India: Between The Lines... October 2017

Last Updated: 12 November 2017
Article by Vaish Associates Advocates

Key Highlights

  1. Supreme Court decides on appointment of employee of a party as arbitrator for arbitrations initiated prior to 2015 amendment
  2. SARFAESI proceedings and arbitration proceedings can go hand in hand: Supreme Court
  3. CBDT takes a step forward towards easing the tax concern of global MNC's having regional headquarters in India

I. Supreme Court decides on appointment of employee of a party as arbitrator for arbitrations initiated prior to 2015 amendment

The Supreme Court of India in the case of Aravali Power Company Private Limited vs. M/s. Era Infra Engineering Limited (decided on September 12, 2017) held that if the appointed arbitrator is an employee of one party for an arbitration initiated prior to the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015 (the "2015 Amendment Act") coming into force, such appointment could not by itself, be rendered invalid and unenforceable.

Legal position before and after the amendment

It is pertinent to take note of the legal position in order to appreciate the facts of the case and the decision of the court. Prior

to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (the "Act") being amended by the 2015 Amendment Act, the position with respect to procedure for challenging the appointment of an arbitrator was that the appointment could be challenged within a time frame if circumstances existed that gave rise to justifiable doubts as to independence or impartiality of arbitrator. Precisely, before the amendment of the Act, merely because the appointed arbitrator was an employee of any party did not ipso facto render the appointment of such employee as arbitrator invalid.

However, after the amendment of the Act by the 2015 Amendment Act, any person whose relationship, with the parties or counsel or the subject-matter of the dispute, falls under any of the categories specified in the newly inserted Seventh Schedule is ineligible to be appointed as an arbitrator. This can be waived by the parties by an express agreement in writing subsequent to disputes having arisen between them. The Seventh Schedule contains, inter alia, list of various relationships between the arbitrator and the parties or counsel which includes that the arbitrator cannot be an employee, consultant, advisor or person having any other past or present business relationship with any party. In a nutshell, after the amendment of the Act, if the appointed arbitrator is an employee of any party, such appointment is ipso facto invalid. As noted by the court in this case, after the amendment, if the arbitration clause finds foul with the amended provisions, the appointment of the arbitrator even if apparently in conformity with the arbitration clause in the agreement, would be illegal and court would be within its powers to appoint such arbitrator as may be permissible.

Facts

In the instant case, respondent was awarded construction work and contract was executed in 2009.The arbitration clause in the agreement provided for arbitration of disputes by project in-charge of the project or some other person appointed by the chairman and managing director.

Due to delays in completion of work by respondent, appellant cancelled remaining works. Respondent disputed the decision of appellant alleging that it was not to be blamed for the delays in completion of the project and invoked arbitration clause. Respondent wanted dispute to be arbitrated by a retired judge of the High Court. Appellant denied the allegations of respondent and appointed its Chief Executive Officer to arbitrate the disputes between the parties.

Arbitration proceedings commenced and no objection was raised before the arbitrator by respondent. However, after the 2015 Amendment Act came to be notified, respondent on January 12, 2016 challenged the appointment of arbitrator for the first time. The objection was rejected by the arbitrator on the ground that respondent participated in the arbitral proceedings without raising any protest. Respondent approached the Delhi High Court seeking termination of the mandate of the arbitrator. The Delhi High Court had set aside the appointment of arbitrator and directed appellant to provide name of three arbitrators from which respondent was to choose one as arbitrator. The Delhi High Court had observed, "In the present case, no doubt, the invocation was on the basis of un-amended Act but still under Section 12 of the Act would give the similar indication. The sole Arbitrator appointed by the respondent admittedly is CEO and Executive of the respondent-Company who is also from the same office/department. In order to maintain the neutrality, or to avoid any doubt in the mind of the petitioner and the reasons given in the petition, it would be appropriate that independent sole Arbitrator should be appointed as ultimately neutral person has merely to decide the dispute between the parties. Even, the object and scope of the Act says so, that an arbitration procedure should be fair and unbiased. Thus, the appointment of Mr. S.K. Sinha, CEO of the respondent Company is terminated and once the Arbitrator's appointment is terminated, the Court can consider the prayer of the petitioner."

