A very short hearing on Thursday. Judge was least interested and NDA sought adjournment. Bajrangi had some new advocate this time and was not present. This advocate was complaining that Bajrangi is not being allowed to enter the court. He also pointed out that the LC has not returned the seized devices even after 3 years. LC stated that the devices have been stolen and he will be filing an FIR soon. Judge just adjourned the matter and at that point NDA's jr advocate sought an early date so that their contempt application may be argued. The judge was not interested.
Today a fiery hearing. Both sides the gloves are off:
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.
Today was a hearing in this matter. Some progress after years of adjournments.
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.
Nishith was not dragged into the personal matrimonial dispute at all. On the other hand he did so to join hands with the enemy of the enemy. Nishith hired the estranged spouse of the whistleblower in order to gain leverage on him and to give the leaks a spin of a matrimonial dispute.
Yes. A senior journalist is working on a documentary on the Desai Papers and the Mauritius route. The shooting starts next week. Anuradha Vs Bajrangi also is not finished yet.
do you then have the guts to complain or sue? no right? you just wanna rant over some unfounded baseless allegations to gain clientele, but let me tell you NDA is still one of the most prominent and attractive firms in India, don't use malicious claims like this for what only seems like you being fired ▮▮▮
It seems to me that you are one of those who care about Nishith Desai and this post - enough to make you comment.
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.
This is not just unusual but deliberately irregular. NDA has been desperately trying to keep this suit under cover. Read the main Pioneer news story in this discussion thread and you will get an idea of how this suit was instituted - in a sealed cover (read comment #8.1.1), under pseudonyms, directly approaching in the chamber of the judge, bypassing the registry and without serving any notice to the proposed defendant. Despite this the judge passed an ex-party order allowing NDA to raid the defendant.
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.
It appears the orders are not being updated on the Del HC website - that's very unusual, they generally have all the orders uploaded properly. It's not even that the last order is missing (so, it may not have been signed & uploaded yet) - the orders are missing in random order. Is there something fishy around this?
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.
Today was a substantive hearing after more than a year.
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 ▮▮▮
But NDA's confidential & privileged data was selling for $1K before this cybercrime forum was shut down. It is still being sold on some obscure darknet forums.
NMD's ego would take a major hit when he sees that it is just $1K.
Nah! Just another desperate attempt by NMD to stay in the news. Very soon he will get one of the international publications to publish a case study on how progressive NDA is and how this policy has brought about a transformation in the team and that we are in the profession of law and not business of law, blah blah blah.
Rajeshwar Singh is the candidate from Lucknow(Sarojini Nagar). He is ex-ED who investigated 2G scams etc and is close to the folks who have exposed the Desai files - Prashant Bhushan, Dr. Swamy, Gopikrishnan. Hence the interest.
What's the latest in this case? Case history shows that multiple hearings in the last 4 months but no order. No update posted on this thread either?
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.
All this just proves Balzac's quote in the Godfather novel by Mario Puzo: "Behind every great success there is a crime". Whether there was one here or not, it's for the government's investigative agencies and courts to determine.
This is just rubbish posted by a paid troll. Nishith is not the one who would risk his law firm for any associate. He is just another pompous overlord of an Indian law firm. If this post by @Callow Reporting even has an iota of truth, then Nishith would not have hesitated in firing this employee, rather than putting his law firm to such a grave risk. Here we are talking about leak of client confidential data and serious charges of tax evasion - something which can be a death knell for the firm.
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?
2.6 As alluded to above, this Court is not concerned, as to whether or not the information available in the external hard drive is relevant, for the purposes of the government agencies to enable them to take the matter forward as per law.
Many employees (including those who have recently quit) strongly believe that phones of some of them are being tapped by the agencies. They are more worried about that than the security of their personal data stored on internal server.
Oof. Forget contempt, reading just this order itself has left me with less respect for Justice Shakder than I did five minutes ago.
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.
Here what is pertinent is not the case title but the memo of parties. In cases of sexual offences the memo of parties does have the real names and addresses - a criminal case cannot be filed without that, but the names are obfuscated in the case titles and the orders sheet. But in the instant case of Anuradha Vs Bajrangi even the memo of parties has pseudonyms. Actually there are two memo of parties - one which is in the petition has pseudonyms and there is another one which has been filed in a sealed cover, which has the real names and addresses of the parties. So one will have to access that memo of parties which is in a sealed cover to find the true identity. Even the registry (other than its chief) is not aware of the real names/addresses.
Checked the Delhi High Court Original Side Rules for Confidentiality Club. No mention of filing suit under pseudonym. Confidentiality Club is to protect the other side from looking into the documents containing trade secrets filed by one party. Not to keep the identity of the parties confidential.
Is it common to file suits under pseudonyms in India? I haven't seen any precedent. Are there many such precedents? Please enlighten. The only scenarios where I have seen identity being protected are Rape and POCSO cases, but even there the cases are filed under real names but those names are not published.
