India: A Radical Change In India's Tax Landscape: Implementation Of General Anti Avoidance Regulations (‘GAAR')

INTRODUCTION

The debatable principle of tax righteousness is not new, this contentious concept has always been a topic of some persuasive deliberations in the past, when it comes to the principles of tax management, tax planning or an art of paying less taxes. Whether, morality becomes relevant when someone takes some positive action to avoid paying tax, but is it a moral obligation not to try to reduce or avoid paying taxes within the legal framework; this seems a challenging thought.

Repeatedly, the courts have said that there is nothing sinister in so arranging one's affair as to keep taxes as low as possible1. Perhaps, everybody does so, rich or poor, and all do right, for nobody owes any public duty to pay more tax than the law demands: taxes are enforced extractions, not voluntary contributions. The argument is not on tax morality v. tax legality per se, it is the matter of following the principles of morality while applying the tax provisions to reduce the payment of taxes, i.e. to say the focus should be on tax planning and management and not aggressive tax avoidance planning.

The momentum of aggressive tax planning, has been growing for the last few years, High Net Individual(s), Corporates and Multi-National Enterprises have actively engaged themselves in building complicated tax structures to achieve less tax payouts. Though these structures are regarded legally correct but whether they stand within the four walls of morality is a topic of discussion around the world. Discussions of the ethics of tax avoidance are almost pervasive; even the most powerful countries of the word are actively engaged in the discussions and why not, as they are the most affected ones.

Base Erosion and Profit Shifting ('BEPS') project of Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development ('OECD') led by the G20 countries is focused on a coordinated drive by the countries across the world to address the concerns of aggressive tax planning by MNEs by modernizing the current framework of tax treaties and nationally-set-anti-tax avoidance laws. Treaty abuse is one of the chief concerns when it comes to attaining or defining objectives of BEPS Projects. BEPS Action Plan 6 on Treaty Abuse suggests that there is a need to identify the tax policy consideration that, in general, countries should consider before deciding to enter into a tax treaty with another country including carrying out a cost/benefit analysis of the tax treaty. The report prescribes for the development of domestic rules, and treaty provisions, that counter the unintended use of treaties to avoid payment of taxes.

With this background, India in its commitment towards the BEPS project and to protect its tax base, has taken umpteen number of steps, inter alia, enforcement of provisions of General Anti Avoidance Rules ('GAAR')2, Recent Amendments made to the bilateral tax treaty between India-Mauritius, Singapore and Cyprus and the introduction of thin capitalization rules3, marks a beginning of a second generation reforms of the Indian Income Tax code.

GENERAL ANTI AVOIDANCE RULES ('GAAR'): EVOLUTION

In Indian Tax framework, GAAR was first proposed to be introduced in the year 2009 as a part of the Direct Tax Code (DTC). Since, DTC, 2009 faced plethora of representations from the investor and professional community at large, the same was revised in the year 2010.

It was widely felt that the provisions of GAAR under DTC, 2009 did not strike a balance between legitimate tax minimization and abusive tax avoidance. The revised version of DTC, 2010, essentially retained the same provisions of GAAR as provided for in the DTC, 2009, however, some enabling provisions pertaining to safeguards relating to process for invoking of GAAR were introduced. DTC was again revised and another version was presented in the year 2013. However, the new government, while announcing the Finance Budget, 2015, formally discarded the DTC stating that "there is no merit in going ahead with the Direct Tax Code as it exists today."

As the fate of DTC was not definitive, GAAR was introduced as Chapter X-A of the Act vide the Finance Act, 2012 under the existing tax laws (considering that new Direct Tax Code ideation was shelved by the new Modi Government) and was proposed to be implemented with effect from April 1, 2014. In view of the several representations received on the implementation of the GAAR, the Central Board of Direct Taxes ('CBDT'), the apex board administrating Direct Taxes in India constituted a committee to address the concerns of the community at large. The draft guidelines and the recommendations of the committee were released on June 28, 2012.