This decision of the Delhi High Court was challenged before the apex court.

Arguments

Counsel for appellant submitted that the Delhi High Court should not have interfered with the appointment of arbitrator as the appointment was as per the arbitration clause agreed between the parties. Appellant referred to the law as it stood before the amendment of the Act which prescribed clearly the procedure to challenge the appointment of arbitrator.

Counsel for respondent, on the other hand, argued that a person who was associated with the project under consideration or who was directly subordinate to any authority whose decision was in dispute could not be appointed as an arbitrator. Counsel relied upon several apex court decisions in support of the argument.

Observations of the Court

The court, at the outset, noted that the Act as it stood before the amendment was to govern the present dispute as the arbitration proceedings had commenced before October 23, 2015 which is the date on which the 2015 Amendment Act was deemed to have come into force.

The court relied upon the decision of the apex court in the case of Indian Oil Corporation Limited and Others vs. Raja Transport Private Limited [(2009) 8 SCC 520] in which it was held that just because an arbitrator was an employee of one of the parties was not a ground in itself to raise presumption of any bias. The court went on to observe that in the present case, there was no justifiable apprehension about the impartiality of the arbitrator and arbitrator in the present matter was neither the dealing authority in regard to the contract nor was directly sub-ordinate to the authority whose decision is the subject matter of the dispute. Further, the court pointed out that respondent participated in the arbitration and did not challenge the appointment within the prescribed time. The court held that in such circumstances, even though the arbitrator was an employee of one of the parties, the appointment could not be rendered invalid and unenforceable.

Decision

The court decided in favour of appellant and directed that the arbitration in the present matter should proceed in accordance with law.

VA View

In several commercial agreements, we generally find that one of the parties has weak bargaining power as the arbitration clause in such commercial agreement provides for appointment of an employee of the strong party as an arbitrator. In such cases, when disputes arise, the aggrieved party has no option but to get the dispute arbitrated by an employee of another party or challenge it in the courts of law as per the procedure under the Act. Further, possibility of bias is generally difficult to rule out and there is presumption of an unfair decision by the arbitrator. Such presumptions without any adequate findings/basis resulted into numerous cases pending before the higher judiciary and caused delay in justice delivery system.

However, this case before the apex court in relation to arbitration that commenced before the amendment to the Act came into force, has made the position very clear. The parties now, in respect of the arbitration proceedings commenced before the 2015 Amendment Act, cannot argue that arbitrator is not independent and is impartial merely because the employee of a party is an arbitrator. In the instant case, the Supreme Court chose to give effect to the agreed arbitration clause as the court felt that the there was no reasonable suspicion about the independence and impartiality of arbitrator. For arbitrations initiated before the amendment, such appointments are not ipso facto invalid and the courts will continue to decide the validity of such appointments as per the facts and circumstances of each case.

II. SARFAESI proceedings and arbitration proceedings can go hand in hand: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court of India decided an interesting case- M.D. Frozen Foods Exports Private Limited and Others vs. Hero Fincorp Limited on September 21, 2017. The Bench comprised of Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman.

Facts

Appellant borrowed money from respondent against security of certain immoveable properties. On default in payment of monthly installment by appellant, respondent invoked the arbitration clause. Prior to the invocation of the clause, respondent was notified as a financial institution for the purpose of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (the "SARFAESI Act"). Respondent then issued a notice to appellant under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act for one of the seven properties given as security. In parallel, the arbitration proceedings commenced and an interim order was passed restraining appellant from creating a third party charge on any of the properties in contention. Concerned about the proceedings under the SARFAESI Act, respondent filed an application to substitute the order of status quo qua parties with the name of appellant, which was allowed. This order was challenged by appellant before the Delhi High Court, and presently before the apex court. The Delhi High Court had dismissed the appeal.

