We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
Tax firm’s leaked data includes correspondences with 33 Cos, HNWIs
India’s own ‘Panama papers’ are gathering dust with law enforcement agencies and the Delhi High Court (HC). The 1.5 GB leaked data belongs to the tax consulting firm Nishith Desai Associates and includes controversial tax-related correspondences involving 33 of India’s biggest corporates and several high-net-worth individuals (HNWIs).
A Delhi-based whistle-blower, who is a software engineer, first got the sensational data and communications that could pose serious trouble for corporate houses since it contains disturbing details on how to exploit loopholes in the country’s taxation regime and float shell firms across the world in places like Mauritius, Cayman Islands, British Virgin Islands, Guernsey Island, and Uganda, apparently to avoid taxes in India.
The Pioneer has accessed the 1.5 GB data, which has 33 files with numerous correspondences between Nishith Desai Associates and big corporates and HNWIs. Noted advocate Prashant Bhushan has alleged that the ‘Desai Papers’ are on the lines of the ‘Panama Papers.’ The Panama Papers relate to a Panama-based tax firm’s involvement in helping companies and HNWIs in avoiding taxes by floating companies in tax havens.
Nishith Desai Associates is a Delhi-based legal and tax consulting firm having offices in Mumbai, Bengaluru, the Silicon Valley, Singapore, Munich, and New York. Interestingly, former SEBI chief UK Sinha’s documents like passport and credit card payments details are also available in the leaked documents.
B. This seems like normal tax advice.
Hardly anything sensational.. Seems like some software engineering managed to get his hands on correspondence.
Am i wrong?
B. What is normal 'depends'. The test of tax avoidance v. tax evasion could be considered analoguous to the test of pornography except with a slight modification - An experienced tax professional would know it when he sees it. Giving advice to aid tax evasion is an economic offence and opens up a pandoras box of violations. The allegations are rather serious.
By this logic all tax structuring advisory is illegal and must be stopped immediately by all law firms and the tax consultants. Someone needs to educate the over zealous reporters at the Daily Pioneer that sensationalising some crap information shared by some uninitiated software techie is hardly investigative journalism. Frankly the so called “whistle blowers” should be investigated on their own motives, or are they just blind to the concept called “tax structuring advice”. They should think twice and thrice before writing such nonsense about a firm like Nishith Desai Associates. It is and will always remain one of the most ethical and distinguished firms ever. If as lawyers all we can do is sit and find such malicious news articles “interesting”, we need a reality check. Stop discussing or paying heed to such journalism which is trying to bring down an organisation built on strong values and principles, we are professionals so let’s remain above such uninformed targeted reporting.
@Hardly Surprised - I am surprised that you have not considered subsections 126(1)&(2) of The Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Also agree with “callow reporting” below, Kian - please gather facts and then print.
What about the whistle blowers, when did a software techie become an authority on tax? Wonder why are you not questioning the motives of the “whistle blowers”. So fast to judge an entire career’s work of the authority of the subject and his team, you clearly don’t know the depth of their knowledge and never will.
All whistle-blowers are leaks. Edward Snowden is a traitor. Assange is a criminal. Their intentions doesn't matter. Even assuming that he has mala fides, that does not erase the illegality, if any, committed by NDA.
May be you should take a deep breath before you jump in. Blindly defending someone and attacking everyone else who has legitimate questions doesn't reflect good professionalism. May be if you shed the suit and wear the robes, you might find your thinking hat.
The abovemention is confirmed truth especially the dates. I have purposefully not named the employee.
BTW, is this matter an IP matter?
https://www.docdroid.net/NkCMcCj/csos67-2020-pdf
And in case any all too eager law student is reading this, this comment is not contemptuous. I'm just saying the order is so bad that I cannot help but judge the judge.
Clearly our judges are not interested in justice.
While I can underatand why Kian/R did not censor this post of @Callow Reporting, but I am surprised that this was not flagged as Trollish or Facts Contested?
Quote: I guess this settles your question.
( )
- R
If your point is that the blog is wonderfully written - which it is, I admit - then just point that out to that person. "A TLDR wont do justice to it" is not only more decent that "develop a reading habit to be a good lawyer" but is also much shorter.
I wonder then, which part is really tragic - the lack of a decent response, or unnecessary comments on anonymous persons lawyering skills which have nothing to do with that blog post nor these comment sections.
For what it's worth, I'm not the OP. R can confirm this by my IP. But seriously though, this place is way too toxic and people unnecessarily have a stick up their backside. Doesn't hurt to be polite.
As per the last order on the DHC website:
1. Sr Adv Arvind Datar makes a appearance
2. Presses for urgency
3. Alleges that D1's action causing prejudice to Plaintiff and counsel appearing for the Plaintiff
Now this is super interesting. Adv Anuradha Dutt's appearance is marked as the briefing counsel for Sr Adv Datar. The name of the Plaintiff is also Anuradha. I was earlier under the impression that Anuradha was NMD. So can we conclude that DMD is also involved in this along with NDA. Particularly because @Insider has recently posted that D1 has targeted multiple organizations. DMD has represented several high profile clients in international tax disputes. So this could be a colossal leak.
NDOH: 2nd August, 2021
Also caught a glimpse of 'Bajrangi' during the hearing. Adv Anuradha Dutt also clarified that her name being the same as Plaintiff's pseudonym is a mere coincidence. Why would they do so? Why choose the name same as your counsel? She also admitted that the ex-Mrs. Bajrangi was hired into NDA recently in 2019, after Bajrangi had already done his monkey tricks with Adv Prashant Bhushan.
Dont know the NDOH and which bench it will come up before.
Wonder how earlier orders were passed if the sealed cover of the petition has not been opened yet.
Actually, am on a short visit to Lucknow and was invited to a political meet of pro-BJP advocates. I was surprised at how much interest this leak/case has generated in Lucknow. Many wanted to know what's the latest in this matter.
The software engineer used all his guile to break into the servers of the law firm and take away its data. Thereby rendering all the protection by way of attorney client privilege that the law firm had built around its data.
I wonder who won in the end?
https://www.legallyindia.com/lawfirms/cyril-amarchand-scoops-ex-sebi-chief-uk-sinha-to-spearhead-governance-practice-very-profitable-wachtell-like-think-tank-new-centrepiece-of-firm-20180308-9145
Quote:
Incidentally just a day before this story was published, there was a meeting over VC inside NDA this Friday wherein the agenda was to come up with a plan to stop publishing of this saga by bloggers. NMD is apprehensive that someone from inside, a disgruntled associate is also publishing online.
- Words of the threat actor on a popular cybercrime forum.
If this is the state of the cybersecurity of a top law firm, I couldn't help but wonder how worse the cyber infrastructure of other law firms might be.
This could have serious repercussions to employees if their data is stored inside insecure servers.
NMD's ego would take a major hit when he sees that it is just $1K.
https://www.legallyindia.com/lawfirms/do-you-check-your-privilege-we-have-and-found-potentially-huge-future-problems-with-cbi-taking-nirav-modi-docs-from-cam-in-raid-20180307-9144
[quote]And around 8 to 10 years ago, recalls Nishith Desai, managing partner of Nishith Desai Associates, his firm was raided, with the CBI confiscating not just documents but also computer servers.
“What happened was, at that time they were looking for some client things, and they came [to us] and thought we were chartered accountants,” Desai tells us. “Then we pointed out to them [the things they took] are all privileged.”
“They returned the files without opening,” he says.
[/quote]
She has alleged that this story was published with the sole objective to destroy her career.
https://twitter.com/nalinisharma_/status/1443085476835958785?s=20
Quote:
Thanks R
https://www.barandbench.com/columns/nda-voluntarily-embraces-ant-money-laundering-measures
Is this the Bajrangi effect?
