Appeal Details
Counselvise Citation
[2014] 120 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8238 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
CRN Number
Duration Of Justice
3 year(s) 5 month(s) 26 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
31-10-2014
Appeal Filed By
Assessee
Order Result
Dismissed
Bench Allotted
H
Next Hearing Date
08-10-2014
Assessment Year
2002-2003
Appeal Filed On
04-05-2011
Judgement Text
, ,, , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES H MUMBAI , , ! '#$ ' % BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.K.BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ' . / ITA NO.3544/MUM/2011 & & & & '& '& '& '& / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2002-03 SHRI MOHAN MANOJ DHUPELIA, 12-13, ESPLANADE, 3 RD FLOOR, AMRIT KESHAV NAYAK MARG, MUMBAI-400001 VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 MUMBAI (A SSESSEE ) ( REVENUE ) P.A. NUMBER : AAIPD4113F ' . / ITA NO.3545/MUM/2011 & & & & '& '& '& '& / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2002-03 SHRI AMBRISH MANOJ DHUP ELIA, 12-13, ESPLANADE, 3 RD FLOOR, AMRIT KESHAV NAYAK MARG, MUMBAI-400001 VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 MUMBAI ( ASSESSEE) (REVENUE) P.A. NUMBER : AAIPD2710L ' . / ITA NO.3546/MUM/2011 & & & & '& '& '& '& / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2002-03 MS. BHAVYA MANOJ DHUPELIA (NOW MRS. BHAVYA S. SHANBHAG) 12-13, ESPLANADE, 3 RD FLOOR, AMRIT KESHAV NAYAK MARG, MUMBAI-400001 VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE-1 MUMBAI (ASSESSEE) (REVENUE) P.A. NUMBER : AA HPD2422N ASSESSEE BY : DR. K.SHIVARAM , & SHRI S.R.PARIKH REVENUE BY : SHRI GIRISH DAVE - SPL. COUNSEL 2 MOHAN MANOJ DHUPELI & ORS . DATE OF HEARING : 08 /10/2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31 /10/2014 O R D E R PER JOGINDER SINGH: JM THESE THREE APPEALS ARE BY DIFFERENT ASSESSEE, WHO ARE RELATIVES, CHALLENGING THE IMPUGNED ORDER ALL DATED 25/02/2011 , PASSED BY THE LD. FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY, RAISING IDENTICAL REVISED GROU NDS OF APPEALS WHICH ARE SUMMARIZED AS UNDER:- 1. REOPENING OF ASSESSMENT IS BAD IN LAW (ORIGINAL GRO UND NO. 1 TO 3) THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT WHICH WAS COMPLETED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WITHOUT FOLLOWING THE DUE PROCESS OF THE LA WS HENCE THE ORDER OF REASSESSMENT IS BAD IN LAW, AS THE PRINCIPAL OF THE NATURAL JUSTICE IS VIOLATED, SANCTION WAS GIVEN BY THE ADDITIONAL COMM ISSIONER WITHOUT APPLICATION OF MIND, OBJECTION OF THE REOPENING WAS NOT DEAL WITH, THE PURPORTED REASONS RECOREDE3D WERE SERVED BEYOND LIM ITATION PERIOD, HENCE THE NOTICE IS BAD ETC. 2. ADDITION ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED UNDISCLOSED INCOME- RS.2,34,64,398/- (ORIGINAL GROUND NO.4) THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER MAKING AN ADDITI ON OF RS.2,34,64,398/- ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED UNDISCLOSED INCOME, WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE ALLEGED TRUST WAS DI SCRETIONARY TRUST AS NEITHER THE AMOUNT WAS ACCRUED NOR CREDITED TO A PPELLANTS NAME, HENCE ADDITION CANNOT BE MADE IN THE HANDS O F THE APPELLANT. 3 MOHAN MANOJ DHUPELI & ORS . 3. NOT ADJUDICATING THE ALTERNATIVE GROUND REGARDING T AXABILITY OF INCOME ONLY (ORIGINAL GROUND NO.4). WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE, THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED ON FACTS AND IN LAW IN NOT ADJUDICATING THE ALTERNATIVE GROUNDS REGARDING THE TAXABILITY OF INCOME ONLY OF US $ 13,500/- EARNED B Y THE ALLEGED TRUST AND NOT THE AMOUNT OUTSTANDING OF US $24,06,6 04.90/- AS AT 31 ST DECEMBER, 2001. 4. ORIGINAL GROUND NO.5 THE ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE WITHOUT PREJUDICE T O ONE ANOTHER AND THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER, AMEND , DELETE OR MODIFY ANY OF THE ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, WE HAVE HEARD DR. K.SHIVARA M ALONGWITH SHRI S.R.PARIKH LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AND SHRI GI RISH DAVE LD. SPECIAL COUNSEL FOR THE REVENUE. DR. SHIVARAM, THROUGH GRO UND NO.1, CHALLENGED CONFIRMATION OF REOPENING OF ASSESSMENT BY ASSERTIN G THAT DUE PROCESS OF LAW WAS NOT FOLLOWED BY THE DEPARTMENT, THEREFORE, THE REASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS ARE BAD IN LAW, BEING, VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLE OF NA TURAL JUSTICE, WITHOUT APPLICATION OF MIND, THE OBJECTIONS RAISED BY THE A SSESSEE FOR REOPENING WERE NOT DEALT WITH AND FURTHER THE PURPORTED REASONS, R ECORDED BY THE REVENUE, WERE SERVED BEYOND THE LIMITATION PERIOD. IT WAS POINTED OUT THAT THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED THE NOTICE ISSUED U/S 148 ON 30 TH MARCH 2009 AND THE ASSESSEE REQUESTED THE AO TO FURNISH THE REASONS FOR REOPENI NG THE ASSESSMENT. AGAIN VIDE LETTER DATED 17 TH APRIL 2009 THE AO WAS INFORMED THAT THE ASSESSEE H AS FILED THE RETURN ON 31 ST JULY 2002. THE AO VIDE LETTER DATED 13 TH MAY 2009 FURNISHED THE REASONS FOR REOPENING OF ASSESSMENT. IT WAS CONTENDED THAT THE ASSESSEE VIDE LETTER DT. 14 TH OCTOBER 2009 DENIED THE ALLEGATIONS AND THE DETAIL S SOUGHT FROM THE ASSESSEE VIDE LETTER OF THE AO DATE D 23/09/2009. OUR ATTENTION WAS ALSO INVITED TO PAGES 22 AND 24 OF PA PER BOOK INFORMING THE AO THAT NO BENEFIT FROM THE TRUST WERE RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS ASSERTED BY THE LD. COUNSEL THAT THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE DID N OT APPEAR IN THE LIST OF 4 MOHAN MANOJ DHUPELI & ORS . BENEFICIARY OF THE TRUST THUS NO AMOUNT COULD BE TA XED OF THE INCOME LYING IN THE NAME OF THE TRUST. THE CRUX OF THE ARGUMENT IS THAT NEITHER THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE IS APPEARING IN THE LIST OF BENEFICIAR Y OF THE TRUST NOR ANY BENEFIT WAS RECEIVED. 2.1. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. SPECIAL COUNSEL S HRI GIRISH DAVE DEFENDED THE REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT BY SUBMITTING THAT OBJECTIONS CAN BE RAISED ONLY AFTER FILING OF RETURN, NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED ON 26/03/2009 AND THE AO ON 13 TH MAY 2009, PROVIDED THE REASONS FOR REOPENING OF ASSESSMENT. OUR ATTENTION WAS INVITED TO PAGE 7 (T AX HAVEN BANK SECRECY TRICKS) AND OTHER PAGES SHOWING THE TRANSACTIONS. I T WAS EMPATHETICALLY CONTENDED THAT EVEN THE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF THE DOCUMENT WAS PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE. THE LD. SPECIAL COUNSEL FILED CERTAI N DOCUMENTS WHICH WILL BE DISCUSSED IN THE LATER PART OF THIS ORDER. IT WAS CONTENDED THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS MADE AWARE ABOUT THE NAMES OF THE BENEFICIARIES , BANK ACCOUNT. OUR ATTENTION WAS INVITED TO SECTION 106 OF THE EVIDENC E ACT (BURDEN OF PROVING FACT) BY CONTENDING THAT THE DEPARTMENT GOT THESE AUTHENT ICATED DOCUMENTS WHICH WERE PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE ALSO, THEREFORE, REOP ENING IS VALID. IT WAS POINTED OUT THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS SUMMONED BY THE REVENUE A UTHORITIES BUT SHE/THEY DID NOT APPEAR BEFORE THE AO AND EVEN SOUGHT ADJOUR NMENT DURING REMAND PROCEEDINGS WHICH WAS GRANTED, CONVENIENT DATE WAS FIXED AND EVEN ON THAT DATE THE ASSESSEES DID NOT APPEAR. IT WAS SUBMITTE D THAT MONEY WAS ARRANGED BY THE BENEFICIARIES TO THE LOCAL JURISDICTION BECA USE DISTRIBUTION OF ASSETS WAS NOT LIABLE FOR FURTHER TAXATION AT THAT PLACE (WHER E ACCOUNT OF THE TRUST WAS OPENED ) BUT LIABLE FOR TAXATION IN INDIA. 