Post the receipt of the draft guidelines and recommendations, another expert committee under the chairmanship of Dr. Parthasarathi Shome was constituted to address the concerns of the foreign and domestic investors and finalise the draft GAAR guidelines. The first draft report of the Shome Committee was made public on August 31, 2012 and after considering the views and submissions of the public and other stakeholders, Dr. Shome submitted its final report on September 30, 2012. Since the said report was only for consideration of the government and was not binding, the government did accept majority of the recommendations of the Shome Committee, with certain modifications. The Finance Minister on January 14, 2013 announced that the GAAR with the proposed amendments shall be applicable April 1, 2016, rather than the proposed date of April 1, 2014.

The tax proposals for the year 2015, further postponed the introduction of GAAR for two years to the financial year 2017-18, with a grandfathering, that GAAR will not apply to investments made upto March 31, 2017. April 1, 2017 marks the beginning of the Financial Year 2017-18, and enforcement of provisions of GAAR4.

SCHEME OF GAAR REGULATIONS: CHAPTER X-A OF INCOME TAX ACT, 1961

GAAR as a codified law enshrined under Chapter X-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('Act'), hinges in primacy upon the doctrine of "substance over form", where the real intention of the parties, the effect of transactions and purpose of arrangement is taken into account for determining tax consequences, irrespective of legal structure that has been superimposed to camouflage the real intent and purpose.

It inter alia empowers the tax authorities to deny tax benefit, if the transactions or arrangements do not have any commercial substance or consideration other than achieving the tax benefit.

Section 95 and 96 of the Act, further do suggest GAAR as an anti-avoidance measure, which, irrespective of anything laid down under the Act, provides power to the tax officials to treat any transaction or any arrangement as an 'impermissible avoidance arrangement', where the main purpose of entering in such transaction or arrangement is to obtain tax benefit.

The term "impermissible avoidance arrangement" in terms of the provisions of Section 96 of the Act essentially means an arrangement or a transaction whose main purpose is to obtain a tax benefit and lacks commercial substance in whole or in part.

Therefore, the scope of the provisions of Section 96 is very wide and for the purposes of an arrangement to be an "impermissible avoidance arrangement", a primary test of obtaining a tax benefit along with any of the secondary tests, as enlisted below, is to be satisfied.

Secondary Tests as provided under Section 96 of the Act:

  1. Creates rights, or obligations, which are not ordinarily created between persons dealing at arm's length;
  2. results, directly or indirectly, in the misuse, or abuse, of the provisions of this Act;
  3. lacks commercial substance or is deemed to lack commercial substance, in whole or in part; or
  4. is entered into, or carried out, by means, or in a manner, which are not ordinarily employed for bona fide purposes.

While, the conditions provided in (a), (b) and (d) are subjective, the condition of lack of commercial substances as provided in (d) is defined under Section 97 of the Act.

In terms of the said Section an arrangement shall be deemed to lack commercial substance, where, the substance or the effect of the arrangement as a whole is inconsistent with the individual transactions or steps; or it involves ,round tripping financing, or an accommodating party, or the transaction is concluded or conducted in such a manner that the value, location, source and ownership of funds are disguised; or there lacks any substantial commercial purpose other than obtaining a tax benefit; or it does not have significant effect upon the business risks or net cash flows of any party to the arrangement other than the one attributable to the tax benefit.

The area of concern with respect to the enforceability of the GAAR is with regard to the scope of main purpose test of obtaining tax benefit. Section 96(2) of the Act, provides that the whole of the arrangement shall be deemed to be entered for the main purpose of obtaining a tax benefit, even if a step in, or a part of the arrangement is to obtain a tax benefit. Such deeming fiction shall hold good irrespective of the fact that the whole arrangement is not to obtain a tax benefit. Thus, even if one step in an arrangement or a transaction results in a tax benefit, it can be treated as an 'impermissible avoidance agreement'.

Furthermore, the said Section also casts a significant burden upon the tax payer to prove that the transaction or an arrangement or even a part of such arrangement was not entered into, or carried out, for the main purpose of obtaining a tax benefit. In such a scenario, wherein, even a small part of the whole transaction constitutes tax benefit, such deeming fiction, in all likelihood will lead to unintended consequences and protracted litigation.

