soon
• Prelims Exclusive Programme (PEP)
• Prelims Test Series (AIPTS)
• S-ILP – English
• S-ILP – हिंदी
• Connect to Conquer(C2C) 2024
• TLP Plus – 2024
• TLP Connect – 2024
• Public Administration FC – 2024
• Anthropology Foundation Course
• Anthropology Optional Test Series
• Sociology Foundation Course – 2024
• Sociology Test Series – 2023
• Geography Optional Foundation Course
• Geography Optional Test Series – Coming Soon!
• PSIR Foundation Course
• PSIR Test Series – Coming Soon
• ‘Mission ಸಂಕಲ್ಪ’ – Prelims Crash Course
• CTI (COMMERCIAL TAX INSPECTOR) Test Series & Video Classes
• Monthly Magazine

Retrospective taxation: the Vodafone case

• September 26, 2020

UPSC Articles

ECONOMY/ GOVERNANCE/ INTERNATIONAL

Topic: General Studies 3: Indian Economy and issues relating to planning, mobilization, of resources, growth, development. Government policies and interventions for development in various sectors and issues arising out of their design and implementation.

Context: The Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague gave a Unanimous ruling on Vodafone case.

What is the case?

• In May 2007, Vodafone International Holding (Dutch Firm) had bought a 67% stake in Hutchison Whampoa for $11 billion. This included the mobile telephony business and other assets of Hutchison in India
• In September 2007, the India government for the first time raised a demand of Rs 7,990 crore in capital gains and withholding tax from Vodafone
• Government argued that Vodafone should have deducted the tax at source before making a payment to Hutchison.
• Vodafone challenged the demand notice in the Bombay High Court, which ruled in favour of the Income Tax Department. Subsequently, Vodafone challenged the High Court judgment in the Supreme Court
• Supreme Court in 2012 ruled that Vodafone Group’s interpretation of the Income Tax Act of 1961 was correct and that it did not have to pay any taxes for the stake purchase.

How did government tried to overrule Supreme Court Judgement?

• In 2012, the government of the day circumvented the SC’s ruling by proposing an amendment to the Finance Act , thereby giving the Income Tax Department the power to retrospectively tax such deals.
• The case had by then become infamous as the ‘retrospective taxation case’.
• Once Parliament passed the amendment to the Finance Act in 2012, the onus to pay the taxes fell back on Vodafone

What is retrospective taxation?

• As the name suggests, retrospective taxation allows a country to pass a rule on taxing certain products, items or services and deals and charge companies from a time behind the date on which the law is passed
• Countries use this route to correct any anomalies in their taxation policies that have, in the past, allowed companies to take advantage of such loopholes.
• Global Norm: Apart from India, many countries including the US, the UK, the Netherlands, Canada, Belgium, Australia and Italy have retrospectively taxed companies, which had taken the benefit of loopholes in the previous law.

Consequence of Retrospective Taxation on Market 

• Hurts Companies: While governments often use a retrospective amendment to taxation laws to “clarify” existing laws, it ends up hurting companies that had knowingly or unknowingly interpreted the tax rules differently.
• Hurts Investor Confidence: The amendment was criticised by investors globally, who said the change in law was “perverse” in nature. This impacted the market sentiment and the flow of foreign funds to India.

How did government tried to handle Vodafone case post global outrage?

• Following international criticism, India tried to settle the matter amicably with Vodafone, but was unable to do so
• By 2014, all attempts by the telco and the Finance Ministry to settle the issue had failed.
• In 2014, the Vodafone Group initiated arbitration against India at the Permanent Court of Arbitration at the Hague, under Article 9 of the Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) between India and the Netherlands.
• After the new NDA government came to power, it said it would not create any fresh tax liabilities for companies using the retrospective taxation route. But the provision in Finance Act remained.

What is the Bilateral Investment Treaty?

• In 1995, India and the Netherlands had signed a BIT for promotion and protection of investment by companies of each country in the other’s jurisdiction.
• The two countries would, under the BIT, ensure that companies present in each other’s jurisdictions would be “at all times be accorded fair and equitable treatment and shall enjoy full protection and security in the territory of the other”.
• The BIT between India and the Netherlands expired on September 22, 2016.

What did the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague say?

• The court ruled that India’s retrospective demand of Rs 22,100 crore as capital gains and withholding tax imposed on Vodafone for a 2007 deal was “ in breach of the guarantee of fair and equitable treatment ”.
• The court ruled that Indian order was in violation of United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL).
• The court has also asked India not to pursue the tax demand any more against Vodafone Group

Implication of the ruling

• Policy Setback: The ruling in favour of Vodafone signals a setback for the country’s retrospective taxation policies. 
• Sets a precedence: The ruling also raises the possibility of other cases under arbitration being decided on similar lines.

Connecting the dots:

• Protectionism in economically interconnected world
• Bilateral Investment Treaties and Concerns

For a dedicated peer group, Motivation & Quick updates, Join our official telegram channel – https://t.me/IASbabaOfficialAccount

Subscribe to our YouTube Channel HERE to watch Explainer Videos, Strategy Sessions, Toppers Talks & many more…

Related Posts :

Cess pool: on cag report on gst, catharsis -unlock your talent & creativity: paintings by biswajit singh & song by amnisha sisters .

