Why Mr Salman Kurshid is turning into a saint all of a sudden when the entire world knows that the modus operandi of the transfer of ownership of licence is well known to be done through tax heaven to which political class themselves are parties. The major issue miht be, the expected money did not flow to the parties as vodafone might not have wanted to pay. What is meant by negotiated settlement is well known to a child as well. How do parties after loosing election, stays and fights it is only with this sort of filthy money and once they taste it people stoop to any level to keep getting it. All these facts would be an untold story
So, Mr.Khurshid want to say that tax imposed by UPA was incorrect or he is saying that it is wrong to pay tax to BJP lead govt. and this was only right to pay the same to UPA.Why he is advocating for this foreign company, suddenly.
Re: A tax notice that affected India's credibility
by Ramachandra N on Feb 24, 2016 09:57 PM
article is quite balanced. after a very long time I am seeing Salam being rational. There was a tax loop hole and utilised by vodofone later corrected by retro amendment.
Re: Re: A tax notice that affected India's credibility
by chanakya maurya on Feb 24, 2016 10:20 PM
Elango must know that voda won at the apex. Is Elango also infering that voda bought apex, too ? The retro was first fired most unashamedly, criminally and against all moral values of a good governance, against the ITC, by the big rascal PC. ITC chairman was badly treated and persecuted like a criminal. His crime was ITC won at the apex. A wily politician is blood thirsty. Voda is a repetition by Pranab who polluted the fdi atmosphere, they are reluctant to trust the politician and babudom in general and the tax man in particular.
Re: Re: Re: A tax notice that affected India's credibility
by Ramachandra N on Feb 24, 2016 10:39 PM
Vodo case was a clear utilisation of loop hole which should not have been used.It was against moral ethics. Fixed by later retro. Even ITC Case was same. certain dealer income was not included in final value which ought to have been included