2.2. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. SINCE IDENTICAL FACT S/ISSUES ARE INVOLVED AND ALL THE ASSESSEES ARE RELATIVES, THEREFORE, THESE APPEA LS ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY THIS COMMON AND CONSOLIDATED ORDER. IN THE CASE OF SHRI MOHAN MANOJ DHUPELIA THE FACTS IN BRIEF ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE F ILED RETURN OF INCOME U/S 139(1) OF THE ACT ON 1 ST AUGUST 2002 SHOWING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.1,97,650/-. 5 MOHAN MANOJ DHUPELI & ORS . SUBSEQUENTLY, INFORMATION WAS RECEIVED THAT THE ASS ESSEE IS A BENEFICIARY OF AMBRUNOVA TRUST, HAVING AN ACCOUNT IN LIECHTENSTEIN BANK. THE SAID INFORMATION CONTAINED SUMMARY OF BANK STATEMENT AS ON 31/12/2001 OF THE SAID TRUST IN WHICH THERE WAS A BALANCE OF US $ 24, 06,604.90/-. THIS INFORMATION WAS NOT DISCLOSED BY THE ASSESSEE IN TH E ORIGINAL RETURN THUS NOTICE U/S 148 OF THE ACT WAS ISSUED ON 26/03/2009. THE A SSESSEE REQUESTED THE REVENUE TO TREAT THE RETURN ALREADY FILED AS HAVING BEING FILED IN RESPONSE TO THE NOTICE ISSUED AND SERVED U/S 148 OF THE ACT. THE AS SESSEE WAS ALSO SUPPLIED WITH A COPY OF REASONS RECORDED FOR REOPENING OF AS SESSMENT INCLUDING ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF THE DOCUMENTS. THE ASSESSEE ALSO DE NIED OF ANY KNOWLEDGE OF TRUST BY FURTHER CLAIMING THAT HE/SHE HAS NOT RECEI VED ANY MONEY. THE AO FOUND THAT THE ADDRESS/NATIONALITY, COUNTRY OF DOMI CILE WAS THE SAME AS OF THE ASSESSEE AS MENTIONED IN INDIA IN THE RETURN. HOW EVER, THE ASSESSEE DID NOT PROVIDE ANY DOCUMENT IN SUPPORT OF HIS STATEMENT TH AT HE IS NOT CONNECTED WITH THIS TRUST. THE AO ADDED RS.2,34,64,398 BEING 25% IF HIS SHARE OUT OF RS.11,73,31,988/-(I.E. US $ 24,06,604.90/- CONVERTE D AT 48.75%). WE NOTE THAT THE ASSESSMENT WAS REOPENED BY THE AO ON THE I NFORMATION RECEIVED FROM LGT BANK REGARDING AMBRUNOVA TRUST IN WHICH THE NAM E OF THE ASSESSEE WAS APPEARING AS A BENEFICIARY. BEFORE THE LD. AO, IT WAS CONTENDED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE DOCUMENTS SO RECEIVED BY THE DEPARTMENT RE GARDING THE TRUST (LGT BANK) ARE UNAUTHENTICATED AND UNVERIFIED AND THUS R EOPENING IS INCORRECT. WE HAVE PERUSED THE DOCUMENTS. A PERMANENT SUB-COMMIT TEE ON INVESTIGATION (COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENT AFFA IRS) WAS CONSTITUTED BY THE UNITED STATES SENATE OF WHICH MR. CARAL LEVIN W AS THE CHAIRMAN (SOURCE: WWW.FRANK-CS.ORG/CMS/PDFS/USA/SERVILE/ SENATE_TAX HAVEN BANK_EXHIBITS _17.7.08.PDF). WE HAVE ALSO PERUSED THE DOCUMENTS PROVIDED BY THE LD SENIOR SPECIAL COUNSEL (TAX HAVEN BANK SECRECY TRICKS). A S PER ARTICLE 14 OF THE BANKING ACT (LIECHTENSTEIN SECRECY LAWS) THE MEMBER S OF THE ORGAN OF THE BANK AND THEIR EMPLOYEES AS WELL AS OTHER PERSONS, ACTIN G ON BEHALF OF SUCH BANKS, SHALL BE OBLIGED TO MAINTAIN SECRECY OF FACTS THAT THEY HAVE BEEN INTERESTED TOO OR HAVE BEEN MADE AVAILABLE TO THEM PURSUANT TO THE IR BUSINESS RELATIONS WITH 6 MOHAN MANOJ DHUPELI & ORS . CLIENTS. THE OBLIGATION TO MAINTAIN SECRECY SHALL NOT BE LIMITED IN TIME. THESE DOCUMENTS ARE AVAILABLE AT PAGES FROM 1 TO 15 OF TH E PAPER BOOK FILED BY THE LD. SPECIAL COUNSEL. WE ARE REPRODUCING HEREUNDER THE E XHIBIT LIST (HEARING) ON TAXHAVEN BANK AND US TAX COMPLIANCE (JULY 17 AND 25 , 2008) FOR READY REFERENCE AND PROPER CONCLUSION. UNITED STATES SENATE PERMANENT SUB COMMITTEE ON INVESTIGA TIONS COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFF AIRS CARL LEVIN, CHAIRMAN NORM COLEMAN, RANKING MINORITY MEMBER EXHIBIT LIST HEARING ON TAX HAVEN BANKS AND U. S. TAX COMPLIANCE JULY 17 AND 25, 2008 1. MARSH FOUNDATIONS, CHART PREPARED BY THE U. S. SENATE PERMANENT SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS. 2. WU FOUNDATION, CHART PREPARED BY THE U. S. SENATE PERMANENT SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS. 3. GREENFIELD FOUNDATION, CHART PREPARED BY THE U. S. SENATE PERMANENT SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS. 4. LAITY FOUNDATION, CHART PREPARED BY THE U. S. SENAT E PERMANENT SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS. 5. A. STATEMENT OF FORMER LGT TREUHAND EMPLOYEE, FO RMERLY KNOWN AS HENRICH KIEBER. B. LIECHTENSTEIN WARRANT FOR THE ARREST OF HENRICH RICHER. DOCUMENT RELATING TO MARSH ACCOUNTS : 6. LETTER OF WISHES, LINCOL FOUNDATION, OCTOBER 15, 1985. 7. LGT RECEIPT FOR US $3,310,700 CASH FROM LINCOL FOND ATION, DATED OCTOBER 15, 1985. 8. HANDWRITTEN LETTER SIGNED BY SHANNON N. MARSH TO MR. ALVATE, TO GIVE KERRY M. MARSH PERMISSION TO REVIEW ALL DOCUMENTS AND RECEIPTS PERTAINING TO LINCOL FOUNDATION AND CHATEAU FOUNDATION, DATED MAY 23, 1992. 9. INSTRUCTIONS SIGNED BY SHANNON NEAL MARSH, EMPOWERI NG MARSH FAMILY MEMBERS TO ACT AS PRINCIPALS FOR LINEA L FOUNDATION, DATED NOVEMBER 17, 1993. 10. CORRESPONDENCE FROM JAMES A. MARSH, JR. TO PETER ME IER, LGT, 7 MOHAN MANOJ DHUPELI & ORS . DATED OCTOBER 4, 1994, RE: LINCOL AND CHATEAU. 11. LETTER OF WISHES, LINCOL FOUNDATION AND FOUNDATION CHATEAU, OCTOBER11, 2000 12. LGT MEMORANDUM TO FILE ABOUT LINCOL AND CHATEAU FOUNDATIONS, DATED FEBRUARY 7,2002. 13. DEED OF SIGNATURE ACCEPTING APPOINTMENT AS PROTECTOR OF THE CHATEAU FOUNDATION, SIGNED BY KERRY MICHAEL MARSH, SHANNON NEAL MARSH, AND JAMES AIBRIGHT MARSH, JR. A ND DEED OF APPOINTMENT OF SUCCESSORS. 14. RESOLUTION, THE FOUNDATION BOARD OF FOUNDATION CHATEAU, INDICATING THE INVENTORY OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES AT 31. DECEMBER 2000 SHOWING A TOTAL OF USD 10O15623,50, DATED SEPTEMBER 12, 2001 15. LETTER FROM JAMES A. MARSH TO LGT, DATED NOVEMB ER 10, 2004, GRANTING LGT ALL ADMINISTRATIONAL AND MANAGEM ENT ACTIVITIES FOR FOUNDATION CHATEAU. 16. CORRESPONDENCE FROM SHANNON NEAL MARSH TO MEMBERS OF THE FOUNDATION COUNCIL OF CHATEAU FOUNDATION, DATED NOV EMBER 4, 2004, RE: APPOINTMENT OF MEMBERS OF THE FOUNDATION COUNCIL OF CHATEAU FOUNDATION. 17. EXCERPT FROM 2006 INCOME TAX RETURNS, ESTATE OF JAMES A. MARSH. 18. THREE LETTERS FROM BAKER & MCKENZIE LLP (MARSH FAMILY ATTORNEY) TO THE INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE, DATED MA Y 12,2008, FORWARDING AMENDED RETURNS FOR FOREIGN INCOME AND F OREIGN BANK AND FINANCIAL ACCOUNTS FOR CALENDAR YEARS 2002 -2006. DOCUMENTS RELATING TO WU ACCOUNTS : 19. WT REPORT ON JCMA FOUNDATION, DATED JUNE 27, 20 02. 