The issues before the court were as under:

Issue 1: Whether the arbitration proceedings can continue simultaneously with the proceedings under the SARFAESI Act?

Issue 2: Whether Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act can be made applicable to debts arising out of a loan agreement/mortgage created prior to the applicability of the SARFAESI Act to respondent?

Issue 3: Whether respondent can invoke provisions of the SARFAESI Act when it has been notified as a financial institution after the account became a Non- Performing Asset ("NPA")?

Arguments

Counsel for appellant contended that the remedy of arbitration was invoked after the provisions of the SARFAESI Act had been made applicable to respondent and therefore, respondent had elected its remedy and was precluded from seeking recourse under the SARFAESI Act. Further, it was contended that Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act was substantive law and thus, recourse to the SARFAESI Act's provisions after an account had been declared as NPA would amount to retrospective application of substantive law.

Counsel for respondent, on the other hand, argued that simultaneous proceedings could be initiated under the SARFAESI Act and the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (the "RDDB Act"). Similarly, the recourse of arbitration was only an alternative to the recourse under the RDDB Act. Section 37 of the SARFAESI Act made it clear that the provisions of the statute were in addition to and are not in derogation of any other law for the time being in force. It was further argued that the provisions of the SARFAESI Act can be used for recourse against any live and actionable debt. The SARFAESI Act only provided the procedure to enforce rights which had already accrued to a lender without the interference of the courts. Counsel submitted, "It is only a new remedy in terms of the manner of such recovery. The legislation itself is procedural in nature."

Observations of the Court

Issue 1- The court traced the history and necessity for constituting debt recovery tribunals under the RDDB Act, as an alternative to civil proceedings for recovery of debts. The court drew analogies from the question of law with respect to simultaneous proceedings under the RDDB Act and SARFAESI Act. The said instance, being a settled question of law allowed for simultaneous proceedings under the SARFAESI Act and the RDDB Act because, (i) both the statutes were complementary to each other; and (ii) owing to the lack of inconsistency and repugnancy between the Acts, the doctrine of election of remedy had no application.

Analogously, in the present circumstance, the proceedings under the SARFAESI Act were in the nature of enforcement proceedings and arbitration was in the nature of adjudicatory proceedings. The court referred the case of Transcore vs. Union of India and Anr. [(2008) 1 SCC 125]which held that the SARFAESI Act is an additional remedy to the RDDB Act. Together they constitute one remedy and, therefore, the doctrine of election is not applicable. Referring to the above case, the court in the instant case held, "The only twist in the present case is that, instead of the recovery process under the RDDB Act, we are concerned with an arbitration proceeding. It is trite to say that arbitration is an alternative to the civil proceedings. In fact, when a question was raised as to whether the matters which came within the scope and jurisdiction of the Debt Recovery Tribunal under the RDDB Act, could still be referred to arbitration when both parties have incorporated such a clause, the answer was given in the affirmative. That being the position, the appellants can hardly be permitted to contend that the initiation of arbitration proceedings would, in any manner, prejudice their rights to seek relief under the SARFAESI Act." The court observed that remedy under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act was in addition to the remedy of arbitration.

Issue 2 and 3- The Court observed that the SARFAESI Act applied to all claims which were owing and live at the time when it came into force and the date on which the debt was declared as NPA had no impact.

Decision

The Court dismissed the appeal and noted that this was an attempt by appellant to prolong the recovery.

VA View

The judgment of the apex court noted that debt recovery processes were exceedingly slow due to the varied techniques employed by the borrowers in their endeavors to make the said proceedings 'cumbersome and time consuming.' The court observed that in the event the secured assets are insufficient to satisfy the debts, the secured creditor can proceed against other assets in execution against the debtor, after determination of the pending outstanding amount by a competent forum. The court concluded that the appeal was completely devoid of merit, and was only an endeavour to prolong the ultimate "date of judgment" for appellants to meet their obligations.