• DAILY CURRENT AFFAIRS IAS | UPSC Prelims and Mains Exam – 22nd April 2024
• UPSC Quiz – 2024 : IASbaba’s Daily Current Affairs Quiz 22nd April 2024
• [DAY 43] 60 DAY RAPID REVISION (RaRe) SERIES for UPSC Prelims 2024 – GEOGRAPHY, CURRENT AFFAIRS & CSAT TEST SERIES!
• DAILY CURRENT AFFAIRS IAS | UPSC Prelims and Mains Exam – 20th April 2024
• UPSC Quiz – 2024 : IASbaba’s Daily Current Affairs Quiz 20th April 2024
• [DAY 42] 60 DAY RAPID REVISION (RaRe) SERIES for UPSC Prelims 2024 – SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, CURRENT AFFAIRS & CSAT TEST SERIES!
• DAILY CURRENT AFFAIRS IAS | UPSC Prelims and Mains Exam – 19th April 2024
• UPSC Quiz – 2024 : IASbaba’s Daily Current Affairs Quiz 19th April 2024
• [DAY 41] 60 DAY RAPID REVISION (RaRe) SERIES for UPSC Prelims 2024 – SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, CURRENT AFFAIRS & CSAT TEST SERIES!
• UPSC Quiz – 2024 : IASbaba’s Daily Current Affairs Quiz 18th April 2024

Don’t lose out on any important Post and Update. Learn everyday with Experts!!

Email Address

Search now.....

Sign up to receive regular updates.

Sign Up Now !

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Vodafone Case Study

Related Papers

SSRN Electronic Journal

kashif janjua

Strategy: Analysis and Practice : Text and Cases

Tanya Sammut-Bonnici

This case outlines the growth of the UK mobile communications industry from its inception, and provides an overview of the events that transformed mobile telephony into a mass market commodity. Beginning in 1985, the case outlines the continuous evolution of T-Mobile, Orange, Vodafone and O2i, the mobile network operators (MNOs) which were licensed to operate in the UK from 1985 to date. The case describes how Orange and TMobile rapidly gained market share over O2 and Vodafone, the industries incumbents that had set up ten years earlier. The case tracks the network operator’s initiatives into the mid 1990s as the market changed radically in terms of affordability, product choice, and customer cohorts. Finally the case describes strategic action in the late 1990s when the MNOs experienced exponential demand and the market hit critical mass. The case focuses on the strong forces affecting the companies: rapid technological developments and the exponential rise in sales fuelled by the mechanism of network externalities. Besides describing the sales patterns of the mobile communications market, the case documents the jockeying for the leadership position, and the constant narrowing of the differences in market shares. The companies experienced powerful market forces which override strategic action and permit new entrants to rapidly gain ground. As a result the MNOs opted for copycat strategies in order to collectively benefit from network externalities, and to reduce the risk of allowing competitors to gain ground. When used with the support readings on the mechanism of network externalities, the case becomes a powerful vehicle for studying a variety of new market issues including strategic herding and strategic collaboration.

Communications of the ACM

Khawaja Saeed

International Journal of Business Data Communications and Networking

Strategy: Analysis and Practice

Jarmo Harno

Anna-Greta Nyström

Telecommunications Policy

Grazia Cecere

Stella Njeri

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences

Abdollah Karimi

Hervaldo Carvalho

O Supremo Tribunal Criminal: O Supremo em 2017

Thomaz Pereira

Dieter Hoffmann

Australian Prescriber

Basil Roufogalis

Barack Obama

International Journal of Biological and Chemical Sciences

Ricardo Cabral

Máté Kovács

Nilza Patrícia Ramos

The Journal of Physical Chemistry A

Yann Danten

Elvis Ronald Valero Kari

American Journal of Hypertension

Gilles Fortin

Suomalais-Ugrilaisen Seuran Aikakauskirja

Susanna S Virtanen

Cec Pedersen

Shweta Shinde

American journal of physiology. Gastrointestinal and liver physiology

Shanjana Awasthi

BMJ case reports

Nasir Hussain

Rocznik Bezpieczeństwa Międzynarodowego

Tomasz Pawluszko

Episteme. Revista de divulgación en estudios socioterritoriales

Episteme. Revista de divulgación en estudios socioterritoriales.

Jurnal Agronomi Indonesia (Indonesian Journal of Agronomy)

Edi Santosa

INTED2021 Proceedings

Víctor Yepes

Current opinion in critical care

Alain Duhamel

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Call us @ 08069405205

Search Here

• An Introduction to the CSE Exam
• Personality Test
• Annual Calendar by UPSC-2024
• Common Myths about the Exam
• About Insights IAS
• Our Mission, Vision & Values
• Director's Desk
• Meet Our Team
• Our Branches
• Careers at Insights IAS
• Daily Current Affairs+PIB Summary
• Insights into Editorials
• Insta Revision Modules for Prelims
• Current Affairs Quiz
• Static Quiz
• Current Affairs RTM
• Insta-DART(CSAT)
• Insta 75 Days Revision Tests for Prelims 2024
• Secure (Mains Answer writing)
• Secure Synopsis
• Ethics Case Studies
• Insta Ethics
• Weekly Essay Challenge
• Insta Revision Modules-Mains
• Insta 75 Days Revision Tests for Mains
• Secure (Archive)
• Anthropology
• Law Optional
• Kannada Literature
• Public Administration
• English Literature
• Medical Science
• Mathematics
• Commerce & Accountancy
• Monthly Magazine: CURRENT AFFAIRS 30
• Content for Mains Enrichment (CME)
• InstaMaps: Important Places in News
• Weekly CA Magazine
• The PRIME Magazine
• Insta Revision Modules-Prelims
• Insta-DART(CSAT) Quiz
• Insta 75 days Revision Tests for Prelims 2022
• Insights SECURE(Mains Answer Writing)
• Interview Transcripts
• Previous Years' Question Papers-Prelims
• Answer Keys for Prelims PYQs
• Solve Prelims PYQs
• Previous Years' Question Papers-Mains
• UPSC CSE Syllabus
• Toppers from Insights IAS
• Testimonials
• Felicitation
• UPSC Results
• Indian Heritage & Culture
• Ancient Indian History
• Medieval Indian History
• Modern Indian History
• World History
• World Geography
• Indian Geography
• Indian Society
• Social Justice
• International Relations
• Agriculture
• Environment & Ecology
• Disaster Management
• Science & Technology
• Security Issues
• Ethics, Integrity and Aptitude

• Indian Heritage & Culture
• Enivornment & Ecology

Retrospective taxation: the Vodafone case, and the Hague court ruling

Topics Covered: Important International institutions, agencies and fora, their structure, mandate.