20. DECLARATION OF TRUST BETWEEN COBYRNE LIMITED AN D JCMA FOUNDATION, DATED OCTOBER 1,1996. 21. NEW YORK CITY PROPERTY RECORDS, RECORDING SALE OF FOREST HILLS, NY HOME OF WILLIAM S. WU TO TM LUNG WORLDWIDE, LTD, DATED JANUARY 21, 1997. 22. LGT MEMORANDUM BY KIM CHOY REGARDING JCMA FOUND ATION, DATED JUNE 26, 2002. 23. DOCUMENTS REGARDING WITHDRAWAL OF$1 00,000 BY J CMA FOUNDATION/WILLIAM WU FROM LGT THROUGH HSBC HONG KO NG AND SHANGHAI BANKING CORP. HONG KONG, JUNE 2002. 24. EXCERPT FROM RESOLUTION, THE FOUNDATION BOARD O F JCMA FOUNDATION, INDICATING STATEMENT OF ASSETS ASPER3L DECEMBER2001 IN THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF USD 4.283,4 73 .49. DATED FEBRUARY 7, 2002. 8 MOHAN MANOJ DHUPELI & ORS . 25. EXCERPT FROM RESOLUTION, THE FOUNDATION BOARD O F JCMA FOUNDATION, INDICATING INVENTORY OF ASSETS AND LIAB ILITIES AT 31 DECEMBER 2003 SHOWING A TOTAL OF USD 2.1 7Z145.9 7, DATED MARCH 10, 2004. 26. EXCERPT FROM RESOLUTION OF THE FOUNDATION BOARD OF JCMA FOUNDATION, SHOWING ASSETS AS PER 31 DECEMBER2004 AMOUNT TO USD 1,202,636.25, DATED FEBRUARY 13, 2006. 27. EXCERPT FROM RESOLUTION OF THE FOUNDATION BOARD OF JCMA FOUNDATION, SHOWING ASSETS AS PER 31 DECEMBER2005 AMOUNT TO USD 1,188,957.64, DATED M ARCH 30, 2006. 28. EXCERPT FROM RESOLUTION OF THE FOUNDATION BOARD OF JCMA FOUNDATION, SHOWING ASSETS AS PER 31 DECEMBER2006 AMOUNT TO USD 422,249.10, DATED APR IL 18,2007. 29. WI REPORT ON VELINE FOUNDATION AFTER A MARCH 27 , 2000, CLIENT VISIT. 30. STATEMENT OF ASSET AS PER 31.12.2000, VELINE FO UNDATION, DATED FEBRUARY 5, 2001. 31. BEARER SHARE CERTIFICATE, MANTA COMPANY LIMITED , DATED SEPTEMBER 3,1997. 32. HANDWRITTEN ORGANIZATIONAL CHART SHOWING VELINE FOUNDATION OWNERSHIP OF CORPORATIONS AND PROPERTY, UNDATED DOCUMENTS RELATED TO LOWY ACCOUNTS: 33. LGT MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD, DATED NOVEMBER26 , 1996, MEMORIALIZING A NOVEMBER21, 1996, MEETING IN SYDNEY REGARDING WESTFLELDS, ADELPHI, CROFTON BETWEEN LGT AND FRANK LOWY, DAVID LOWY, DAVID GRONSKI AND JOSHUA GELBARD. 34. LGT MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD, DATED NOVEMBER 2 7, 1996, REGARDING NEW ESTABLISHMENT WESTFIELD/LOWY. 35. LGI NOTE FOR FILE, DATED DECEMBER 17, 1996, REG ARDING TELEPHONE CONVERSATION WITH FRANK LOWY AND JOSHUA GELBARD REG ARDING WESTFIELDS, ADELPHI, CROFTON. 36. LGT MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD, DATED JANUARY 23 , 1997, REGARDING JANUARY 20, 1997 MEETING IN LOS ANGELES B ETWEEN LGT AND FRANK LOWY, DAVID LOWY, AND PEER LOWY REGARDING WESTFIELD/LOWY FAMILY. 37. LGT MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD, DATED MARCH 4, 1 997, REGARDING MARCH 3, 1997, PHONE CALL WITH PETER WIDM ER REGARDING MARCH 12, 1997 MEETING IN LONDON WITH F.L. AND J. G ELBERT, THE DEFINITIVE STRUCTURE AS WELL AS THE ASSET TRANSFER IS TO BE 9 MOHAN MANOJ DHUPELI & ORS . DISCUSSED. 38. CORRESPONDENCE FROM J.H. GELBARD TO WI, DATED M ARCH 12, 1997, REGARDING FORMATION OF A FOUNDATION BY THE NAME OF LUPERLA FOUNDATION. 39. WI MEMORANDUM FOR THE FILE, DATED MARCH 13, 199 7, REGARDING MARCH 12,1997, MEETING IN LONDON BETWEEN LGT AND FR ANK LOWY AND JOSUA GELBARD. 40. LGT MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD, DATED MARCH 16, 1997, REGARDING MARCH 12, 1997 MEETING IN LONDON WITH F.L . REGARDING LUPERLA FOUNDATION, 41. REGULATIONS, LUPERLA FOUNDATION, VADUZ, DATED A PRIL 30, 1997. 42. LGT MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD, DATED MAY 2, 199 7, REGARDING APRIL 30, 1997, MEETING IN THE HOTEL SAVOY, ZURICH BETWEEN LGT AND FRANK LOWY AND J.H. GELBARD. 43. LGT MEMORANDUM FOR THE FILE, DATED MAY14, 1997, REGARDING LUPERLA FOUNDATION, VALUZ. 44. LGT MEMORANDUM FOR THE FILE, DATED OCTOBER 23,1 997, REGARDING LUPERLA FOUNDATION/SWELL SERVICE LTD. B.V.I. 45. LGT MEMORANDUM FOR THE FILE, DATED JANUARY 29, 1998, REGARDING JANUARY 28,1998, MEETING IN BENDERN WITH PETER WIDM ER REGARDING LUPERLA FOUNDATION, VADUZ (LUPERLA). 46. MEMORANDUM FOR THE FILE, DATED JUNE 26, 2001, R EGARDING LUPERLA FOUNDATION. 47. MEMORANDUM FOR THE FILE, DATED JULY 16, 2001, R EGARDING LUPERLA FOUNDATION, VALUZ. 48. MEMORANDUM FOR THE FILE, DATED DECEMBER 17, 200 1, REGARDING LUPERLA FOUNDATION, VALUZ. 49. MEMORANDUM FOR THE FILE, DATED DECEMBER 18, 200 1, REGARDING LUPERLA FOUNDATION, VALUZ. 50. MEMORANDUM FOR THE FILE, DATED DECEMBER 20,2001 , REGARDING LUPERLA FOUNDATION, VALUZ. 51. DOCUMENTS REGARDING BEVERLY PARK CORPORATION. 52. IRS INFORMATION DOCUMENT REQUESTS (IDR) REGARDI NG BEVERLY PARK CORPORATION. 53. STATE OF DELAWARE, DIVISION OF CORPORATIONS, EN TITY DETAILS FOR BEVERLY PARK CORP., LISTING INCORPORATION DATES OF DECEMBER 17, 1991, AND JANUARY 3, 1997. DOCUMENTS RELATING TO GREENFIELD ACCOUNTS : 54. LGT MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD, DATED MARCH 27, 2001, MEMORIALIZING A MARCH 23, 2001 MEETING REGARDING MA VERICK FOUNDATION BETWEEN LGT AND HARVEY AND STEVEN DAVID GREENFIELD. 55. WI SUMMARY OF MAVERICK FOUNDATION AS OF DECEMBE R 31, 2001, DATED JANUARY 1, 2002., 10 MOHAN MANOJ DHUPELI & ORS . 56. LGT REPORT ON MAVERICK FOUNDATION, UNDATED. 57. LGT REPORT ON TSF COMPANY LIMITED, UNDATED. 58. LGT REPORT ON CHIU FU (FAR EAST) LIMITED, UNDAT ED. 59. LGT BACKGROUND INFORMATION/PROFILE FOR MAVERICK FOUNDATION, DATED OCTOBER 12,2001. 60. LGT BACKGROUND INFORMATION/PROFILE FOR TSF COMP ANY LTD., BVI, DATED DECEMBER 20, 2001. DOCUMENTS RELATING TO GONZALEZ ACCOUNTS : 61. FOUNDATION TRAGIQUE FLOW CHART, UNDATED. 62. LGT REPORT FOR TRAGUNDA FOUNDATION, DATED DECEM BER 3,2001. 63. LGT BACKGROUND INFORMATION/PROFILE FOR AUTO AND MOTEREN [MOTORS] CORP. DATED OCTOBER 3, 2001. 64. LGT REPORT ON ASMERAL INVESTMENT ANSTALT. 65. LGT MEMORANDUM FOR THE FILE, DATED SEPTEMBER 11 ,2001, REGARDING FOUNDATION TRAGIQUE. 66. STIFTUNG FLOW CHART, UNDATED. 67. LGT BACKGROUND INFORMATION/PROFILE FOR FOUNDATI ON TRAGIQUE, VADUZ, DATED DECEMBER 18, 2001. 68. LGT BACKGROUND INFORMATION/PROFILE FOR FIWA AG, VADUZ, DATED DECEMBER 10, 2001. DOCUMENTS RELATING TO CHONG ACCOUNTS : 69. LGT BACKGROUND INFORMATION/PROFILE ON YUE SHING TON G FOUNDATION. 70. DOCUMENTS RELATED TO APEX. 71. COMMUNICATION BETWEEN CHONG AND CHALET [SILVAN GOLANTI AT LGT], FEBRUARY - MARCH 2008, REGARDING DISCLOSURE O F LGT ACCOUNTS. DOCUMENTS RELATING TO MISKIN ACCOUNTS : 72. DECLARATIONS OF MICHAEL MISKIN, DATED 2003. 73. DECLARATIONS AND COURT PLEDINGS OF STEPHANIE MI SKIN, DATED 2003. 74. LGT MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD, DATED, JUNE 30,1 998~ REGARDING NEW ESTABLISHMENT MICHEL MISKEN. 75. MICHAEL MISKEN LETTER OF WISHES WITH RESPECT TO THE ASSETS OF MICRONESIA FOUNDATION, DATED JULY 28, 2000. 76. LGT REPORT ON MICRONESIA FOUNDATION. 77. LGT/MICHAEL MISKEN RECEIPT FOR WIRE TRANSFER OF GBP 3,650,314.00, DATED OCTOBER 21,1998. 11 MOHAN MANOJ DHUPELI & ORS . 78. FAX FROM THOAMS LUNGKOFLER/LGT TO MICHAEL MISKE N, DATED FEBRUARY 27,2002, REGARDING TAX SITUATION IN THE US -AREA. ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS RELATING TO LGT : 79. DOCUMENTS RELATED TO SERA FINANCIAL CORPORATION . 80. DOCUMENTS RELATED TO JAFFRA DEVELOPMENT INC. 81. DOCUMENTS RELATED TO SEWELL. 82. EXCERPT FROM PRESENTATION RELATED TO LGT AND TH E QUALIFIED INTERMEDIARY (QI) PROGRAM. 83. DOCUMENTS RELATED TO LRAB FOUNDATION. DOCUMENTS RELATED TO UBS : 84. WEALTH MANAGEMENT AND BUSINESS BANKING, CLIENT ADVI SORS GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTATION AND MANAGEMENT OF DIS CRETIONARY ASSET MANAGEMENT RELATIONSHIP WITH U.S. CLIENTS (20 02). 85. CROSS-BORDER BAN KING ACTIVITIES INTO THE UNITE D STATES (VERSION NOVEMBER2004) 86. RESTRICTIONS ON CROSS-BORDER BANKING AND FINANC IAL SERVICES ACTIVITIES. COUNTRY PAPER USA (EFFECTIVE DATE JUNE 1, 2007), PREPARED BY UBS. 87. EXCERPT OF KEY CLIENTS IN NAM, BUSINESS CASE 20 03-2005. 88. CORRESPONDENCE OF UBS TO CLIENTS DATED NOVEMBER 4,2002, WE ARE WRITING TO REASSURE YOU THAT YOUR FEAR IS UNJUS TIFIED AND WISH TO OUTLINE ONLY SOME OF THE REASON WHY THE PROTECT ION OF CLIENT DATA CANNOT POSSIBLY BE COMPROMISED .... UBSS ENTI RE COMPLIANCE WITH ITS QI OBLIGATIONS DOES NOT CREATE THE RISK TH AT HIS/HER IDENTITY BE SHARED WITH U.S. AUTHORITIES. 89. MARTIN LIECHTI (HEAD OF UBS WEALTH MANAGEMENT A MERICAS) EMAIL, JANUARY2007, REGARDING NET NEW MONEY GOAL AND YEAR OF THE PIG. 90. REFERRAL CAMPAIGN BU AMERICAS, JUNE 2002 (SWISS WATCH AWAIT!). 91. OVERVIEW FIGURES NORTH AMERICA, PREPARED BY UBS . 92. CASE STUDIES CROSS-BORDER WORKSHOP NAM. 93. UBS MEMORANDUM, DATED NOVEMBER 15, 2007, RE: CH ANGES IN BUSINESS MODEL FOR U.S. PRIVATE CLIENTS. 94. TALKING POINTS FOR INFORMING U.S. PRIVATE CLIEN TS WITH SECURITIES HOLDINGS ABOUT THE REALIGNMENT OF OUR BUSINESS MODE L PLUS Q&.A. DOCUMENTS RELATED TO OLENICOFF : 95. STATEMENT OF FACTS, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA VS . BRADLEY BIRKENFELC4 DATED 2008. 96. PLEA AGREEMENT FOR DEFENDANT IGOR HI OLENICOFF, DATED 2007. 97. EMAILS BETWEEN BIRKENFELD/OLENICOFF, DATED JULY 2001, RE: MEETING IN CALIFORNIA. 12 MOHAN MANOJ DHUPELI & ORS . 98. CORRESPONDENCE OF IGOR OLENICOFF, DATED OCTOBER 2001, RE: GUARDIAN GUARANTEE CO. LTD. 99. EMAIL BETWEEN STAGGL/OLENICOFF, DATED JANUARY20 02, RE: STRUCTURE. 100. UBS DOCUMENTS RELATED TO OPENING OF ACCOUNT FO R GUARDIAN GUARANTEE COMPANY, LTD. 101. EMAILS RELATED TO LIECHTENSTEIN TRUST AND A DA NISH CORPORATION. 102. FAX FROM OLENICOFF TO BIRKENFELD, DATED DECEMB ER 2001, RE: STRUCTURE. 103. EMAILS DATED APRIL 2002, RE: TRANSFERRING U.S. SECURITIES TO A LIECHTENSTEIN ACCOUNT. OTHER DOCUMENTS : 104. TAX HAVEN BANK SECRECY TRICKS, CHART PREPARED BY THE U. S. SENATE PERMANENT SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS. 105. LIECHTENSTEIN SECRECY LAWS, CHART PREPARED BY THE U. S. SENATE PERMANENT SUB-COMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS. 106. LETTER FROM BAKER & MCKENZIE LLP (MARSH FAMILY ATTORNEY) TO THE PERMANENT SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS, DATED JUL Y 15,2 008, WITH CLARIFICATION. 107. STATEMENT FOR THE RECORD OF THE AUSTRALIAN TAX ATION OFFICE. ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS RELATED TO LOWY ACCOUNTS : 108. LGT REPORT ON LUPERLA FOUNDATION. 109. LGT BACKGROUND INFORMATION/PROFILE FOR LUPERLA FOUNDATION, DATED DECEMBER 7, 2002. 110. LGT STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT FOR LUPERLA FOUNDATIO N, DATED DECEMBER 29, 2001. 111. LGT MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD, DATED APRIL 10, 2002, REGARDING RETROACTIVE DISSOLUTION OF LUPERLA FOUNDATION. 112. LETTER TO PETER LOWY FROM LEON C. JANKS, DATE D DECEMBER 13, 2001, ENCLOSING FOUR ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS RELATED TO BEVERLY PARK CORPORATION. 113. A. CONTRACT FOR THE PURCHASE AND SALE OF REAL ESTATE, SALE BY WEST PARK AVENUE CORPORATION TO BEVERLY PARK CORPOR ATION, MARCH 1997. B. BEVERLY PARK CORPORATION GUEST LOG, BEVERLY HILL S HOUSE AND NEW YORK CONDO, JULY 1999-MAY 2000. 114. HIDDEN MONEY TRAIL, CHART PREPARED BY THE U. S . SENATE PERMANENT SUBCOMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATIONS . TAX HAVEN BANK SECRECY TRICKS CODE NAMES FOR CLIENTS PAY PHONES, NOT BUSINESS PHONES . FOREIGN AREA CODES UNDECLARED ACCOUNTS 13 MOHAN MANOJ DHUPELI & ORS . ENCRYPTED COMPUTERS TRANSFER COMPANIES TO COVER TRACKS FOREIGN SHELL COMPANIES FAKE CHARITABLE TRUSTS STRAW MAN SETTLORS CAPTIVE TRUSTEES ANONYMOUS WIRE TRANSFERS DISGUISED BUSINESS TRIPS COUNTER-SURVEILLANCE TRAINING FOREIGN CREDIT CARDS HOLD MAIL SHRED FILES LIECHTENSTEIN SECRECY LAWS ARTICLE 14 OF THE BANKING ACT: THE MEMBERS OF THE ORGANS OF BANKS AND THEIR EMPLOYEES AS WELL AS OTHER PERSONS ACTING ON BEHALF OF SUCH BANKS SHALL BE OBLIGED TO MAINTAIN THE SECRECY OF F ACTS THAT THEY HAVE BEEN ENTRUSTED TO OR HAVE BEEN MADE AVAILABLE TO TH EM PURSUANT TO THEIR BUSINESS RELATIONSHIPS WITH CLIENTS. THE OBLI GATION TO MAINTAIN SECRECY SHALL NOT BE LIMITED IN TIME. ARTICLE 11 OF THE TRUSTEE ACT TRUSTEES ARE OBLIGED TO SECRECY ON THE MATTERS ENTRUSTED TO THEM AND ON THE FACTS WHIC H THEY HAVE LEARNED IN THE COURSE OF THEIR PROFESSIONAL CAPACIT Y AND WHOSE CONFIDENTIALITY IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THEIR CL IENT. THEY SHALL HAVE THE RIGHT TO SUCH SECRECY SUBJECT TO THE APPLICABLE RUL ES OF PROCEDURE IN COURT PROCEEDINGS AND OTHER PROCEEDINGS BEFORE GOVE RNMENT AUTHORITIES. ARTICLE 10- DATA CONFIDENTIALITY: WHOEVER PROCESSES DATA OR HAS DATA PROCESSED MUST KEEP DATA FROM APPLICATIONS ENT RUSTED TO HIM OR MADE ACCESSIBLE TO HIM BASED ON HIS PROFESSIONAL AC TIVITIES SECRET, NOTWITHSTANDING OTHER LEGAL CONFIDENTIALITY OBLIGAT IONS, UNLESS LAWFUL GROUNDS EXIST FOR THE TRANSMISSION OF THE DATA ENTR USTED OR MADE ACCESSIBLE TO HIM, PROCESSING OF PERSONAL DATA - 1173. , ART. THE AB~ (GENERAL CMI CODE): THE EMPLOYER MAY NOT PROCESS DATA RELATING TO THE EMPLOYEE UNLESS SUCH DATA CONCERN HIS OR HER QUALIFICATION F OR THE EMPLOYMENT OR ARE INDISPENSABLE FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF THE EMPLOY MENT CONTRACT. IN ADDITION, THE PROVISIONS OF THE DATA PROTECTION ACT SHALL APPLY. 