GAAR PROVISIONS: APPLICATION FRAMEWORK AND MACHINERY PROVISIONS

The provisions of the Act, provides for sufficient procedural safeguards for the purpose of invoking of GAAR. Although, the proposal of invoking the provisions of GAAR will be initiated by the Assessing Officer, ultimate decision of the application of the same vests in the hands of the Approving Panel constituting (1) one sitting or retired judge of a High Court of India who will also be the chairperson; (2) one member from the Revenue, not below the rank of Chief Commissioner; and (3) one member who will be an academic or scholar having special knowledge of matters such as direct taxes, business accounts and international trade practices.

Rule 10UB of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 ('Rules') prescribe the procedure for invoking the provisions of GAAR to any arrangement or transaction. In terms of the Rules, the Assessing Officer, before making a reference to the Commissioner for invoking the provisions of GAAR, shall provide an opportunity to the assessee seeking his objections to the applicability of the provisions of GAAR.

The notice seeking the objections of the tax payer must elucidate the following details:

  1. details of the arrangement to which the provisions of GAAR are proposed to be applied;
  2. the tax benefit arising under such arrangement;
  3. the basis and reason for considering that the main purpose of the identified arrangement is to obtain tax benefit;
  4. the basis and the reasons why the arrangement satisfies the condition of considering the arrangement as an impermissible avoidance arrangement.
  5. and the list of the documents and evidence relied upon by the Assessing Officer.

It is therefore mandatory for the tax officer to make a reference to the Commissioner of Income Tax in all the cases. Post the receipt of any reference from the Assessing officer and considering the reply of the assessee, Commissioner may conclude that the invocation of the GAAR provisions are not warranted and shall issue direction to the Assessing Officer accordingly.

However, if the Commissioner considers that the provisions of GAAR is applicable on the facts and circumstance of the case, a reference shall be made by the Commissioner to the Approving Panel along with his satisfaction regarding the applicability of the provisions of GAAR.

TRANSACTIONS HELD IMPERMISSIBLE: CONSEQUENCES

The tax office has vide powers in term of the provisions of the Act, once the arrangement or the transaction is concluded to an impermissible avoidance agreement.

In terms of Section 98 of the Act, including denial of the tax benefit or treaty benefit to the assessee, the Assessing officer may inter alia recharacterize the transaction or part thereof; treat the arrangement as if the same was never entered; treat the place of residence of any party to the arrangement or the situs of an asset or of a transaction to be at a place other than the place of residence, location of asset or of transaction as provided in the arrangement; or lift the veil and look through any arrangement by disregarding any corporate structure; or treat equity as debt, capital expenditure as revenue expenditure or vice versa.

Considering the vide powers entrusted with the tax authorities, it is most likely that the non-resident assessee's and certain categories of resident assessee's would consider the option of seeking an Advance Ruling, to seek an assurance whether the provisions of GAAR are applicable or not, before entering into any transaction, which may lead to a tax benefit to the assessee. Section 245N, Chapter XIX-B of the Act, provides that an advance ruling may be sought on the aspect of arrangement being an impermissible avoidance arrangement or not, in terms of the provisions of Chapter X-A of the Act. Section 245N(a)(iv) provides that such ruling can be sought either by a resident or a non-resident, however, the same should be sought prior to entering into any such arrangement. Since the ruling of the Authority of Advance Ruling is binding on both the assessee and the revenue, this route may be considered as a safeguard against some consequences, before entering into any arrangement.

GRANDFATHERING AND SAFEGUARDS

In terms of the provisions of Rule 10U of the Rules, provisions of GAAR shall not be invoked in a scenario where the tax benefit in the relevant assessment year, in aggregate, to all the parties in the arrangement does not exceed a sum of INR Thirty Million.

Furthermore, the provisions of GAAR shall not be applicable to a Foreign Institutional Investor, who is an assessee under the Act, has not taken any benefit of a bilateral tax treaty and has invested in India in listed or unlisted securities in accordance with the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Foreign Institutional Investor) Regulations, 1995.

Although, the government has also provided the much-needed relief to the assessee's by providing the grandfathering of the investments made prior to April 1, 2017, in terms of Rule 10U(1)(d) GAAR will not apply to income earned/received by any person from transfer of investments made before April 1, 2017. However, Rule 10U(2) provides thatGAAR will apply to any arrangement, irrespective of the date it has been entered into, if tax benefit is obtained on or after April 1, 2017.