Yes this is a wonderful blog. First time I have read a writeup that provides an inside view of the politics and culture of an Indian law firm. Otherwise you just read about salaries and workload only. This does provide a very different perspective of the culture in Indian law firms and what is wrong with it.
Pissed because someone asked for a TL;DR? Think about it for a moment.
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.
Tragic, how you expect to be spoofed information via a tl;dr, and when told to read a wonderfully written blog, say you only read things you're paid to read, while spending time being a troll on LI.
The real names of all those involved are in the original news story and the various blogs that have been linked in the comments. You don't need me to tell you those. However, let me share what is the pseudonym for the employee by whom NMD is heroically "standing by" as claimed in some of the comments. She has been referred to as Chamanlal in the Anuradha Vs Bajrangi Suit. Funny na?
We are deeply concerned with how interim orders are being passed nowadays in intellectual property cases. Senior counsel come to Court with a plaint, manage to get interim orders also and the other party aren't even aware that a case is filed against them. : Delhi HC
No @Comparison. Read the NDA story more carefully which has far more details than the Amazon one (where details are mostly sketchy and behind paywall). NDA seems to have thrown its clients under the bus, even though it may not have been intentional.
Your summary and analysis verges on absolute brilliance. Unfortunately, I have to moderate all of it. But i am bowled over by what you wrote. Hopefully when people stop suing LI, I can release that.
[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]
" On 20 Aug Nishith Desai Associates did an internal webex concall to discuss how to stop us and spread of the news of this leak. That haughty firm is clueless. Doesnt even know how to have secure webex. Stupid firm still not learn lesson."
- 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.
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.
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.
Total cover up. I am also disappointed with LI. This is not published as a story but as a conversation. The title has spelling mistake (Nitish). This conversation does not show up when one searches for Nishith Desai on LI.
This is a canard propogated by NDA because it has no way out of this mess. It is a confirmed fact that the complaint to ED and CBDT by the whistleblower and Adv Prashant Bhushan was made in the beginning of 2019. This employee who came with the added qualification of matrimonial dispute was specially hired by NDA in end of 2019, several months after the complaint. NDA filed this super secret suit shortly after (beginning 2020) this employee was hired. The basis of the suit was the statement of the employee that the whistleblower has stolen the NDA data to spite her. Thus the focus was shifted from Tax evasion to matrimonial dispute as there was no other escape route.
The abovemention is confirmed truth especially the dates. I have purposefully not named the employee.
Babbermouth, the original complaint is started and filed by this whistleblower writing to about purported tax evasion.Forget law, did you even read the article.Then the NDA petition has come in.Snapping and shouting away all the time, lazy lawyer.
What petition and admission are you blabbering about? Isn't the petition filed by NDA? Your comment makes no sense. Stop frothing at the mouth, take deep breaths and type sensible stuff. Picking out the word "credibility" from your comment, since you typed it multiple times, in evidence law, there are character witnesses and testimonies you doofus. So, reliance on credibility is not alien to law.
It would do some good for you to understand that the "credible" journalist,"distinguished"advocate and "whistleblower" will not be entertained as grounds for petition to be admitted.You have to show the violations of TAX-EVASION and also demonstrate that these are not as per tax advisory practices.Thats why"credibility" of accused becomes a factor , and a defense if petition even survives,because they are tax advising firm.Maybe if you read law instead of shooting off comments on LI, you would know why" credibility" of firm/accused is a ground.
A law firm used all its legal might to enter the software engineer's house and take away all his devices. The softie would have had all the techie security to protect his data but the law firm still managed to take it away.
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.
Why the need to "sell" the story of legal violations or offenses by relying on the "credibility" of extra ordinary journalist and distinguished advocate?If there is violation it's there and Court will take the action.
This is causing damage to NDA. Speaker from NDA was listed in a tax conference. Organizers replaced with some other (renowned) tax practitioner a couple of days before the event.
Assigned to J. Anu Malhotra. Nothing happened because NDA's petition has still not reached the bench. It is lying with the registry in a sealed cover. The judge refused to pass any order without seeing the petition. Renotified.
Wonder how earlier orders were passed if the sealed cover of the petition has not been opened yet.
What a hearing! J. Hari Shankar recused himself. I could not totally get why he did so. I have never seen a Sr advocate as helpless as I saw Sr Adv Datar today. He tried so hard to get an order but the bench would not budge.
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.
Finally updated on DHC website. Very intriguing and wonder why MSM/B&B/LiLa giving it a miss.
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.
5 is completely true. The ex-husband has also leaked out confidential documents of previous employers too. Not the first time he is targeting any organisation just to infuse some toxicity in his ex’s life
Yes. Such a big news and no mention in MSM. Even on this thread most of the comments on leadership of NMD, and very little discussion on the seriousness of this leak, and its effect on NDA and the legal industry.
OMG! Mofon hyped up and nothing illegal in it??? Read the entire Panama Papers story, or if you don't prefer reading, watch Laundromat on Netflix. The firm, with several offices across the world, such history and a partner who was an influential member of the Panama government, would not have just shut down, if there was no illegality. Remember that there is no smoke without fire.