14 MOHAN MANOJ DHUPELI & ORS . ARTICLE 8-TRANSHORDER DATA FLOWS: NO PERSONAL DATA MAY BE TRANSFERRED ABROAD IF THE PERSONAL PRIVACY OF THE P ERSONS AFFECTED COULD BE SERIOUSLY ENDANGERED, IN PARTICULAR WHERE THERE IS A FAILURE TO PROVIDE PROTECTION EQUIVALENT TO THAT PROVIDED UNDE R LIECHTENSTEIN LAW. THIS SHALL NOT APPLY TO STATES WHICH ARE PARTY TO T HE EM AGREEMENT.; WHOEVER WISHES TO TRANSMIT DATA ABROAD MUST NOTIFY THE DATA PROTECTION COMMISSIONER BEFOREHAND IN CASES WHERE: A) THERE IS NO LEGAL OBLIGATION-TO DISCLOSE THE DATA AND B) THE PE RSONS AFFECTED HAVE NO KNOWLEDGE OF THE TRANSMISSION. PROHIBITED ACTS OF A FOREIGN STATE ART. 2 OF THE LIECHTENSTEIN STATE SECURITY LAW: PROHIBITED ACTS FOR A FOREIGN STATE: WHOEVER, WITHOUT BEING AUTHORIZED, PERFORMS ACTS FOR A FOREIGN STATE ON LIECHTENSTEIN TERRITORY THAT ARE RESERVED TO AN AUTHORITY OR -AN OFFICIAL, WHOEVER AIDS AND ABETS SUCH ACTS, SHALL BE PUNISHED BY THE LIECH TENSTEIN COURT (LANDGERICHT) WITH IMPRISONMENT UP TO THREE YEARS. PROHIBITED ACTS FOR A FOREIGN STATE ART. 271 OF THE SWISS PENAL CODE: WHOEVER, WITHOUT BEING AUTHORIZED, PERFORMS ACTS FOR A FOREIGN STATE ON SWISS TERRITORY THAT ARE RESERVED TO AN AU THORITY OR AN OFFICIAL, WHOEVER PERFORMS SUCH ACTS FOR A FOREIGN PARTY OR A NOTHER FOREIGN ORGANIZATION, WHOEVER AIDS AND ABETS SUCH ACTS, SHA LL BE PUNISHED WITH IMPRISONMENT UP TO THREE YEARS OR A FINE, IN S ERIOUS CASES WITH IMPRISONMENT OF NO LESS THAN ONE YEAR. ECONOMIC INTELLIGENCE SERVICE (ART. 273 SPC): WHOEVER SEEKS OUT A MANUFACTURING OR BUSINESS SECRET IN ORDER TO MAKE IT ACCESSIBLE TO A FOREIGN OFFICIAL AGENCY, A FOREIGN ORGANIZATION, A PRIVATE ENTERPRISE, OR THEIR AGENTS, WHOEVER MAKES A MANUFACTURING OR BUSI NESS SECRET ACCESSIBLE TO A FOREIGN OFFICIAL AGENCY, A FOREIGN ORGANIZATION, A PRIVATE ENTERPRISE, OR THEIR AGENTS, SHALL BE PUNISHED WITH IMPRISONMENT UPTO THREE YEARS OR A FINE, IN SERIOUS CASES WITH IMPRIS ONMENT OF NO LESS THAN ONE YEAR. IMPRISONMENT AND FINE CAN BE COMBINE D. 6. THE SCOPE AND IMPACT OF THE LGT TAX INVESTIGATIO N AND ANY LESSONS LEARNED TAX OFFICE STRATEGY THE ATO IS INVESTIGATING THE USE OF LIECHTENSTEIN E NTITIES AND BANK ACCOUNTS IN COLLABORATION WITH OTHER REVENUE AGENCI ES. IN AUSTRALIA, WE ARE CONDUCTING 20 TAX AUDITS WHICH ARE LIKELY TO RAISE TAX LIABILITIES IN EXCESS OF $100 MILLION. ANECDOTAL IN FORMATION SUGGESTS 15 MOHAN MANOJ DHUPELI & ORS . THAT RELATIVELY FEW AUSTRALIANS ARE INVOLVED IN LIE CHTENSTEIN ARRANGEMENTS RELATIVE TO CITIZENS FROM OTHER COUNTR IES. LIECHTENSTEIN -THE ATO IS CURRENTLY REVIEWING THE T AXATION AFFAIRS OF AUSTRALIAN TAXPAYERS WHO APPEAR TO HAVE CONCEALED I NCOME IN OFFSHORE ENTITIES LOCATED HI BANKING SECRECY JURISD ICTIONS AND TAX HAVENS. ~M HAVE A PARTICULAR FOCUS ON TAXPAYERS WHO HAVE USED THE SERVICES OF THE LGT GROUP AND ITS TRUSTEE ENTITY, L GT TREUHAND AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT IN VADUZ. LIECHTENSTEIN (LGT.) LGT TREUHAND A.O. OPERATES A FIDUCIARY OR TRUSTEE SERVICE AND ESTABLISHES AND ADMINISTERS LEGAL ENTITLES SUCH AS ANSTALTS, STIFTUNGS (FOUNDATIONS) AND TRUSTS FOR ITS CLIENTS. LGT BANK IN LIECHTENSTEIN A.G. IS THE BANKING DIVIS ION OF THE LGT GROUP. IT HAS RESPONSIBILITY FOR BANKING SERVICES R ELATED TO THE INVESTMENT FUNCTIONS OF THE LGT GROUP. THE SERVICES PROVIDED BY LGT INCLUDE ADMINISTRATION AND INVESTMENT OF OFFSHORE ASSETS WHICH APPEAR TO BE BENEFICIALLY OWNED BY THE CLIENT LGT ACTS ON INSTRUCTIONS FROM A CLIENT TO ESTABLISH OR CREATE A LIECHTENSTEIN ENTITY AND SUBSIDIARY ENTITLES IN OTH ER TAX HAVEN JURISDICTIONS. IN THE AUSTRALIAN EXAMPLES, THE PARE NT ENTITY IS USUALLY A FOUNDATION OR TRUST. IN SOME INSTANCES, LGT APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN RETAINED AS AN AGENT OF THE CLIENT, AND BAN ESTABLI SHED AND ADMINISTERED A LIECHTENSTEIN ENTITY ACTING IN THAT CAPACITY. THE BENEFICIAL OWNERS OF THE LIECHTENSTEIN ENTITY A RE COMMONLY A NATURAL PERSON AND THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS, HOWEVER TH EIR IDENTITY AND CONTROL APPEAR TO BE CONCEALED ON PUBLIC AND BANK R ECORDS BY THE INTERPOSITION OF A FOUNDATION BOARD COMPRISING LGT OFFICIALS, WHO EXERCISE CONTROL OF THAT ENTITY ON BEHALF OF THE BE NEFICIAL OWNERS. - DOCUMENTS RELATING TO A PRIVATE FAMILY FOUNDATION A RE NOT RECORDED ON THE LIECHTENSTEIN PUBIC REGISTRY. TH. FOUNDATION IS A SEPARATE LEGAL ENTITY AND THE BOARD MEMBERS HAVE DISCRETION TO NOM INATE BENEFICIARIES, SO THAT SECRECY IS MAINTAINED. THE ATO-UNDERSTANDS THAT IN PRACTICE THE FOUNDATION BOARD MEMBERS ACT ON THE WISHES OR INSTRUCTIONS OF THE SETTLOR OR BENEFICIAL OWNERS OF THE ENTITY. IN OTHER CASES THE CLIENT HAS USED A FO REIGN ATTORNEY TO GIVE INSTRUCTIONS TO THE FOUNDATION BOARD MEMBERS OR HAS REPLACED THE BY- 16 MOHAN MANOJ DHUPELI & ORS . LAWS OR REGULATIONS OF THE FOUNDATION TO APPOINT NE W BENEFICIARIES. LGT ALLEGEDLY DESIGNS CLIENT STRUCTURES SO THAT THE CLIENT OR BENEFICIAL OWNER, IS UNABLE TO BE CONNECTED TO THE LIECHTENSTE IN ENTITY, WHETHER THAT ENTITY TE A FOUNDATION, TRUST OR ANSTALT. THE SERVICES PROVIDED BY LGT ON THE BANKING AND SECRECY LAWS OPERATING HI LIECHTENSTEIN TO PREVENT DISCLOSURE OF THE CLIENTS IDENTITY OR INFO RMATION. LGT WILL ALSO ARRANGE TO OPEN AND OPERATE A BANK AC COUNT FOR THE FOUNDATION OR TRUST IT HAS ESTABLISHED FOR ITS CLIE NT THE BANK ACCOUNTS ARE TYPICALLY HELD HI THE NAME OF THE ENTITY, TO AV OID ANY CONNECTION WITH THE INSTRUCTING CHANT, AND TO MEET THE BANKS ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING OBLIGATIONS. ASSETS ADMINISTERED BY LGT MAY BE INVESTED IN A DIV ERSE RANGE OF MANAGED FUNDS AND CURRENCIES. FURTHER, SAFETY DEPOS IT FACILITIES CAN BE ARRANGED FOR CLIENTS TO SECURE OTHER VALUABLE ITEMS SUCH AS ART AND JEWELLERY WHICH MAY ALSO FORM PART OF THE INVESTMEN T PORTFOLIO. FUNDS OWNED BY ENTITIES THAT ARE ESTABLISH D BY LGT FOR ITS CLIENTS ARE COMMONLY INVESTED WITH ITS OWN BANK OR FUNDS MANAGE MENT ENTITIES: LGT BANK IN LIECHTENSTEIN; LGT CAPITAL INVEST LIMITED GRAND CAYMAN; AND LGT PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT (CAYMAN) LIMITED. AT THE CLIENTS DIRECTION, FUNDS MAY BE INVESTED WIT H A THIRD PARTY BANK, USUALLY OPERATED IN A BANKING SECRECY JURISDICTION. THE ATO UNDERSTANDS THAT FOR A TRUST OR FOUNDATION TO BE ESTABLISHED BY LGT, SUBSTANTIAL FUNDS MUST BE SETTLED IN THE TRUST OR FOUNDATION FOR IT TO BE ECONOMICALLY VIABLE FOR LGT. LGT CLIENTS ARE WEA LTHY INVESTORS WHO TYPICALLY INVEST A SMALL PORTION OF THEIR TOTAL WEA LTH IN A LGT STRUCTURE AND WHO DO NOT NEED ACCESS TO THESE FUNDS TO SUPPED THEIR DOMESTIC LIFESTYLE. LGT PLAYS AN ACTIVE ROLE IN SERVICING AND ADMINISTERING THE CLIENTS LIECHTENSTEIN ENTITY. FOR EXAMPLE THE BAWD MEMBERS OF A FOUNDATION WILL BE LGT EMPLOYEES. THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR ADMINISTRATION OF THE ENTITY AND ARE THE APPROVED SIGNATORIES. THE USE OF LGT EMPLOYEES AS BOARD MEMBERS OR TRUSTEES AND IN-HOUSE OR OMNIBUS ENTITIES AS NOMINEE DIRECTORS OF INTERPOS ED ENTITIES IS CONSIDERED TO BE ANOTHER MEANS BY WHICH THE BENEFICIAL OWNER I S DISTANCED FROM BEING CONNECTED TO THEIR LIECHTENSTEIN ENTITY. THIS MAY FACILITATE THE AVOIDANCE OR EVASION OF TAX ON ANY OFFSHORE INCOME DERIVED BY THE LIECHTENS TEIN ENTITY 17 MOHAN MANOJ DHUPELI & ORS . BY AN AUSTRALIAN TAXPAYER, WHO IS THE BENEFICIAL OW NER. LGT ALSO ARRANGES FOR SHELL ENTITIES INCORPORATED H I OTHER TAX HAVEN JURISDICTIONS (SUCH AS BVI OR PANAMA) TO BE SET UP AS INTERPOSED ENTITLES OF THE LIECHTENSTEIN ENTITY FOR ITS CLIENTS. THE ATO CONSIDERS THAT THESE SPECIAL PURPOSE VEHICLES ARE USED TO LAYER THE TRANSACTIONS AND THE FLOW OF FUNDS, AND (NAY BE DESIGNED TO PREVENT REGULATOR S AND TAX ADMINISTRATORS FROM DETER MINING THE UNDERLYING OWN ERSHIP AND CONTROL OF THE ENTITY ESTABLISHED BY LGT AND ITS ASSETS AND IN COME. LGT ALLEGEDLY RECOMMENDS TO CLIENTS THAT FUND TRANSFERS BE CONDUCTED THROUGH