ADVERTISEMENT

Cadbury gets a bitter bill

April 05, 2015 04:25 pm | Updated April 06, 2015 11:05 pm IST - New Delhi

Mondelez India is accused of misusing a tax holiday scheme in the hill state of Himachal Pradesh Company, the local arm of Cadbury’s, claims that it is functioning since 2009.

Cadbury allegedly evaded excise duty by fraudulently taking exemption for one of its ‘ghost’ production units in Himachal Pradesh.

The issue is one of interpretation, and it will be inappropriate on our part to discuss the details externally at this time since the matter is sub-judice and in the legal domain

India’s tax office has demanded about Rs.570 crore ($88 million) from the local arm of chocolate maker Cadbury, now Mondelez International Inc, in a dispute over a factory in the foothills of the Himalayas, government officials said.

India, under pressure to reduce its budget deficit, has sought to boost fiscal revenue, not least by pursuing billions of dollars in unpaid tax claims against large multinationals in recent years.

ADVERTISEMENT

But it has also vowed to step back from what critics call ‘tax terrorism’ after high profile cases, such as bumper claims against Vodafone Group Plc., threatened to tarnish its reputation.

India’s tax authorities began investigating Cadbury in 2011, accusing it of misusing an exemption provision in the hill state of Himachal Pradesh that allowed a ‘tax holiday’ scheme.

Tax authorities said Cadbury’s new unit in the region was not operational at the end of March 2010, when the holiday ended, and was, therefore, not eligible. They said it began commercial operations months later.

ADVERTISEMENT

Tax authorities in Himachal Pradesh said Mondelez India had been asked for about Rs.550 crore, a sum which includes payments dating back from 2010 onwards and a fine. Media reports, on Monday, put the fine at around Rs.230 crore.

Mondelez India disputed the charge and said in a statement that it had correctly claimed an exemption to the excise duty, adding that its factory had been working since 2009.

“The issue is one of interpretation, and it will be inappropriate on our part to discuss the details externally at this time since the matter is sub-judice and in the legal domain,” the company said in a statement.

This is a Premium article available exclusively to our subscribers. To read 250+ such premium articles every month
You have exhausted your free article limit.
Please support quality journalism.
You have exhausted your free article limit.
Please support quality journalism.
The Hindu operates by its editorial values to provide you quality journalism.
This is your last free article.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT