Vodafone SC hearing: week one

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Garden, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Vodafone SC hearing: week one

Vodafone’s much-anticipated India Supreme Court hearing started with a bang yesterday with a lengthy argument by the telecommunications company criticising the country’s tax authority.

The dispute has dominated headlines ever since Vodafone made the $11.2 billion purchase of a 67% stake in Indian cellular phone operator Hutchison Essar from Hong Kong's Hutchison Telecommunications in 2007.

Vodafone opened the hearing yesterday by questioning the tax authorities’ decision to slap a $2.5 billion tax bill on capital gains from the transaction.

Senior advocate, Harish Salve, representing Vodafone said that the tax department has no authority to tax the transaction as the deal took place between two foreign companies.

He added that the deal was a transfer of control of “two downstream companies by the two foreign companies and it cannot be a basis [for the tax department] to exercise jurisdiction".

Vodafone’s other legal counsel is Abhishek Singhvi, who is also a ruling Congress party spokesman.

The three-judge bench, headed by Justice SH Kapadia, then asked questions about the nature of the transaction and commented on observations made by the Bombay High Court in a previous round of the dispute.

As the case continues, Vodafone are likely to argue that since the transfer is of a capital asset situated outside India, the gains arising there from should not be liable to tax in India in the hands of the non-resident seller entity and that the Indian withholding tax provisions under section 195 of the Income Tax Act do not apply to offshore entities making offshore payments.

The authorities will disagree and say that since the transaction under consideration had a substantial nexus in India, it would result in an obligation being cast on Vodafone to deduct tax at source under section 195.

Previously, the Bombay High Court ruled that once territorial nexus is established, the provisions of section 195 would operate.

The case continues.

Follow www.internationaltaxreview.com for full coverage of the hearing.

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

There is a shocking discrepancy between professional services firms’ parental leave packages. Those that fail to get with the times risk losing out in the war for talent
Winston Taylor is expected to launch in May 2026 with more than 1,400 lawyers across the US, UK, Europe, Latin America and the Middle East
They are alleging that leaked tax information ‘unfairly tarnished’ their business operations; in other news, Davis Polk and Eversheds Sutherland made key tax hires
Overall revenues for the combined UK and Swiss firm inched up 2% to £3.6 billion despite a ‘challenging market’
In the first of a two-part series, experts from Khaitan & Co dissect a highly anticipated Indian Supreme Court ruling that marks a decisive shift in India’s international tax jurisprudence
The OECD profile signals Brazil is no longer a jurisdiction where TP can be treated as a mechanical compliance exercise, one expert suggests, though another highlights 'significant concerns'
Libya’s often-overlooked stamp duty can halt payments and freeze contracts, making this quiet tax a decisive hurdle for foreign investors to clear, writes Salaheddin El Busefi
Eugena Cerny shares hard-earned lessons from tax automation projects and explains how to navigate internal roadblocks and miscommunications
The Clifford Chance and Hyatt cases collectively confirm a fundamental principle of international tax law: permanent establishment is a concept based on physical and territorial presence
Australian government minister Andrew Leigh reflects on the fallout of the scandal three years on and looks ahead to regulatory changes
Gift this article