INTERPOSED ENTITIES IN COUNTRIES OUTSIDE TH E CLIENTS DOMESTIC JURISDICTION. THE AUSTRALIAN EXPERIENCE IS-THAT CLI ENTS HAVE ADOPTED THIS RECOMMENDATION AND THAT FEW INTERNATIONAL FUND TRAN SFERS ARE REMITTED DIRECTLY BETWEEN AUSTRALIAN RESIDENTS AND LIECHTENS TEIN OR SWITZERLAND AS DETECTED BY OUR FIU. COMMUNICATION, BETWEEN THE ULTIMATE BENEFICIAL OWNE R OF THE FOUNDATION AND LGT APPEARS TO BE LIMITED TO EITHER FACE TO FACE OR TELEPHONE CONTACT LGT INSTRUCTS THE ULTIMATE BENEFICIAL OWNER OF THE FOUNDATION TO AVOID WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE WITH IT AND CLIENTS ARE PROV IDED WITH CODES AND PASSWORDS TO MAINTAIN CONFIDENTIALITY AND SECRECY. INTELLIGENCE HELD BY THE ATO INDICATES THAT AT JULY 2006 THERE WERE 14 BANKS OPERATING HI LIECHTENSTEIN WITH FUNDS UNDER C ONTROL-OF APPROXIMATELY 255 BILLION SWISS FRANCS. ALSO OPERATING IN LIECHTENSTEIN WAS NUMEROUS TREUHAND (TRUST SERVICE COMPANIES). FU RTHER INTELLIGENCE INDICATES THAT AS AT NOVEMBER 2006 APPROXIMATELY 127,000 ENTITIES WERE REGISTERED WITH THE PUBLIC COMPANY REGISTRY (THE PO PULATION OF LIECHTENSTEIN IS APPROXIMATELY 35,000). THE ATO HAS EMPLOYED SEVERAL COMPLIANCE STRATEGIES - AUDITS, ISSUING INFORMATION PRODUCTION NOTICES (BOTH DOMESTICALLY A ND OFF-SHORE), CONDUCTING FORMAL AND INFORMAL INTERVIEWS, ACCESSIN G PREMISES (WITH OR WITHOUT NOTICE) TO COPY DOCUMENTS, AND EXCHANGING INFORMATION WITH OUR TAX TREATY PARTNERS. MORE IMPORTANTLY, THE SHARING OF INTELLIGENCE BETWE EN INTERNATIONAL TAX AGENCIES HAS PROVIDED A UNIQUE UNDERSTANDING OF LIE CHTENSTEIN FINANCIAL SERVICES AND ENTITLES END WILL PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNI TY TO ENGAGE WITH LIECHTENSTEIN TO ACHIEVE GREATER TRANSPARENCY AND E XCHANGE OF INFORMATION. 18 MOHAN MANOJ DHUPELI & ORS . THE ATO WELCOMES NEWS THAT NEW LAWS IN LIECHTENSTEI N WILL ENHANCE REGULATION AND TRANSPARENCY IN RELATION TO SOME LEG AL ENTITIES. HOWEVER, WE ARE CONCERNED TO SEE THE DETAILED LAW AND ITS PROPO SED IMPLEMENTATION IN 2009 TO DETERMINE WHETHER THERE ARE PRACTICAL CHANGES TO TRUSTEE/BANKING PRACTICES. LESSONS LEARNED PROJECT MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES ARE ESSENTIAL TO SU CCESSFUL AUDIT OUTCOMES. SHARING OF INFORMATION WITH OTHER REVENUE AGENCIES EXPEDITES THE PROGRESS OF CASES. OUR COMPLIANCE ACTIVITIES HAVE RESULTED IN DISCLO SURES OR SETTLEMENTS . 2.3. WE ARE REPRODUCING HEREUNDER THE SALIENT FEATU RES OF THE HOST TRUST REG. HOME - THE TRUST REG. CAN BE STRUCT URED LIKE A COMPANY LIMITED BY SHARES OR FOUNDATIONS AS AN INSTRUMENT FOR COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES OR FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF ASSETS. COMPANY OVERVIEW - THE TRUST REG. QUALIFYING AS PRIVATE ASSET STRUCTURE PAYS AN ANNUAL TAX OF CHF 1,200 ONLY EXECUTIVE SU M COMPANY NORMS MAN Y LIECHTENSTEIN - DISTRIBUTION TO THE BENEFICIARIES AS WELL AS PROFITS EARNED ARE NOT SUBJECT TO ANY FURTHER TAX TRUST. REG. - THE SUPREME AUTHORITY IS VESTED IN THE SETTLOR AND IS TRANSFERABLE. FOUNDATION TRUST - THE BENEFICIAL INTERES TS MAY BE ASSIGNED TO PERSONS OTHER THAN THE SETTLER ESTABLISHING A COMPANY IN LIECHTENSTEIN FEES AND COSTS - THE ADMINISTRATION IS TAKEN CARE BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES. CONCLUSION - IF COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES ARE PERUSED OR THE ARTICLES MAKE PROVISION FOR SUCH ACTIVITIES AN AUDITOR MUST BE APPOINTED. IN THIS CASE THE ANNUAL ACCOUNTS APPROVED BY THE AUDITOR MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE LIECHTENSTEIN TAX ADMINISTRATION. CONTACT DETAILS - IN CASE OF LOSSES OR LIABILITIES ONLY THE 19 MOHAN MANOJ DHUPELI & ORS . ASSET OF THE TRUST REG. HAVE TO BE USED TO COVER THEM DISCL A IMER - THE MINIMUM CAPITAL TO CONSTITUTE A TRUST REG. IS CHF 30,000 HOST TRUST REG.S MISSION IS TO ADVISE FOREIGN INVE STORS AND TO ESTABLISH IT 11 THEM - BASED ON LEGAL EXPERTISE - COMPANIES OR TRUS TS IN LIECHTENSTEIN TO ENHANCE PROFITS. THE LIECHTENSTEIN JURISDICTION QUALIFIES AS AN OFFS HORE FINANCIAL CENTRE. FOREIGN INVESTORS HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ESTABLISH COMPANIES OR TRUSTS ILL THE PRINCIPALITY OF LIECHTENSTEIN TO ENJOY THE ADVA NTAGES OF OUR OFFSHORE FINANCIAL CENTRE DUE TO: A VERY MODEST TAX REGIME WITH SPECIAL ADVANTAGES FO R PRIVATE ASSET STRUCTURES I.E. LEGAL ENTITIES AND TRUSTS WHICH DO NOT PURSUE ANY ECONOMIC ACTIVITY; A COMPANY LAW WHICH OFFERS NEXT TO THE ORDINARY KIN D OF COMPANIES LIKE I HE COMPANY LIMITED BY SHARES ( AKTIENGESELLSCHAF/AG ) THOSE SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED TO SERVE THE NEEDS COMI NG ALONG WITH HOLDING OF ASSETS, NAMELY THE FOUNDATION (STIFTUNG) AND THE ESTABLISHMENT (ANSTALT); THE INSTITUTE OF TRUSTS SHAPED ACCORDING TO THE ENG LISH LAW TRUST; A HIGH STANDARD OF SECRECY LAWS . KEY FIGURES - FOUNDATION: 1719 AD - GOVERNMENT: CONSTITUTIONAL HEREDITARY MONARCHY - ECONOMY (GNP): CHF 5.2 BILLION (2009) - CURRENCY: SWISS FRANC (CHF) (POSSIBLE TO INVEST IN ANY CURRENCY) - SIZE: 160 SQ METERS (62 SQ MILES) - POPULATION: 36' 150 (2010) - MEMBER OF UNO, EFTA, EEA AND WTO 20 MOHAN MANOJ DHUPELI & ORS . THE PRINCIPALITY OF LIECHTENSTEIN IS A POLITICALLY, ECONOMICALLY AND SOCIALLY VERY STABLE COUNTRY FOR INVESTORS. COMPANY THE COMPANY LIMITED BY SHARES IS SUITABLE FOR ALL E CONOMIC OBJECTIVES, IN PARTICULAR FOR: . INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL TRANSACTIONS OR . AS A HOLDING STRUCTURE FOR SUBSIDIARY COMPANIES. - THE COMPANY LIMITED BY SHARES QUALIFYING AS PRIVA TE ASSET STRUCTURE PAYS AN ANNUAL TAX OF CHF 1 '200 ONLY. - THE COUPON TAX OF 4% IS NOT ANY LONGER LEVIED ON DIVIDENDS DISTRIBUTED FROM INCOME ACCRUED AFTER JANUARY 1, 2011. - THE PROFITS EARNED ARE NOT SUBJECT TO ANY FURTHER TAX. - BEARER OR REGISTERED SHARES ARE ADMISSIBLE. THE M INIMUM NOMINAL VALUE IS NOT REGULATED. IT IS ALSO POSSIBLE TO ISSUE VOTI NG SHARES. THE LIECHTENSTEIN LAW DOES NOT ASK FOR ANY QUALIFYING SHARES TO BE HE LD BY THE DIRECTORS. - THE GENERAL MEETING OF THE SHAREHOLDERS IS THE SU PREME AUTHORITY. - THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS CONDUCTS AND MANAGES THE C OMPANY BUSINESS. - THE AUDITOR HAS TO EXAMINE THE ANNUAL ACCOUNTS AN D REPORTS TO THE GENERAL MEETING. - THE ANNUAL ACCOUNTS APPROVED HAVE TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE LIECHTENSTEIN TAX ADMINISTRATION. - THE MINIMUM CAPITAL TO CONSTITUTE A COMPANY LIMIT ED BY SHARES IS CHF 50'000. COMPANY FORMS COMPANY LIMITED BY SHA RES ESTABLISHM ENT TRUST REG. TRUST FOUNDATION 21 MOHAN MANOJ DHUPELI & ORS . THE ORGANIZATION OF AN INDIVIDUAL ESTABLISHMENT MAY BE ADOPTED TO ITS SPECIFIC NEEDS: LIKE A COMPANY LIMITED BY SHARES OR A FOUNDATION, AS AN INSTRUMENT FOR COMMERCIAL OBJECTIVES OR FOR THE ADM INISTRATION OF ASSETS. ESTABLISHMENT - THE ESTABLISHMENT QUALIFYING AS PRIVATE ASSET STR UCTURE PAYS AN ANNUAL TAX OF CHF 1 '200 ONLY. - DISTRIBUTIONS TO THE BENEFICIARIES AS WELL AS PRO FITS EARNED ARE NOT SUBJECT TO ANY FURTHER