The court has observed that the SARFAESI Act applies to claims which are live at the time when the statute came into force and that the remedy under the SARFAESI Act is in addition to remedy of arbitration.

III. CBDT takes a step forward towards easing the tax concern of global MNC's having regional headquarters in India

The concept of Place of Effective Management ("POEM") is an internationally recognised test for determination of residence of a company incorporated in a foreign jurisdiction. Most of the tax treaties entered into by India recognises the concept of POEM for determination of residence of a company as a tie-breaker rule for avoidance of double taxation. The principle of POEM is recognized and accepted by Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) also.

The Finance Act, 2015 also introduced this concept of POEM by amending the provisions of section 6(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for determining the tax residency of a foreign company in India. POEM had been defined to mean a place where key management and commercial decisions that are necessary for the conduct of the business of an entity as a whole are, in substance made. These provisions have taken effect from 1st April, 2017.

The Central Board of Direct Taxes ("CBDT") had issued guiding principles for determination of POEM by Circular No. 06/2017 dated 24th January, 2017 in which it was clarified that the POEM in case of a company engaged in Active Business Outside India shall be presumed to be outside India if the majority meetings of the Board of Directors ("BoD") are held outside India. Further, if on the basis of facts and circumstances it is established that the BoD of the company are standing aside and not exercising their powers of management and such powers are being exercised by either the holding company or any other person (s) resident in India, then the POEM shall be considered to be in India.

Concerns were raised by various stakeholders wherein it was represented that, as per the CBDT guidelines, in cases of multinational companies with regional headquarter structure, POEM may be triggered merely on the ground that certain employees having multi-country responsibility or oversight over operations in other countries of the region are working from India leading to taxation in India of their income from operations outside India.

To nip this concern in the bud, the CBDT by its Circular no. 25/2017 dated 23rd October, 2017 has clarified that so long as the regional headquarter operates for group companies in a region within the general and objective principles of global policy of the group laid down by the parent entity in the field of pay roll functions, accounting, human resource functions, IT infrastructure and network platforms, supply chain functions, and routine banking operational procedures, which are per se not specific to any entity or group of entities, this in itself, would not constitute a case of BoD of such group companies standing aside and consequently such activities of the regional headquarter in India alone will not be a basis for establishment of POEM for such group companies.

However, it has also been clarified that if the above clarification is found to be used for abusive or aggressive tax planning, then the provisions of General Anti-Avoidance Rules may come into play.

VA View

The above clarification has been welcomed by the multi-national corporations carrying on the specified activities through their regional headquarter in India. Such a regional headquarter would not constitute a POEM of the other group companies in India as long as it performs routine functions as described above in accordance with the general and objective principles of global policy of the group. However, for all other substantive operational functions, it would be imperative that the majority meetings of the BoD of companies engaged in active business outside India be carried out outside India so that the risk of establishing POEM of the group companies is mitigated. Overall, this seems to be a positive step towards elevating India to a preferred global business hub and aligning the tax reforms towards the government's avowed objective of ease of doing business in India.

© 2017, Vaish Associates Advocates,
All rights reserved
Advocates, 1st & 11th Floors, Mohan Dev Building 13, Tolstoy Marg New Delhi-110001 (India).

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist professional advice should be sought about your specific circumstances. The views expressed in this article are solely of the authors of this article.

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
Vaish Associates Advocates
 
In association with
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
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of www.mondaq.com

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). 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 & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about Mondaq.com’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.

Disclaimer

Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd 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 or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.

Registration

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to unsubscribe@mondaq.com with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.

Cookies

A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.

Links

This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.

Mail-A-Friend

If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.

Emails

From time to time Mondaq may send you emails promoting Mondaq services including new services. You may opt out of receiving such emails by clicking below.

*** If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of services offered by Mondaq you may opt out by clicking here .

Security

This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to webmaster@mondaq.com.

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to EditorialAdvisor@mondaq.com.

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at enquiries@mondaq.com.

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at problems@mondaq.com and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.