Wow. Amazing. In this age and time where every partner massacres their associate as bakra, this man has lived by his word and stood by his team. Irrespective of anything else, this deserves all the praise one could bestow.
That was not the logic and may be you must read twice before you make a chaffy reaction. If the department finds that there were tax evasive devices/designs employed, I don't see any reason why the firm should not be considered an abettor. A lawyer may defend a murderer but cannot actively participate in a conspiracy to murder and then claim privilege that he was merely advising the legalities of it. An allegation has been made. That allegation is also supported by a public spirited Senior Advocate. When such a major allegation is made, an investigation should be initiated. No one is saying that they are guilty per se, just that there is nothing wrong with the news article pointing out the bureaucratic lethargy in looking into it. Are you saying that the matter should not even be looked into at all? Surely, you could not be that unreasonable.
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.
By this logic everyone who gives tax advice in the name of “structuring” should be investigated every time someone steals confidential data … Duh… 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.
5 is true by all means. I am not from NDA and so pleased to see how Nishith Desai is standing by their lawyer. I haven't worked there but a true fan of their work culture. This speaks volumes about the firm truly.
AAP: Hmmm… it’s quite interesting to see that you didn’t skip a heartbeat at questioning NMD’s motives, but give your full support to Mr Bhushan’s stand. Guess you are a “know it all”. Also check the law, you will know when and why a party can call themselves what they want and pray for what they want.
Also agree with “callow reporting” below, Kian - please gather facts and then print.
No, this should not be swept under the carpet as a "tax structuring advice". There is a line between tax avoidance advice and tax evasion abetment. Every tax professional should know the difference. Crooks who enable tax evasion bring a bad name on the entire tax bar. Further, if, as you say, it is only "tax structuring", NDA should have no problem being investigated and made to answer some queries. Hell, they can even rely even on Azadi Bachoa Andolan which they parade out as their massive contribution to tax jurisprudence. Sathyam Computers, Vijay Maalaya, Sahara were all "distinguished" and "most ethical" until they were not.
A. The fruit of the poisoned tree concept does not apply in India. Even if a search is illegal, the evidence obtained by the police officer can be used in prosecution. The violation of the attorney-client privilege, if any, may give cause to the client to sue the attorney but would not have even an iota of impact on the admissibility of evidence in criminal proceedings.
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.
The same thing was said in defence of Mossack Fonseca when Panama Papers story came out. We all know what eventually happened to that firm which was even more distinguished than NDA. Some points stand out in this story. If this was just normal (and legal) tax structuring advice then why did NMD change his name to "Anuradha" and take such a drastic action against "Bajrangi"? Prashant Bhushan, a distinguished lawyer himself, would not have shared it with the agencies if there was nothing incriminating. Even the journo who reported this story is no ordinary journalist. He is the same person who exposed the 2G scam.
@Hardly Surprised - I am surprised that you have not considered subsections 126(1)&(2) of The Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Kian, stop publishing like a sell out. You should first gather facts and then print. Nishith has become collateral damage in a personal matrimonial dispute that doesn’t concern him at all. A bitter vindictive ex husband of an employee who will stop at nothing is dragging him into this. And despite all this, Nishith is the kind of warm personality that others in the organization don’t feel the heat and importantly, the employee in question has not been fired. Let’s not sully the hard earned reputation of a legendary lawyer without ascertaining facts. Don’t have to be first all the time - be correct for a change. And don’t censor the comment!
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.
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.
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.
Court Comedy.
https://twitter.com/jgopikrishnan70/status/1614198616830410759?s=20&t=Ybz_rKZWAYeNCDXNlYRkcA
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.
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.
https://caaa1973.medium.com/another-proof-that-deloitte-knew-whistleblowers-my-identity-e5aa9a90d56d
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.
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.
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 ▮▮▮
NMD's ego would take a major hit when he sees that it is just $1K.
https://www.barandbench.com/columns/nda-voluntarily-embraces-ant-money-laundering-measures
Is this the Bajrangi effect?
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.
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?
Clearly our judges are not interested in justice.
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.
https://www.docdroid.net/NkCMcCj/csos67-2020-pdf
BTW, is this matter an IP matter?
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.
Thanks R
https://twitter.com/nalinisharma_/status/1443085476835958785?s=20
Quote:
She has alleged that this story was published with the sole objective to destroy her career.
- R
( )
Quote: I guess this settles your question.
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]
- 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.
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.
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:
The abovemention is confirmed truth especially the dates. I have purposefully not named the employee.
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?
Wonder how earlier orders were passed if the sealed cover of the petition has not been opened yet.
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.
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
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.
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.
Also agree with “callow reporting” below, Kian - please gather facts and then print.
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.
@Hardly Surprised - I am surprised that you have not considered subsections 126(1)&(2) of The Indian Evidence Act, 1872
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.
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?
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.