TAX. - THE SUPREME AUTHORITY IS VESTED IN THE FOUNDER (H OLDER OF THE FOUNDER'S RIGHTS) AND IS TRANSFERABLE. - THE BENEFICIAL INTERESTS MAY BE ASSIGNED TO PERSO NS OTHER THAN THE HOLDER (S) OF THE FOUNDER'S RIGHTS - THE ADMINISTRATION IS TAKEN CARE BY THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS. - IF COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES ARE PURSUED OR THE ARTIC LES MAKE PROVISION FOR SUCH ACTIVITIES AN AUDITOR MUST BE APPOINTED. IN THIS CA SE THE ANNUAL ACCOUNTS APPROVED BY THE AUDITOR MUST BE SUB MITTED TO THE LIECHTENSTEIN TAX ADMINISTRATION. - IN CASE OF LOSSES OR LIABILITIES ONLY THE ASSETS OF THE ESTABLISHMENT HAVE TO BE USED TO COVER THEM. - THE MINIMUM CAPITAL TO CONSTITUTE AN ESTABLISHMEN T IS CHF 30'000. TRUST REG (TRUST ENTERPRISE) THE TRUST-REG. CAN BE STRUCTURED LIKE A COMPANY LIM ITED BY SHARES OR FOUNDATION AS AN INSTRUMENT FOR COMMERCIAL ACTIVITI ES OR FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF ASSETS. - THE TRUST REG. QUALIFYING AS PRIVATE ASSET STRUCT URE PAYS AN ANNUAL TAX OF CHF 1 '200 ONLY. - DISTRIBUTION TO THE BENEFICIARIES AS WELL AS PROF ITS EARNED ARE NOT SUBJECT TO ANY FURTHER TAX. - THE SUPREME AUTHORITY IS VESTED IN THE SETTLOR AN D IS TRANSFERABLE. - THE BENEFICIAL INTERESTS MAY BE ASSIGNED TO PERSO NS OTHER THAN THE SETTLOR. - THE ADMINISTRATION IS TAKEN CARE BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES. 22 MOHAN MANOJ DHUPELI & ORS . - IF COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES ARE PURSUED OR THE ARTIC LES MAKE PROVISION FOR SUCH ACTIVITIES AN AUDITOR MUST BE APPOINTED. IN TH IS CASE THE ANNUAL ACCOUNTS APPROVED BY THE AUDITOR MUST BE SUB MITTED TO THE LIECHTENSTEIN TAX ADMINISTRATION. - IN CASE OF LOSSES OR LIABILITIES ONLY THE ASSETS OF TH E TRUST REG. HAVE TO BE USED TO COVER THEM. - THE MINIMUM CAPITAL TO CONSTITUTE A TRUST REG. IS CHF 30'000. FOUNDATION THE FOUNDATION MAY BE CONSTITUTED AS: . ONE FOR PRIVATE USE, ESPECIALLY AS FAMILY FOUNDAT ION; . CHARITABLE FOUNDATION. - THE FOUNDER ENDOWS ASSETS FOR A SPECIFIC PURPOSE AND REGULATES THE BENEFICIAL INTEREST. - THE FOUNDATION QUALIFYING AS PRIVATE ASSET STRUCT URE PAYS AN ANNUAL TAX OF CHF 1 '200 ONLY. - NEITHER THE ENDOWMENT TO THE FOUNDATION NOR THE D ISTRIBUTIONS TO THE BENEFICIARIES OR THE PROFITS EARNED ARE SUBJECT TO ANY FURTHER TAX, - THE SUPREME AUTHORITY IS VESTED IN THE MEMBERS OF BOARD WHO ALSO TAKE CARE OF THE ADMINISTRATION. - THE FOUNDER MAY DESIGNATE OTHER BODIES AS E.G. PR OTECTORS, COLLATORS AND AUDITORS. - AN INDIVIDUAL AS FOUNDER MAY BY CREATING RETAINED FOUNDER'S RIGHTS PRESERVE FOR HIMSELF THE AUTHORITY TO REVOKE THE FO UNDATION AND TO AMEND THE FOUNDATION DOCUMENTS. - ONLY IF THE FOUNDATION PURSUES COMMERCIAL ACTIVIT IES THE ANNUAL ACCOUNTS APPROVED BY THE AUDITOR MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE LIECHTENSTEIN TAX ADMINISTRATION. - THE MINIMUM CAPITAL TO CONSTITUTE A FOUNDATION IS CHF 30'000. THE LIECHTENSTEIN TRUST SETTLEMENT IS SHAPED ACCORD ING TO THE ENGLISH LAW TRUST. TRUST (TRUST SETTLEMENT) - TRUSTS ARE USED IN A SIMILAR MANNER AS THE FOUNDA TION. 23 MOHAN MANOJ DHUPELI & ORS . - HOWEVER, THE TRUST IS NOT A LEGAL ENTITY ITSELF, BUT A KIND OF CONTRACTUAL RELATIONSHIP. - THE SETTLOR TRANSFERS MOVABLE OR IMMOVABLE ASSETS OR RIGHTS TO THE TRUSTEE WITH THE OBLIGATION TO HOLD AND MAKE USE OF THIS TRUST PROPERTY AGAINST THIRD PARTIES IN HIS OWN NAME AS I NDEPENDENT LEGAL OWNER FOR THE BENEFIT OF ONE OR MORE BENEFICIARIES. - THE TRUST COMES INTO EXISTENCE WITH THE STIPULATI ON OF THE TRUST SETTLEMENT (TRUST DEED) BETWEEN THE SETTLOR AND THE TRUSTEE OR BY MEANS OF A TRUST LETTER ACCEPTED. - THE TRUSTEE MUST KEEP HIS PERSONAL ASSETS STRICTL Y SEPARATE FROM THE TRUST PROPERTY. - TO ENSURE THE OBSERVANCE OF THE PROVISIONS IN THE TRUST DEED AN AUDITOR, A PROTECTOR, A CURATOR OR A COLLATOR CAN BE APPOINT ED. - THE KEEPING OF ANNUAL ACCOUNTS IS NOT OBLIGATORY. - TRUSTS ACCORDING TO FOREIGN LAW CAN BE FORMED IN LIECHTENSTEIN. - THE ASSETS HELD BY THE TRUST QUALIFYING AS PRIVAT E ASSET STRUCTURE ARE SUBJECT TO AN ANNUAL TAX OF CHF 1 '200 ONLY. - THE DISTRIBUTIONS TO THE BENEFICIARIES AS WELL AS THE PROFITS EARNED ARE NOT SUBJECT TO ANY FURTHER TAX. REASONS FOR ESTABLISHING LIECHTENSTEIN COMPANIES THE HOLDING OF ASSETS ASSETS OF HOLDING COMPANIES CAN BE INVESTED IN ANY KIND OF PROPERTY; E. G. BANK ACCOUNTS, PUBLICLY TRADED OR NOT TRADED SHA RES, PARTICIPATIONS IN OTHER COMPANIES, REAL ESTATE PROPERTY, ART AND SO O N. THE EARNINGS STEMMING FROM THE ASSETS HELD BY A HOL DING COMPANY, BE IT INTEREST ON BANK ACCOUNTS, DIVIDEND PAYMENTS FRO M SHARES, EARNINGS FROM PARTICIPATIONS IN OTHER COMPANIES, PROCEEDS OF SALES OR ROYALTIES QUALIFY AS INCOME OF THE HOLDING COMPANY WHICH ARE IN CASE OF A PRIVATE ASSET STRUCTURE SUBJECT TO AN ANNUAL TAX OF CHF 1 ' 200 ONLY. - THE PURSUIT OF BUSINESS PROFITS STEMMING FROM BUSINESS TRANSACTIONS OF COMP ANIES CONSTITUTED AFTER JANUARY 1, 2011, ARE SUBJECT TO ORDINARY CORPORATE TAX WITH A TAX RATE OF 12.5% ON THE TAXABLE NET INCOME. COMPANIES PURSUING BUSINESS TRANSACTIONS AND HAVING BEEN CONSTITUTED PRIOR TO JANUARY 1, 2011, ARE UNTIL DECEMBER 31, 20 13 SUBJECT TO A SPECIFIC ANNUAL CAPITAL TAX OF 0.1 % OF THE ASSETS HELD ONLY, AT LEAST CHF 1 '200 PER YEAR. 24 MOHAN MANOJ DHUPELI & ORS . IT IS NOT NECESSARY THAT SUCH AN OFFSHORE COMPANY S ETS UP AN OFFICE IN LIECHTENSTEIN OR EMPLOYS PEOPLE. THE MANAGEMENT OF SUCH AN OFFSHORE COMPANY CAN BE PROVIDED ON A CONTRACTUAL BASIS BY T HE LIECHTENSTEIN TRUSTEE. - REGULATION OF SUCCESSION/AVOIDANCE OF INHERITANCE TAX ESPECIALLY FOUNDATIONS ARE QUALIFIED FOR ALL PURPOS ES OF ESTATE PLANNING AS WELL AS TO AVOID INHERITANCE TAX. THE SUCCESSION IN THE ASSETS IS REGULATED BY THE SO-CALLED BY-LAWS. THESE ARE REGUL ATIONS SETTING FORTH WHO THE FIRST BENEFICIARY OF THE ASSETS IS AND WHO QUALIFIES AS SECOND BENEFICIARY ONCE THE FIRST HAS DIED. AS NO FORMAL C HANGE OF OWNERSHIP TAKES PLACE IN CASE OF SUCCESSION, NO INHERITANCE T AX BECOMES PAYABLE. - ASSET PROTECTION BY MEANS OF A HOLDING COMPANY IF ASSETS - EARMARKED FOR THE PERSONAL BENEFIT ONLY - ARE HELD BY A HOLDING COMPANY (NORMALLY A FOUNDATION) NOT ALL ASSETS ARE ENDANGERED IN CASE OF LOSSES OR LIABILITIES INCURRED DURING THE COURSE OF BUSINESS ACTIVITIES PURSUED BY THE BENEFICIARY. FEES AND COSTS IN GENERAL THE FEES AND COSTS INVOLVED WITH THE CONSTITUTION A ND ADMINISTRATION OF A LIECHTENSTEIN COMPANY OR TRUST ARE APPROXIMATELY TH E FOLLOWING: . FOR THE CONSTITUTION OF A COMPANY/TRUST BETWEEN C HF 5'000 AND 6'000; THE COURT FEES (COSTS) COMING ALONG WITH THE CONS TITUTION DEPEND ON THE KIND OF COMPANY, NORMALLY APPROX. CHF 600 - I '300; FOR THE LOCAL DIRECTOR/TRUSTEE OF THE COMPANY/TRU ST AN ANNUAL LUMP SUM BETWEEN CHF 5'000 AND 6'000; FOR THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE IN CHARGE TO ACCEPT SERVICES ON BEHALF OF THE COMPANY AN ANNUAL LUMP SUM BETWEEN CHF 500 AND 600; PETTY EXPENSES. - WHILE THE FEES FOR THE DIRECTOR AND LEGAL REPRESE NTATIVE ARE PAYABLE IN ADVANCE AND COVER THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE RESPECTIVE POSITION BY THE PERSON OR COMPANY RETAINED, FURTHER SERVICES PROVID ED BY THE LOCAL DIRECTOR AND HIS STAFF ARE CHARGED BY THE TIME SPEN T ACCORDING TO AN HOURLY FEE RATE. THE FEE RATE NORMALLY VARIES BETWE EN CHF 100 FOR ADMINISTRATIVE WORK TO CHF 500 FOR MANAGEMENT AND L EGAL WORK AND DEPENDS ON THE LEVEL OF SOPHISTICATION INVOLVED, TH E ASSETS CONCERNED AS WELL AS ON WHAT THE PARTIES HAVE AGREED. 