1. Bajrangi has changed his lawyer who does not appear to be well known (have not seen him previously)
2. This new lawyer was complaining that the defendant has not been supplied with a copy of the plaint even after 3 years. Anuradha Dutt appearing for Plaintiff refuted but the judge directed her to provide defendant with the entire case record. Anuradha Dutt strangely said that Plaintiff has annexed the firm profile of NDA in a sealed envelope and does not want to give it to the Defendant even though they have relied on it in her plaint. I could not understand why is NDA's profile in a sealed envelope and why does Plaintiff want to keep it confidential.
3. The counsel for the defendant also asked the Judge to dismiss the suit because there is no substance in the plaint and the Plaintiff is refusing to supply the complete plaint. The Judge was furious and threatened to impose heavy cost on the Defendant after which the counsel backed down but said that he will move O7R11.
4. Anuradha Dutt started arguing that the Defendant be put behind bars for his persistent contemptous conduct. She started narrating some long story on how the Defendant had stolen data from one of the lawyers of NDA who happens to be his estranged wife and now using this data to target his wife. Defendant's counsel refuted and stated that the Defendant is a whistleblower. Then Anuradha Dutt read some orders of the predecessors where a contempt notice was issued to defendant for handing over a hard disk to black money commission, but this order mentioned that Defendant had filed complaints with some statutory body through another advocate. She also read another order where J. Harishankar had recused himself. At this point the Judge said that this matter is going to take time and put it up for next year in January. Anurdha Dutt protested and asked for a short date but the Judge did not oblige.
5. Anuradha Dutt also mentioned that Defendant was making a movie on this case and that he should be restrained but the judge ignored. She also mentioned something about Mozzam who was the Plaintiff's counsel earlier which I could not understand. She said something like that Mozzam had written to Defendant that he had gotten him fired from this case.
This suit is some drama. Bajrangi was present during the hearing. I was hoping that he would be some hunk given the pseudonym ▮▮▮
The new counsel is not so unknown. He was particularly active in the COVID PILs and took Harish Salve head on.
Defendant had filed O7R11 for dismissal. Judge tried to push his counsel to withdraw or otherwise he would impose heavy cost. Defendant refused to withdraw.
Moazzam Khan's part is all wrong. Nishith Desai had replaced him with Anuradha Dutt last year as he though Moazzam was unable to stop the defendant from sharing the leaked data and the story with Black Money Commission and journalists. But the truth is that this case got messy not because of Moazzam but because of inane strategy of Nishith himself. Moazzam was just made a scapegoat.
NDA got a confidentiality club formed in this case. Such a club can be formed to protect the IP of the parties in commercial suits pertaining to IP disputes, and it is for protection of any documents revealing trade secrets of a party that it may file in such a suit. But this matter is not an IP dispute so dont know how NDA managed to get a confidentiality club formed.
Since NDA wants to keep this under wraps, it has been asking the Court not to upload or publish the orders in this matter under the pretext that this is covered under confidentiality club, and the judges have been obliging. But on certain occasions the orders have been uploaded by mistake. Those are the orders you see on the HC website. On a few occasions orders were uploaded but were taken down perhaps at the behest of NDA because some of these orders are on indiankanoon. One order that is not available on the HC website is linked to in comment #5.5.2. The para 8 directs the court master not to upload the orders. To the best of my knowledge the court has to upload all orders on its website and I have never seen anything like this before in my practice.
https://caaa1973.medium.com/another-proof-that-deloitte-knew-whistleblowers-my-identity-e5aa9a90d56d
Thank you for your comment and suggestion. I was made to quit Big4 because of the collusion between Nishith Desai and that Big 4 firm. But I did pick up the pieces quickly and am now a partner in what is practically my own firm. I don't get the fortune 500 clients that I used to deal with while at the Big 4 firm, but I have never been happier and honestly the money is decent.
Yes I have moved on but that does not mean that I will forget and forgive.
1. NDA's application to initiate contempt against Bajrangi for publishing the news story in Pioneer dismissed because NDA could not produce any evidence to show that Bajrangi was behind the publishing of the news story. NDA's counsel could only state that there could be no one other than Bajrangi who could have gotten that story published. The judge (HMJ Navin Chawla) was very clear that contempt jurisdiction is quasi criminal and the standard of proof is high and contempt cannot be adjudicated on mere conjectures or surmises.
2. Bajrangi's counsel stated that a notice be issued to Pioneer to find if Bajrangi had any role to play in the publishing of the article. The judge was willing to issue notice to Pioneer but NDA's counsel requested that Pioneer may be directed to not publish anything pertaining to the notice to which the Judge refused and NDA's contempt application was dismissed.
3. The judge asked Bajrangi to give an undertaking that he will not speak to media about NDA's leaked data, and that if he makes such a statement then the suit will be disposed of. Bajrangi point blank refused and said that he wants to approach the media to expose the large scale tax evasion being abetted by NDA. The judge then passed an injunction order prohibiting Bajrangi from speaking with media. Bajrangi protested and stated that he will challenge the order.
4. Bajrangi's counsel also filed a O7R11 for dismissal of the suit as it does not disclose any cause of action. Judge issued notice. The judge did indicate that the entire suit is based on conjectures and surmises.
Court Comedy.
https://twitter.com/jgopikrishnan70/status/1614198616830410759?s=20&t=Ybz_rKZWAYeNCDXNlYRkcA
1. LC in this case Adv Shashank Garg was summoned. He was asked why he has not concluded the execution of the commission even after 3 years. He had no clue. He said that he was under the impression that the commission was over and that he had been discharged. The judge frowned. Bajrangi complained that three of his seized devices are still with the LC. LC said that he has those three devices but does not remember where he has kept it. He was directed to trace those devices and file a final report of the commission.
2. NDA pressed for contempt against Bajrangi for appearing on the podcast. Bajrangi was unrepentant and stated that he will file a detailed reply. He objected to the fact that NDA has annexed an email with the contempt application but they have obfuscated all the details out of that document. Bajrangi insisted that he be given the complete email for him to file a reply. NDA said that it cannot as it has personal details of a spouse of one of its employees. I am at a loss how any spouse of an employee be related to podcast. Any idea?
3. Bajrangi filed a cross contempt saying that NDA has been sharing confidential material of this suit with his wife who is then using it against him. I did not know that his wife is a co defendant in this suit even though she has not appeared in this matter ever. Bajrangi alleged that NDA has breached the confidentiality club by sharing documents from this suit. NDA denied doing so. Judge mentioned hauling up the registry for giving out confidential documents to those not part of the confidentiality club. He issued notice of contempt to Bajrangi's wife to explain how she got access to the confidential documents of the suit.
4. Interestingly NDA has listed several documents that it has relied upon in its plaint but not submitted any of the documents. Bajrangi filed a discovery application and there was strong opposition from NDA. Its stand was that if they share that documents then Bajrangi will misuse and disseminate them. One of the documents is firm profile and NDA doesn't want to submit it but yet rely on it. There was also some mention of some investigation report. This all looks so strange. What kind of litigation is this? How can you not submit documents in suit? Anyways, the judge after a lot of heated arguments issued notice to NDA to put their objections on an affidavit.
5. NDA brought to the notice of the Court that Bajrangi has not filed a written statement even after 3 years. He said how can he file a reply when he has not been given the compete plaint and the LC has also not submitted a report post completion of commission. The judge seemed inclined to close the right of the defendant to file written statement but stopped short of doing it.
No law college student should follow the proceedings in this suit as it will leave them thoroughly confused. This suit seems to be having its own procedure. Unless laws have changed since I graduated and I have failed to keep pace with the latest.