In view of the provisions of Rule 10U(1)(d) read with Rule 10U(2) of the Rules, it can be suggested that the investments made before April 1, 2017 will be grandfathered and not come under scrutiny of GAAR but any arrangement before this could come under the tax department's scanner if a tax benefit from such arrangement is claimed from next year. This means that existing arrangements which are felt to be aggressively structured to escape taxes in India, be it royalty payments, depreciation, interest payments or fees for technical services could come under the tax department's scrutiny irrespective of the date of entering into such arrangements if tax benefits continue to be claimed in Financial Year 2017-18 or after.

However only, income arising from transfer of investments (viz. Capital Gain) made before April 1, 2017 ought not come under GAAR's scrutiny.

GAAR VIS-À-VIS SPECIFIC ANTI AVOIDANCE RULES ('SAAR')

Although, it is widely perceived that GAAR has been incorporated to curb the international arrangements wherein, the treaty benefits are claimed by the assessee's, pertaining to transactions flowing from tax havens of the world, in the absence of any commercial substance with regard to the same. However, the provisions of the GAAR, apart from other specific anti avoidance rules, such as Transfer Pricing, dividend stripping, bonus stripping, etc., also act as a deterrence to the domestic arrangements which are entered for the main purposes of tax benefit and fulfills the secondary tests.

To protect its tax base, India has renegotiated its treaty with Mauritius, Singapore and Cyprus, through which, India has recorded maximum inflow of the foreign investment, because of the favourable tax provisions under the erstwhile treaties between India and such countries. Investments were routed through such countries, without having any substantial presence in such countries, to take the benefit of the tax treaty and the domestic tax provisions of such tax havens. The amended treaty also provides for a detailed out Limitation of Benefit ('LOB') clause, which suggests that the treaty benefits shall not be available, in a scenario wherein, the conditions provided under the LOB clause are not fulfilled.

Albeit, it is widely debated that in the presence and fulfillment of a LOB clause or any Specific Anti Avoidance Rule ('SAAR') the provisions of GAAR should not be applicable, since the specific provision would override the general provision. However, Hon'ble CBDT vide Circular dated January 27, 2017 has inter alia clarified that Specific Anti Avoidance Provisions may not address all situations of abuse. It has been further clarified that the provisions of GAAR and SAAR/LOB can coexist and are applicable, as may be necessary, in the facts and circumstances of the case.

IN CONCLUSION

In the contemporary tax environment, business reasoning and commercial rationale is central to any structuring or investment arrangement. That said, the GAAR framework does provide for procedural safeguard before invoking the provisions of GAAR to any arrangement or transaction, however, considering the arbitrary and adversarial approach of the tax officials in the past and the routine manner in which the powers enshrined under the Act are exercised, the standard safeguards appears to be meaningless, unless there is a deliberate conscious effort which is depicted by the tax authorities which is suggestive of the fact that such regulations would be involved in seldom deserving situations and powers are exercised with restrain in a cautious manner.

While general anti-tax avoidance measures are necesary, sufficient cushion should have been provided to the ordinary business transactions or transactions. The provisions of Section 96(2) of the Act, wherein, even if one step in a scheme or plan results in tax benefit, the whole arrangement can be treated as an 'impermissible avoidance agreement', seems draconian and can be considered as something prone and susceptible to being measured by the tax department.

India's tax policy all this while has struggled to bridge the 'trust deficit' between tax department and society at large, which is witnessed with low tax GDP ratio. Implementation of GAAR in a judicious manner is welcome lest the divide further widens and GAAR becomes a bridge too far!!!!

Footnotes

1. IRC v. Duke of Westminster (1936) AC 1; Union of India v. Azadi Bachao Andolan [2003] 263 ITR 706 (SC); Vodaafone International Holdings B.V v. Union of India 341 ITR 1 (SC)

2. Chapter X-A: General Anti Avoidance Rules, Income Tax Act, 1961

3. Section 94B of the Income Tax Act, 1961

4. Chapter X-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Section 95 to 102) read with Rules 10U to 10UC of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. 

This article was first published in the Conference Journal of IFA- Asia Pacific Tax Conference, New Delhi.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
Pranshu Goel
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Krishnomics Legal
SKP Business Consulting LLP
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Krishnomics Legal
SKP Business Consulting LLP
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions