Latest news with #RaviChadha
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
2 days ago
- Business
- Business Standard
Samsung India executives seek to quash $81 million penalty over tax evasion
Seven Samsung India executives have asked a court to revoke penalties of $81 million included in New Delhi's $601-million tax demand from the company for allegedly misclassifying some imports, arguing "no grave offence" had been committed, according to legal papers and a source. The Indian tax authority in January found Samsung and its executives evaded tariffs by misclassifying imports of key mobile tower equipment from 2018 to 2021. Samsung has separately challenged the order before a tax appeals tribunal, where it has defended its declarations and denied any wrongdoing. While Samsung's India unit faced a $520 million demand, employees were asked to pay penalties totaling $81 million for "knowingly and intentionally" playing a role in the misclassification of imports. In a High Court filing in Mumbai which was not made public but was seen by Reuters, Samsung India logistics executive Ravi Chadha said the authorities issued the penalty within two to three days of receiving hundreds of pages of detailed responses from the company and its executives in January, and the process was "rushed". "This timeframe is utterly insufficient to conduct the requisite in-depth study," read the filing by Chadha, who faces a fine of 950 million rupees ($11.1 million). "The present case is limited to the interpretation of tariff entries, no grave offence has been committed." Online court records show the six other executives including the network division's vice president, Sung Beam Hong, a general manager for finance, Sheetal Jain, and Samsung's general manager for indirect taxes, Nikhil Aggarwal, have also challenged the tax authority's order. The lawyer for all seven executives, Sriram Sridharan of Indian law firm Lakshmikumaran & Sridharan, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The law firm also represents Samsung in the tax appeals tribunal challenge. Their pleas and grounds for revoking the penalty are identical to Chadha's, said a source with direct knowledge of the ongoing lawsuits. In his court filing, Chadha argued that the "egregiously exorbitant" penalty is impossible for any salaried employee to bear, and it would take him more than 100 years to settle the amount given his earnings.
Time of India
2 days ago
- Business
- Time of India
Samsung India executives seek to quash $81 million penalty over tax evasion
Seven Samsung India executives are contesting penalties linked to a $601 million tax demand. They argue against the severity of the alleged offense. The tax authority claims misclassification of mobile tower equipment imports occurred. Ravi Chadha, a logistics executive, calls the penalty process rushed. Other executives, including Sung Beam Hong and Sheetal Jain, have also challenged the order. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Popular in Cons. Products 1. A compelling economic logic is leading India's big data push away from major coastal centres, deep into the inlands Seven Samsung India executives have asked a court to revoke penalties of $81 million included in New Delhi's $601-million tax demand from the company for allegedly misclassifying some imports, arguing "no grave offence" had been committed, according to legal papers and a Indian tax authority in January found Samsung and its executives evaded tariffs by misclassifying imports of key mobile tower equipment from 2018 to 2021. Samsung has separately challenged the order before a tax appeals tribunal , where it has defended its declarations and denied any Samsung's India unit faced a $520 million demand, employees were asked to pay penalties totaling $81 million for "knowingly and intentionally" playing a role in the misclassification of a High Court filing in Mumbai which was not made public but was seen by Reuters, Samsung India logistics executive Ravi Chadha said the authorities issued the penalty within two to three days of receiving hundreds of pages of detailed responses from the company and its executives in January, and the process was "rushed"."This timeframe is utterly insufficient to conduct the requisite in-depth study," read the filing by Chadha, who faces a fine of 950 million rupees ($11.1 million)."The present case is limited to the interpretation of tariff entries, no grave offence has been committed."Samsung India and Chadha did not respond to Reuters queries. India's tax authority did not respond immediately to requests for court records show the six other executives including the network division's vice president, Sung Beam Hong, a general manager for finance, Sheetal Jain, and Samsung's general manager for indirect taxes, Nikhil Aggarwal, have also challenged the tax authority's lawyer for all seven executives, Sriram Sridharan of Indian law firm Lakshmikumaran & Sridharan, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The law firm also represents Samsung in the tax appeals tribunal pleas and grounds for revoking the penalty are identical to Chadha's, said a source with direct knowledge of the ongoing his court filing, Chadha argued that the "egregiously exorbitant" penalty is impossible for any salaried employee to bear, and it would take him more than 100 years to settle the amount given his earnings.
Reuters
3 days ago
- Business
- Reuters
Samsung India executives seek to quash $81 million penalty over tax evasion
NEW DELHI, May 28 (Reuters) - Seven Samsung India executives have asked a court to revoke penalties of $81 million included in New Delhi's $601-million tax demand from the company for allegedly misclassifying some imports, arguing "no grave offence" had been committed, according to legal papers and a source. The Indian tax authority in January found Samsung and its executives evaded tariffs by misclassifying imports of key mobile tower equipment from 2018 to 2021. Samsung has separately challenged the order before a tax appeals tribunal, where it has defended its declarations and denied any wrongdoing. While Samsung's India unit faced a $520 million demand, employees were asked to pay penalties totaling $81 million for "knowingly and intentionally" playing a role in the misclassification of imports. In a High Court filing in Mumbai which was not made public but was seen by Reuters, Samsung India logistics executive Ravi Chadha said the authorities issued the penalty within two to three days of receiving hundreds of pages of detailed responses from the company and its executives in January, and the process was "rushed". "This timeframe is utterly insufficient to conduct the requisite in-depth study," read the filing by Chadha, who faces a fine of 950 million rupees ($11.1 million). "The present case is limited to the interpretation of tariff entries, no grave offence has been committed." Samsung India and Chadha did not respond to Reuters queries. India's tax authority did not respond immediately to requests for comment. Online court records show the six other executives including the network division's vice president, Sung Beam Hong, a general manager for finance, Sheetal Jain, and Samsung's general manager for indirect taxes, Nikhil Aggarwal, have also challenged the tax authority's order. The lawyer for all seven executives, Sriram Sridharan of Indian law firm Lakshmikumaran & Sridharan, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The law firm also represents Samsung in the tax appeals tribunal challenge. Their pleas and grounds for revoking the penalty are identical to Chadha's, said a source with direct knowledge of the ongoing lawsuits. In his court filing, Chadha argued that the "egregiously exorbitant" penalty is impossible for any salaried employee to bear, and it would take him more than 100 years to settle the amount given his earnings.
CNA
3 days ago
- Business
- CNA
Samsung India executives seek to quash $81 million penalty over tax evasion
NEW DELHI :Seven Samsung India executives have asked a court to revoke penalties of $81 million included in New Delhi's $601-million tax demand from the company for allegedly misclassifying some imports, arguing "no grave offence" had been committed, according to legal papers and a source. The Indian tax authority in January found Samsung and its executives evaded tariffs by misclassifying imports of key mobile tower equipment from 2018 to 2021. Samsung has separately challenged the order before a tax appeals tribunal, where it has defended its declarations and denied any wrongdoing. While Samsung's India unit faced a $520 million demand, employees were asked to pay penalties totaling $81 million for "knowingly and intentionally" playing a role in the misclassification of imports. In a High Court filing in Mumbai which was not made public but was seen by Reuters, Samsung India logistics executive Ravi Chadha said the authorities issued the penalty within two to three days of receiving hundreds of pages of detailed responses from the company and its executives in January, and the process was "rushed". "This timeframe is utterly insufficient to conduct the requisite in-depth study," read the filing by Chadha, who faces a fine of 950 million rupees ($11.1 million). "The present case is limited to the interpretation of tariff entries, no grave offence has been committed." Samsung India and Chadha did not respond to Reuters queries. India's tax authority did not respond immediately to requests for comment. Online court records show the six other executives including the network division's vice president, Sung Beam Hong, a general manager for finance, Sheetal Jain, and Samsung's general manager for indirect taxes, Nikhil Aggarwal, have also challenged the tax authority's order. The lawyer for all seven executives, Sriram Sridharan of Indian law firm Lakshmikumaran & Sridharan, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The law firm also represents Samsung in the tax appeals tribunal challenge. Their pleas and grounds for revoking the penalty are identical to Chadha's, said a source with direct knowledge of the ongoing lawsuits. In his court filing, Chadha argued that the "egregiously exorbitant" penalty is impossible for any salaried employee to bear, and it would take him more than 100 years to settle the amount given his earnings.