Retrospective taxation: the Vodafone case, and the Hague court ruling:

In a unanimous decision, the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague has ruled that:

• India’s retrospective demand of Rs 22,100 crore as capital gains and withholding tax imposed on Vodafone for a 2007 deal was “in breach of the guarantee of fair and equitable treatment”.
• India should not to pursue the tax demand any more against Vodafone Group.

What is the case?

• In May 2007, Vodafone bought a 67% stake in Hutchison Whampoa for $11 billion.
• In September that year, Indian government raised a demand of Rs 7,990 crore in capital gains and withholding tax from Vodafone, saying the company should have deducted the tax at source before making a payment to Hutchison.
• Vodafone challenged the demand notice in the Bombay High Court, which ruled in favour of the Income Tax Department.
• Then, Vodafone challenged the judgment in the Supreme Court, which in 2012 ruled that Vodafone Group’s interpretation of the Income Tax Act of 1961 was correct and that it did not have to pay any taxes for the stake purchase.
• But, the same year, the then Finance Minister, the late Pranab Mukherjee, circumvented the Supreme Court’s ruling by proposing an amendment to the Finance Act, thereby giving the Income Tax Department the power to retrospectively tax such deals.

The case had by then become infamous as the ‘retrospective taxation case’.

What happened after India passed the retrospective taxation law?

The Act was passed by Parliament in 2012 and the onus to pay the taxes fell back on Vodafone.

• Later, Vodafone Group invoked Clause 9 of the Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) signed between India and the Netherlands in 1995.

Article 9 of the BIT says that any dispute between “an investor of one contracting party and the other contracting party in connection with an investment in the territory of the other contracting party” shall as far as possible be settled amicably through negotiations.

What is the Bilateral Investment Treaty?

The BIT was signed for promotion and protection of investment by companies of each country in the other’s jurisdiction.

• The two countries would, under the BIT, ensure that companies present in each other’s jurisdictions would be “at all times be accorded fair and equitable treatment and shall enjoy full protection and security in the territory of the other”.

What did the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague say?

• It ruled in favour of Vodafone. Because, the taxation was in violation of the BIT and the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL).
• The tribunal also said that now since it had been established that India had breached the terms of the agreement, it must now stop efforts to recover the said taxes from Vodafone.
• It also directed India to pay £4.3 million ($5.47 million) to the company as compensation for its legal costs.
• What is retrospective taxation?

As the name suggests, retrospective taxation allows a country to pass a rule on taxing certain products, items or services and deals and charge companies from a time behind the date on which the law is passed.

• Countries use this route to correct any anomalies in their taxation policies that have, in the past, allowed companies to take advantage of such loopholes.
• While governments often use a retrospective amendment to taxation laws to “clarify” existing laws, it ends up hurting companies that had knowingly or unknowingly interpreted the tax rules differently.

InstaLinks :

Prelims Link:

• PCA- composition, functions and members.
• Are PCA rulings binding on parties.
• Clause 9 of the Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) signed between India and the Netherlands in 1995.
• Overview of UNCITRAL.

Mains Link:

Discuss the functions and significance of PCA.

Sources: the Hindu and Indian Express.

• Our Mission, Vision & Values
• Director’s Desk
• Commerce & Accountancy
• Previous Years’ Question Papers-Prelims
• Previous Years’ Question Papers-Mains
• Environment & Ecology
• Science & Technology

• International
• Today’s Paper
• Premium Stories
• Express Shorts
• UP Board Results
• Health & Wellness
• Board Exam Results

Retrospective taxation: the Vodafone case, and the Hague court ruling

The court has also asked india not to pursue the tax demand any more against vodafone group..

In a unanimous decision, the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague on Friday ruled that India’s retrospective demand of Rs 22,100 crore as capital gains and withholding tax imposed on the British telecommunication company for a 2007 deal was “in breach of the guarantee of fair and equitable treatment”. The court has also asked India not to pursue the tax demand any more against Vodafone Group.

What is the case?

In May 2007, Vodafone had bought a 67% stake in Hutchison Whampoa for $11 billion. This included the mobile telephony business and other assets of Hutchison in India. In September that year, the India government for the first time raised a demand of Rs 7,990 crore in capital gains and withholding tax from Vodafone, saying the company should have deducted the tax at source before making a payment to Hutchison.

Vodafone challenged the demand notice in the Bombay High Court, which ruled in favour of the Income Tax Department. Subsequently, Vodafone challenged the High Court judgment in the Supreme Court, which in 2012 ruled that Vodafone Group’s interpretation of the Income Tax Act of 1961 was correct and that it did not have to pay any taxes for the stake purchase.

The same year, the then Finance Minister, the late Pranab Mukherjee, circumvented the Supreme Court’s ruling by proposing an amendment to the Finance Act, thereby giving the Income Tax Department the power to retrospectively tax such deals. The Act was passed by Parliament that year and the onus to pay the taxes fell back on Vodafone. The case had by then become infamous as the ‘retrospective taxation case’.

The ruling in favour of Vodafone signals a setback for the country's retrospective taxation policies. It also raises the possibility of other cases under arbitration being decided on similar lines.

What is retrospective taxation?

As the name suggests, retrospective taxation allows a country to pass a rule on taxing certain products, items or services and deals and charge companies from a time behind the date on which the law is passed.

Countries use this route to correct any anomalies in their taxation policies that have, in the past, allowed companies to take advantage of such loopholes. While governments often use a retrospective amendment to taxation laws to “clarify” existing laws, it ends up hurting companies that had knowingly or unknowingly interpreted the tax rules differently.

Apart from India, many countries including the US, the UK, the Netherlands, Canada, Belgium, Australia and Italy have retrospectively taxed companies, which had taken the benefit of loopholes in the previous law.

Also read | Govt may have to shell out Rs 85 crore if it decides not to appeal

What happened after India passed the retrospective taxation law?

Once Parliament passed the amendment to the Finance Act in 2012, the onus to pay the taxes fell back on Vodafone. The amendment was criticised by investors globally, who said the change in law was “perverse” in nature.

“The retrospective amendment that overturned the decision of the highest court of the land was badly drafted in its wide generalities and carried a perverse sense of vindictiveness,” said Nigam Nuggehalli, Dean of the School of Law at BML Munjal University.

Following international criticism, India tried to settle the matter amicably with Vodafone, but was unable to do so. After the new NDA government came to power, it said it would not create any fresh tax liabilities for companies using the retrospective taxation route.

By 2014, all attempts by the telco and the Finance Ministry to settle the issue had failed. Vodafone Group then invoked Clause 9 of the Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) signed between India and the Netherlands in 1995.

Also read |  Explained Ideas: What can the government do to revive India’s telecom industry?

What is the Bilateral Investment Treaty?

On November 6, 1995, India and the Netherlands had signed a BIT for promotion and protection of investment by companies of each country in the other’s jurisdiction.

Among the various agreements, the treaty had then stated that both countries would strive to “encourage and promote favourable conditions for investors” of the other country. The two countries would, under the BIT, ensure that companies present in each other’s jurisdictions would be “at all times be accorded fair and equitable treatment and shall enjoy full protection and security in the territory of the other”.

While the treaty was between India and the Netherlands, Vodafone invoked it as its Dutch unit, Vodafone International Holdings BV, had bought the Indian business operations of Hutchinson Telecommunicaton International Ltd. This made it a transaction between a Dutch firm and an Indian firm.

The BIT between India and the Netherlands expired on September 22, 2016.

📣  Express Explained  is now on  Telegram . Click here to join our channel (@ieexplained) and stay updated with the latest

What did the Permanent Court of Arbitration at The Hague say?

One of the major factors for the Court of Arbitration to rule in favour of Vodafone was the violation of the BIT and the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL).

In 2014, when the Vodafone Group had initiated arbitration against India at the Court of Arbitration, it had done so under Article 9 of the BIT between India and the Netherlands.

Article 9 of the BIT says that any dispute between “an investor of one contracting party and the other contracting party in connection with an investment in the territory of the other contracting party” shall as far as possible be settled amicably through negotiations.

The other was Article 3 of the arbitration rules of UNCITRAL, which, among other things, says that “constitution of the arbitral tribunal shall not be hindered by any controversy with respect to the sufficiency of the notice of arbitration, which shall be finally resolved by the arbitral tribunal”.

• Why some student visa hopefuls are attempting to go to Canada on visitor visas
• Explained: The legislations that BJP, Congress, DMK and others have promised in manifestos
• Russia-Ukraine war: Have tanks become obsolete in modern warfare?

In its ruling, the arbitration tribunal also said that now since it had been established that India had breached the terms of the agreement, it must now stop efforts to recover the said taxes from Vodafone.

I met nobody in rural India who saw Modi as Subscriber Only

How Bengaluru’s lakes disappeared Subscriber Only

Vidya Balan & Pratik Gandhi talk about marriage, infidelity & Subscriber Only

Buoyed by Modi factor, Tejasvi Surya sits pretty in Bangalore Subscriber Only

To survive as an artist today, be a megalomaniac Subscriber Only

How FN Souza's art was perplexing yet arresting Subscriber Only

Lakshya Sen & Priyanshu Rajawat hold the key to India's Subscriber Only

Why Shobhaa De says hunger is underrated

‘High growth not possible if we don’t do our own Subscriber Only

• Express Explained
• Vodafone Idea

The BSEAP is set to announce the AP SSC results 2024 today at 11 M. Over 6.3 lakh students appeared for the exam this year, which was conducted from March 8 to 30. Students can check their scorecards on the official websites or through the direct link provided. Last year, the overall passing percentage was 72.26%.

More Explained

Best of Express

EXPRESS OPINION

Apr 22: Latest News

• 01 Iveco chief Marx quits to become CEO at CNH Industrial
• 02 PBKS vs GT, what caught our eye: Prabhsimran fills in at the start, Harpreet never gets going; Punjab flounder as Ashutosh-Shashank can’t rescue one more time
• 03 SI returning from kin’s funeral dies after his car rams road divider
• 04 Ecuadorians head to polls to toughen fight against gangs behind wave of violence
• 05 Chess Candidates 2024 Live Updates: Gukesh makes history by becoming youngest-ever World Championship contender
• Elections 2024
• Political Pulse
• Entertainment
• Movie Review
• Newsletters
• Gold Rate Today
• Silver Rate Today
• Petrol Rate Today
• Diesel Rate Today
• Web Stories

Vodafone Case Study

Introduction.

Vodafone Case study describes the situation when  Idea Cellular and Vodafone after the entrance of JIO. So, here is the Vodafone case study which describes the position of Vodafone and Idea Cellular before and post-merger, reasons for the merger, how did merger take place and critical analyses of the merger.

About Vodafone 

Vodafone company came from the UK based Vodafone Group plc. It is a multinational service provider of telecommunications in 22 different countries as of 20th November 2020. And, in India Vodafone has its headquarter in Mumbai, Maharashtra. Vodafone is the third largest telecommunication provider in the country. Vodafone

At the beginning of the year, 1992 Vodafone started its company in India from Bombay(now Mumbai). After the entry of JIO in the year 2016. Afterwards, our Vodafone case study begins, Vodafone and Idea announced their merger in March 2017. And as of 31st August 2018, it is known as Vodafone Idea Limited.

Vodafone Idea Merger Case Study

Vodafone case study explains the reason and the situation of the merger of Vodafone and Idea. This merger was first announced in March 2017. Afterwards, in July 2018, the department of telecommunication gave the approval for the merger. Finally, on 31st Aug 2018, the merger was completed and it is announced as Vodafone Idea Limited.

And this merger was the largest telecom merger in India. As per this merger, Vodafone holds a 45.2% stake, Aditya Birla Group holds 26% and the remaining stakes were held public. So, to understand the Vodafone case study, let’s understand the reasons for the Vodafone Idea merger case study.

Reasons For Vodafone Idea Merger

So, while understanding the Vodafone case study lets us understand the reason for the Vodafone Idea merger. 

• The main reason for the Vodafone-Idea merger is to Handel the rising dominance of Reliance Jio in the Telecom industry. As Jio announced to provide free services in the first 6 months. As a result, it started to capture the maximum part of the market.
• Secondly, the free services from the Jio started the price war between the companies in the telecom sector( as it in an oligopoly market structure ).
•  As a result in case of a price war merger brings confidence in companies with synergy benefits. 
• At last, the combined entity of Vodafone and Idea was expected to hold a strong position in the industry . Such as in some circles it became the largest cellular service provider and in some circle, it was the second-largest after Bharti Airtel. So, a joined company can focus on being the service provider in pan India.

So, these were the reasons in Vodafone case study for the merger of Vodafone and Idea.

Vodafone Idea Integration

According to the past in the telecom industry, major telephone operators believes the merger is a strong tool to be in the lead position. As Airtel acquires the Telenor, it acquires the scope and business from other small telecommunication companies like Augere Wireless, Videcon, Tikona(4G Spectrum) etc. 

Also, Reliance Communication (R Com) merged with Aircel and acquire MTC. Plus the Tata Telecom also started the process of merging with R Com. As a result in a period of seven months telephone operators numbers went down to seven from twelve.

However, the announcement of the merger creates a negative image in the public, when the Vodafone and Idea merger was announced the Idea prices started to drop . And the share price of Idea declines from Rs. 97.70 on 20th March 2017 to Rs. 81.81 on 6th Sep 2017.

But the merger was important it gave support to the two companies, which were struggling to survive in the industry. Combined resources will help to compete with only the two biggest brands(Jio and Airtel).

So, these were the challenges of Vodafone and Idea merger in case of Vodafone case study.

Critical Analysis Of Vodafone Case

The merger of Vodafone and Idea in Vodafone case study gave higher stakes to the Idea promoters as compared to Vodafone. So, in long run, both companies can gain access to equal shares in the future. 

Here are the few takeaways from the Vodafone Idea merger in Vodafone case study: 

• The very first thing was the acquisition of 4.9 per cent shares of Vodafone by Aditya Birla . This would amount to a total of Rs. 3874 crore wherein each share is worth Rs. 108 . This would be helpful in increasing the shareholding capacity of Idea to 26 per cent .
• While in the case of Vodafone case study, Vodafone holds 45.1 per cent of the shares in the merger, Idea would be allowed to buy another 9.6 per cent but at a cost of Rs. 130 per share in the period spread over the next four years. However, if Idea is unable to come up equal to the shareholding percentage of Vodafone, it can go forward and buy the number of shares required further but at the price prevailing in the market.
• And, the chairperson of the newly formed enterprise would be Kumar Mangalam Birla . On the other hand, Vodafone had appointed the Chief financial officer . As, after that new CEO was named under both the companies.
• Lastly, the promotors of both entities have the right to nominate three members for the board . Also, there are 12 members out of which 6 are independent on the board in the Vodafone case study of Vodafone and Idea merger. 

Idea Positioning Before Merger

In Vodafone case study of Vodafone and Idea merger, now lets understand the Idea Cellular Limited is an Aditya Birla Group company. Founded in 1995, the company was incorporated as Birla Communications Limited and had a license of GSM-based services in Gujarat and Maharashtra Circle. In the following years, the organization started to expand its business with Tata Group, Birla and AT&T group of the US in joint venture form. 

In August 2015, Idea announced the rollout of its 4G services. It was now competing with Airtel and Vodafone – in a non-monopolistic market. The company relaunched its “What an Idea” campaign taking 4G to the rural areas and empowering people through the usage of 4G services.

But in the year 2016 sudden announcement from Mukesh Ambani about Reliance Jio disrupted the Indian telecom sector. Below pie chart shows the market share of different telecom players before the entry of Jio.

As the Indian market is very sensitive towards price and Jio used it to make most of the profits. So, Jio started to make its all services free for the first six months. Afterwards, they made the services of voice calls, data extremely cheap. As a result, JIO captured a significant share of the telecom industry. Here is the pie chart of the post-Jio market share of various telecom players.

Vodafone Idea Merger

This transaction required various approvals from government authorities including SEBI, dept. of Telecom and Reserve Bank of India among others. The Department of Telecommunications (DoT) has given the green signal for the merger of Vodafone India and Idea in our Vodafone case study, the largest Merger and Acquisition agreement in the sector, which has displaced Bharti Airtel from top position after over 15 years. The approval conditions, which were given over a year after the agreement, were announced in March 2017 which included an advance payment of Rs 7,268 crore. 

Idea Contributon

Promoters Aditya Birla Group infused Rs 3,250 crore in Idea Cellular , which separately raised Rs 3,000 crore ahead of a planned merger with Vodafone India. Following the equity infusion by Idea’s promoters, their stake in India’s third-largest telecom operator rose to 47.2% from 42.4% now. Idea contributed its assets which included standalone towers with 15,400 tenancies and a stake in Indus towers Ltd of 11.5%. 

The entry of Reliance Jio Infocomm Ltd in September 2016, with free services for almost seven months and cheap tariffs, had eroded margins and impacted the revenue of rivals. The contribution of Vodafone will be Vodafone India along with standalone towers with 15,400 tenancies without including an 11.5% stake in Indus Towers. According to the agreement between Idea and Vodafone.

Vodafone will contribute more amount of net debt, about Rs 2,480 crore than Idea at the completion of the merger. Post-termination of both companies, the combined entity will be a joint venture between Vodafone and Idea in the Vodafone case study. Which will account for the under the equity method, controlled by both Aditya Birla Group and Vodafone.

Idea promoters hold the rights to acquire a 9.5% additional stake from Vodafone under the agreed deal to equalize shareholdings over time as per the following proposition

Vodafone: 45.1% – 9.5% = 35.6%

Idea: 26% + 9.5% = 35.6%

Impact of Merger on Telecom Industry

There are also several other implications that this merger of Vodafone case study will bring forth on the telecom industry.

1. Firstly, there can be initiatives based on the renewal of price discipline for the disruptive entry by Jio has caused some serious misbalance

2. Secondly, the poor financial health of the telecom sector can be observed. And through such mergers, there will be an infusion of health and life. Since India is the fastest-growing market in terms of subscriber base .

3. Through the merger, Vodafone and Idea will overcome their debts and a large sum of credit will be infused into the system

4. The deal has also saved both the telecom companies from selling off their business . As was being planned by them initially and this would directly impact the quality of services being provided by different players in the industry

The merger in the Vodafone case study will surely boost the pace of the telecom sector. It has also been found that the savings, synergies and also the spectrum will have a substantial impact on the escalating growth. 

There will be a saving of over 60 per cent of the cost of the operation and this will aid in improving the quality and performance of the service through investments from the saved money.

Enhancement in network infrastructure will be observed while the operational efficiencies have a chance to reach excellence. Moreover, the revenue market share is expected to rise for all the locations and the spectrum of the entity would exceed the initial caps.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Vodafone takes pride in bringing excellence in customer service and integrated solutions when it comes to network quality. Flexibility resides in their DNA—thriving to deliver useful and inspiring innovation, they adapt to the clients’ ever-changing demands. Vodafone envisions a community where communication technologies help improve lives and livelihood, giving everyone access to various services. We at SlideGenius aims to preserve the company’s identity by sticking to its tagline: Experience the Difference. Our design team created a deck that discusses Vodafone’s unique professional stance, including their advocacies and services.

In A Hurry? Give us a call

1.858.217.5144

OR GET YOUR FREE PRESENTATION DESIGN QUOTE NOW

Or fill out the form

Company Size None 1 2-10 10-100 100-1000 1000+

Trusted By 4,000 Clients Globally

24 Hour Global Coverage

Rush Projects

Project Overview

See other work we've created in your industry.

Our Design Process

When you work with us, getting your ideal slide designs will be easy thanks to our 4-step process. Each step is quality-controlled to ensure you’re getting the best presentation possible.

How To Reach A Genius

The Discovery Phase

You have an assigned Account Manager who is always there for you.

Kicking Off The Project

The Ideation Phase

This phase is dedicated to the collaborative development of concept and messaging through a Creative Call, and this is how we do it.

Ready. Set. Design!

The Design Phase

In this phase, our designers do the all-important job of visualizing your concepts and content into digestible layouts for your target audience.

Mission Complete

The Delivery Phase

With 100% of the project now in your hands, all that is left is to do is implement any final tweaks you may have and send it back your way.

Related Projects

See other work we’ve created in your industry.

Red Bull Lyft Chevron Delta Nike QuickenLoans SiriusXM Teletracking Hilton Fidelity Contact us for a design quote today

Are you ready to take your company’s PowerPoint presentation slides to the next level? Reach out to one of our presentation consultants to receive your free project quote today. Our trained staff can help assist you with all of your presentation needs.

The Legal Lock

MAKING LAW SIMPLE!

Mergers and Acquisitions: Case Study of Vodafone Idea Merger

By: Vaidehi Sharma

Introduction to mergers and acquisition  

‘Mergers and acquisitions’ is a technical term used to define the consolidation of two or more companies. When two companies are combined to form one unit, it is known as a merger, while an acquisition refers to the buying of one company by another one, which means that no new company is formed, only one company has been absorbed into another. Mergers and Acquisitions are an important component of strategic management, which comes under the head of corporate finance. The subject concerns buying, selling, dividing, and combining various companies. It is a  type of restructuring to have rapid growth and increase profitability. 

Mergers and acquisitions are part of the strategic working of any business or working group. It involves the joining of two businesses with the object to increase market share and profits and to have an influential impact on the industry. Mergers and Acquisitions are complicated processes that require preparation, analysis, and deliberation. There are a lot of parties who might be affected by a merger or an acquisition but before a deal is finalized, all parties need to be taken into consideration, their concerns should be addressed, and all possible hurdles that can be avoided must be avoided. 

The term ‘Merger’ has not been defined under the Companies Act, 2013 or  Income Tax Act, 1961 , but as a concept ‘merger’ is a combination of two or more entities into one; with the accumulation of their assets and liabilities, and coming together of the entities into one business. 

The other word for Merger is ‘Amalgamation’. Under The Income Tax Act, 1961  (ITA) ‘amalgamation’ is defined as the merger of one or more entities with another company, or the merger of two or more entities forming one company. It also mentions other conditions to be satisfied for an ‘Amalgamation’ to benefit from the beneficial tax treatment. 

For example -A company called and a company called B merge to form a new company called C . This is called a merger. 

The effect of the merger is that the assets and liabilities of both companies will now be shared and they will cease to exist as independent companies . 

Benefits of Mergers 

⮚ Profit and resource sharing – The resources of both companies are pooled together which increases the profit outcome.

⮚ Access to New Markets – Entering into new markets can be challenging for any company even for established companies. While setting up a subsidiary  or branch is always an option, a merger or acquisition can save companies a  significant amount of time, effort, and money compared to starting from  scratch  

⮚ More Economic Strength and Competitive Edge – mergers and acquisitions mean financial strength for both companies. It can help them to become more powerful in the market, attract more customers and create more resources. 

⮚ Powerful Human Resource -The biggest asset any company can hold is its employees. A skilled and effective stall generates a lot of profit for the company. Therefore in mergers and acquisitions, the human resources of both companies are pooled together. 

⮚ Better infrastructure and Fixed Capital -In mergers and acquisitions the resources of both companies are shared which means access to better infrastructure for the poor company. Big machines and other resources can also be used up for better production. 

Mergers and acquisitions in the telecom industry in India 

Introduction  .

India is currently ranked as the world’s second-largest telecommunications market with more than 1.20 billion subscribers and has shown strong growth in the past one and a half decades. 

The Indian telecom industry is growing at a rapid pace. In 2020-2021 the telecom industry contributed 6% to India’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP). The telecom  sector is set to grow at a Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 9.4% from  

2020 to 2025. However, with a CAGR of 15.9% throughout the forecast period, the smartphone industry in India will have the fastest growth. By 2025, India’s digital economy will be worth $ 1 trillion. 

The industry has increased primarily due to favorable regulatory conditions, low prices, increased accessibility, and the introduction of Mobile Number Portability  (MNP), expanding 3G and 4G coverage, and changing subscriber consumption patterns. The deregulation of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) rules has made the telecom sector one of the fastest-growing sectors in the country and a huge means of employment opportunity generator in the country too.

The subsectors of the telecommunication sector include infrastructure, equipment,  Mobile Virtual Network Operators (MNVO), white space spectrum, 5G, telephone service providers, and broadband. 

It is predicted that 5G technology will boost the Indian economy by $ 450 Bn between 2023 and 2040. According to the Global System for Mobile  Communications (GSMA), there is an excellent opportunity for investment in this sector as India will have almost one billion installed smartphones by 2025 and 920  million unique mobile customers, including 88 million 5G connections. 

Importance of the telecom industry  

The importance of the telecommunication industry is highlighted by the fact that it enables global communication. The relevance of this industry has increased significantly after the pandemic. Services offered by this industry are more frequently used since it allows for a continued virtual connection. The smartphone market will continue to increase as more people are expected to purchase them in the coming years. Given that government reforms have eliminated ambiguity and risks and established a stable investment environment, India’s telecom sector is projected to receive investments totaling $ 25.2 Bn over the next two years. 

Mergers and acquisitions in the telecom industry  

The recent trend of mergers and acquisitions can be widely seen in the telecom sector too. This recent trend in the world of the telecommunications market has been caused by the ongoing regulatory liberalization and privatization of the industry.  These changes have brought about fierce competition and ensuing decreases in profit in both the domestic and international telecommunications service markets. 

Mergers and acquisitions in the telecom sector are considered to be horizontal mergers because both companies deal in the same line of business. In the majority of developed and developing countries, mergers and acquisitions in the telecommunications sector have increased which also resulted in the creation of jobs. 

The legal Framework of Mergers and Acquisitions in the telecom sector  

• ⮚ National Telecom Policy formed in 2012 hasimplifiedde M&A in Telecom  Service Sect, ensuring adequate competition and allowing  100% FDI.
• ⮚ The merger in the case of licenses shall be done for the respective service category. Access to service license allows the provision of internet service and so the merger of ISP license with services license shall also be  
• permitted. 
• ⮚ In a service area, the market share of the merged entity should not be more than 50%. If it is more, it has to reduce it below 50% in an annum. 
• ⮚ The total spectrum held by the merged entity should not be more than 50%  in a service area. If it is excess, it has to be surrendered within an annum. 
• ⮚ The corporation which acquires will have to pay the difference between the market price determined in the auction & the administrative price if an acquired company has got spectrum after paying the administrative price. 
• ⮚ If due to a merger or transfer of license in any service area business,  corporation or entity becomes an important market power, then TRAI’s  Telecommunication Act of the year 2002 will come into place. 

Case study – Merger of Vodafone and Idea 

History of both the companies  , history of the merger  .

In March 2017, it was announced that Idea Cellular and Vodafone India would merge. The merger got approval from the Department of Telecommunications in July 2018. On 30 August 2018, National Company Law Tribunal gave the final nod to the Vodafone-Idea merger. It was completed on 31 August 2018, and the new entity was named Vodafone Idea Limited. Under the terms of the deal, the  

Vodafone Group held a 45.2% stake in the combined entity, the Aditya Birla  Group held 26% and the remaining shares were to be held by the public. 

Reasons for Merger of Vodafone and Idea   

Dominance over the market by JIO- The main reason for the merger of Vodafone and the idea was the dominance of the Jio company. The companies saw a major downfall as Jio announced free internet services for the first 6 months. As a result price war began between companies. the companies began to see losses, and as a result, a merger between Vodafone and Idea happened. 

Key takeaways  

• ⮚ Under the plan submitted to Indian regulators, Vodafone will initially hold a  50 0% stake in the combined entity, while the Aditya Birla Group and public shareholders will hold 21.1% and 28.9%, respectively. Vodafone will then divest a 4.9% stake to the Aditya Birla Group, which would increase the latter’s stake from 21.1% to 26%, thus crossing the threshold for an open offer. 
• ⮚ Vodafone and Idea had individual spectrum holdings of 411 MHz and 316  MHz respectively. The amalgamation of the companies would give, it was expected, the merged company a hold of 728 Mhz increasing the chances of the merged company to rank number one or two in India. 
• ⮚ The merger ratio was 1:1. This ratio was based on the price of Idea at 72.5  per unit. Implied enterprise value for Idea and Vodafone was INR 72  thousand crores and INR 82 thousand and 8 hundred crores respectively.  The agreement had a break fee of Rs 3,300 crore payable upon certain conditions. 
• ⮚ Aditya Birla also has the right to acquire up to 9.5% additional shareholding from Vodafone Group throughout three years post-closure of the deal for an agreed price of INR 130 per share. But these rights by Aditya Group will be exercised based on the growth achieved and the market price of the combined entity .
• ⮚ Idea and Vodafone will have joint control over the appointment of CEO and  COO, the exclusive rights to appoint a CFO is with Vodafone. So Vodafone is not just a major shareholder but also has more financial rights. 
• ⮚ If at the end of 3 years, Aditya Birla Group fails to purchase any stakeout of the additional stake of 9.5%, then they will be given the last opportunity to purchase the stake at the prevailing market price for share equalization. 
• ⮚ Vodafone contributed net debt of Rs 55,200 crore to the merged entity,  whereas Idea contributed Rs. 52,700 crore. Vodafone contributed net debt of Rs. 2,500 crore more than Idea . 
• ⮚ In September 2020, Vodafone – Idea rebranded itself. The company used the initials to rebrand itself as ‘Vi’. The rebranding took place after almost two years of the merger, however, it shows the spirit of integration. 
• ⮚ In the financial year 2022, Vodafone Idea Limited earned revenue of 386.5  billion Indian rupees.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Copyright © 2024 The Legal Lock

Design by ThemesDNA.com

• 217 Share on Instagram
• 203 Share on Facebook
• 194 Share on LinkedIn

Building the Vodafone Pavilion in VR for employees to practice presentation skills

• Built a customised virtual environment ready for deployment in 4 weeks
• 91% of learners would like to see more VR training at Vodafone
• 93% of employees would recommend VirtualSpeech to a colleague

Improve employee presentation skills and confidence by re-creating the Vodafone Pavilion in VR.

Vodafone is a global leader in technology communications through mobile, broadband and TV. The key goal for the team at VirtualSpeech was to re-create the Vodafone UK Pavilion in virtual reality (VR), so that employees could practice their public speaking skills in the safety of the virtual world, before delivering a speech in real life.

In VR, they can practice in various virtual environments, upload their own presentation slides and notes, receive instant automated feedback, as well as track progress within the app. Managers can also track learner completion and progress, and more easily measure ROI.

The Pavilion itself is a large, conference room venue that's often used for in-person training, with a complex layout and room for a large number of attendees. The aim was for the virtual simulation to be complete in time to demo at Vodafone Learning Week, and continue to be used for months afterwards as a tool for communications training.

A secondary goal was to deploy existing, off-the-shelf VirtualSpeech training scenarios and features alongside the Pavilion simulation, to upskill employees and give them a chance to practice public speaking in a range of different scenarios.

Creating the Pavilion

With the Learning Week fast approaching, the VirtualSpeech team had around 6 weeks to re-create the pavilion in VR. After visiting the site and taking photos of the venue, the team got to work with designing the initial layout and texturing the scene.

After frequently updating Vodafone with progress of the build and implementing feedback, Vodafone and VirtualSpeech were happy with the final results and the scene was fully rendered. Then, the virtual audience was added into the scene and Vodafone branding added to other areas of the app. The app was then ready for Vodafone employees to start using with their Oculus Go headsets.

Example of the Pavilion in real life compared to in VR

Above: Photo panorama of the Pavilion. Below: A similar angle of the Pavilion built in VR, shown in the VirtualSpeech app.

Building the Pavilion in VR

Above: VR re-creation of the Pavilion. Below: Virtual audience added to the Pavilion. Virtual buttons can also be seen, which trigger the features described below, such as the speech analysis.

In-App Features

Along with the audience, several features were added into the simulation to increase the realism and effectiveness of employees’ practice, and provide them with useful feedback to evaluate their performance. Some of these features include:

• Speech analysis - speech feedback powered by artificial intelligence on metrics such as pace, volume, tone, use of hesitation words, and listenability Speech insights - employees receive an evaluation of how the audience is perceiving them based on a combination of factors in the speech analysis
• Eye contact feedback - learners receive feedback on their use of eye contact and are prompted to focus on certain areas of the room that they may be neglecting
• Add presentation slides - learners can add their own presentation slides into the app for more realistic, effective practice
• Notes - employees can add notes into the app, which scroll like an autocue, so they can be prompted by them while they practice
• Live feedback - employees receive feedback while presenting to give them the best opportunity for a high evaluation as possible. For example, a notification appears suggesting they speak more loudly if they are speaking too quietly.
• Custom questions - upload audio recorded questions, which can then be asked by the audience after the presentation

Using VR at Vodafone

Logistically, Vodafone use several Oculus Go headsets with this initiative, which are shared amongst employees on a needs-be basis. Using an Oculus Go for this type of training is ideal as it doesn’t require any external cables or hardware, and is easy to travel with.

Feedback from the first few months of use has been very positive, with the average time each employee has spent in-app of 36 minutes. The majority of this time was spent in the Pavilion room, as well as the VirtualSpeech meeting and presentations rooms.

A brief user survey conducted within the app showed that  93% of employees would recommend VirtualSpeech to a colleague . This is really encouraging for a new technology that very few employees will have used before.

A further  91% of respondents would like to see more VR training at Vodafone , which is a positive signal for the engagement and effectiveness of VR learning experiences as a whole.

With this project, Vodafone UK have been able to introduce VR soft skills training into the organisation in a structured and effective way.

Benefits of the VR training experience

• Employees have the opportunity for on-demand, realistic practice in the Vodafone Pavilion before delivering a presentation in the Pavilion in front of a real audience
• Learners receive feedback on their performance, which they can instantly use to improve, tracking their performance each time they practice
• Employees can practice a range of other presentation and public speaking skills in the additional VirtualSpeech VR scenarios provided such as a meeting room, sales pitch, and press conference
• Performance analytics and feedback data provided within the app ensures employees know which areas they need to work on, and managers or admins can view learner’s areas of strength and improvements as well. This can help inform both learner and manager about any gaps in their skills which require additional training