25 MOHAN MANOJ DHUPELI & ORS . - ALL FEES ARE SUBJECT TO 8 % V A T AND ARE CHARGED AGAINST THE COMPANY/TRUST AND MAY BE DEDUCTED FROM THE ASSETS H ELD BY THE SAME. CONCLUSIONS THE LIECHTENSTEIN JURISDICTION QUALIFIES AS AN OFFS HORE FINANCIAL CENTRE DUE TO: - A VERY MODEST TAX REGIME; - A COMPANY LAW WHICH OFFERS NEXT TO THE ORDINARY K IND OF COMPANIES LIKE THE COMPANY LIMITED BY SHARES (AG) THOSE SPECIFICAL LY DESIGNED TO SERVE THE NEEDS COMING ALONG WITH HOLDING OF ASSETS, NAME LY THE FOUNDATION (STIFTUNG), THE ESTABLISHMENT (ANSTALT) AND THE TRU ST REG; -THE INSTITUTE OF TRUSTS; -A HIGH STANDARD OF SECRECY LAWS. FOREIGN INVESTORS HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO ESTABLISH COMPANIES OR TRUSTS WITH HOST TRUST REG. IN THE PRINCIPALITY OF LIECHTE NSTEIN TO ENJOY THE ADVANTAGES OF OUR OFFSHORE FINANCIAL CENTRE. CONTACT DETAILS GERHARD R. HOL ZHACKER DR.IUR. M.B.L.-HSG ATTORNEY AT LAW LAW FIRM HOLZHACKER JOSEF RHEINBERGER STRASSE 11 P.O.BOX 656 FL-9490 VADUZ PRINCIPALITY OF LIECHTENSTEIN 1M DUXER 4 P.O.BOX 240 FL-9494 SCHAAN PRINCIPALITY OF LIECHTENSTEIN TEL.: +423 239 66 33 FAX: +423 239 66 44 OFFICE@HOLZHACKER- LAWFIRM.COM WWW.HOLZHACKER- LAWFIRM.COM TEL.: +423 392 42 45 FAX: +423 3924246 HOST -TRUST - REG@SUPRA.NET WWW.HOST-TRUST.COM 26 MOHAN MANOJ DHUPELI & ORS . BLACK MONEY: LIECHTENSTEIN JOINS INDIA IN STASH FUN DS FIGHT PRESS TRUST OF INDIA: JAKARTALNEW DELHI, THU NOV 21 2013, 19:53 HRS. LIECHTENSTEIN, ONE OF INDIA'S IMPORTANT PARTNER NATIONS IN FIGHTIN G OVERSEAS TAX ABUSE AND BLACK MONEY, ON THURSDAY SHE D ITS SECRECY CLOAK AND JOINED THE LEAGUE OF A HOST OF OTHER COUN TRIES FOR AUTOMATIC EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION AND MUTUAL ASSISTANCE IN TA X MATTERS. THE COUNTRY, A LANDLOCKED JURISDICTION IN CENTRAL E UROPE, BECAME THE 62ND SIGNATORY TO A WORLDWIDE CONVENTION, ACCEPTED BY ALMOST ALL ECONOMIC SUPERPOWERS AND FORMULATED BY THE PARIS-BA SED ORGANISATION FOR ECONOMIC COOPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT (OECD), AN INTERNATIONAL POLICY-ADVISORY BODY THAT FORMULATES GLOBAL TAX STA NDARDS TO FIGHT TAX EVASION AND CONCEALMENT OF ILLICIT FUNDS. SWITZERLAND, IN OCTOBER, HAD JOINED THE SAME CONVEN TION. 'LIECHTENSTEIN AND SAN MARINO BECAME THE 62ND AND 6 3RD SIGNATORIES OF THE MULTILATERAL CONVENTION ON MUTUAL ADMINISTRATIV E ASSISTANCE IN TAX MATTERS AT A CEREMONY MARKING THE FIRST DAY OF THE NOVEMBER 21-22 MEETING OF THE GLOBAL FORUM ON TRANSPARENCY AND EXC HANGE OF INFORMATION FOR TAX PURPOSES,' THE OECD SAID IN A S TATEMENT. A SENIOR FINANCE MINISTRY OFFICIAL IN DELHI SAID TH E STEP, ANNOUNCED BY LIECHTENSTEIN LAST WEEK, IS A 'BOOST TO INDIA'S EFF ORTS TO COMBAT BLACK MONEY INSTANCES OVERSEAS.' INDIAN INVESTIGATING AGENCIES HAVE COME ACROSS A NU MBER OF CASES WHERE INDIVIDUALS OR ENTITIES FROM INDIA HAVE BEEN DETECT ED USING BANKING CHANNELS OF LIECHTENSTEIN TO HIDE THEIR ILLEGAL INC OMES OR STASH FUNDS. BY JOINING THE COMITY OF NATIONS, THE CENTRAL EUROP EAN NATION, LIECHTENSTEIN HAS VIRTUALLY PULLED DOWN THE WALL OF SECRECY AND WILL ALLOW PARTNER NATIONS LIKE INDIA TO SEEK INFORMATION ABOU T SUSPECT INDIVIDUALS AND ENTITIES AND PROVIDE FOR OBTAINING BANKING INFO RMATION ABOUT SUCH PEOPLE. THE MULTILATERAL CONVENTION OF THE 0 ECD PROVIDES F OR ALL FORMS OF MUTUAL ASSISTANCE LIKE EXCHANGE ON REQUEST, SPONTANEOUS EX CHANGE, TAX EXAMINATIONS ABROAD, SIMULTANEOUS TAX EXAMINATIONS AND ASSISTANCE IN TAX COLLECTION WHILE PROTECTING TAXPAYERS' RIGHTS. IT ALSO PROVIDES THE OPTION TO UNDERTAKE AUTOMATIC EXCHANGE, REQUIRING AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PARTIES INTERESTED IN ADOPTIN G THIS FORM OF ASSISTANCE. 27 MOHAN MANOJ DHUPELI & ORS . 2.4. SO FAR AS, THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL F OR THE ASSESSEE THAT THERE IS VIOLATION OF PRINCIPAL OF NATURAL JUSTICE AND REASO NABLE OPPORTUNITY WAS NOT PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER, ARE CONCERNED, WE ARE NOT IN AGREEMENT WITH THIS ASSERTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL BE CAUSE THE ASSESSEE WAS DULY PROVIDED WITH THE REASONS OF REOPENING OF ASSESSMEN T AND ENGLISH TRANSLATED COPY OF THE DOCUMENTS. 2.4.1 IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE FIND NO SUBSTANCE IN THE ASSERTION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THE REOPENING OF ASSESSMENT WAS BAD, WITHOUT FOLLOWING THE DUE PROCESS OF LAW OR VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLE OF NATURAL JUSTICE, MORE SPECIFICALLY WHEN SANCTION WAS GRANTED BY THE ADDITIONAL COMMISS IONER AFTER CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND DUE APPLICATION OF PROCESS OF LAW. TH E ASSESSING OFFICER VIDE LETTER DATED 13/5/2009 PROVIDED THE REASONS FOR REOPENING OF THE ASSESSMENT WHEREIN IT WAS SPECIFIED THAT A TAX-EVASION PETITIO N (TEP) HAS BEEN RECEIVED FROM CBDT. AS PER THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE SAID TEP THE ASSESSEE IS A BENEFICIARY OF AMBRUNOVA TRUST AND MERLYN MANAGEMEN T SA. IN THE RETURN OF INCOME THE ASSESSEE NEITHER OFFERED ANY INCOME WITH REFERENCE TO THE TRUST NOR DISCLOSED ANY DETAILS TO THE EFFECT THAT THE APPELL ANT WAS A BENEFICIARY OF THE SAID TRUST. THE ASSESSING OFFICER, FROM THE, SUMMAR Y OF THE TRUST ACCOUNT IN LTG BANK, FOUND CREDIT BALANCE OF US $ 24,06,604 AS ON 31/12/2001 (RS.11,60,99,390/- @ 48.242 PER USD) INTEREST ACCRU ED OF USD 13500 (EQUIVALENT TO RS.6,51,267/-) WAS CREDITED TO THE S AID ACCOUNT. AS THE SAME WAS NOT REFLECTED IN THE RETURN OF INCOME THUS, THE ASSESSING OFFICER CORRECTLY PRESUMED THAT INCOME HAS ESCAPED ASSESSMENT. EVEN V IDE LETTER DATED 23/9/2009 THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHOWED DETAILS (A) INFORMATION OF TRUST, (B) DETAILS OF SETTLER OF THE TRUST, (C) PURPOSE OF CR EATING TRUST, (D) COPY OF TRUST DEED, (E) ASSET AND BANK ACCOUNTS HELD BY THE TRUST IN INDIA AND ABROAD AND (F) BENEFIT RECEIVED BY THE APPELLANT DURING THE FINANC IAL YEARS RELEVANT TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 TO 2007-08 (PAGE 21 ). THE ASSESSEE VIDE LETTER DATED 14/10/2009 DENIED THE ALLEGATION OF THE ASSESSING O FFICER (PAGE-22). THE 28 MOHAN MANOJ DHUPELI & ORS . ASSESSEE ALSO INFORMED THAT SHE/THEY HAD NOT RECEIV ED ANY BENEFIT FROM THE TRUST OR FOR THAT MATTER IN ANY OTHER ASSESSMENT YE ARS. VIDE LETTER DATED 26/10/2009 THE ASSESSING OFFICER FURNISHED THE COPI ES OF DOCUMENTS (PAGES 24 TO 28) WHICH FORMED THE BASIS FOR INITIATING PROCEE DINGS U/S. 148/147 OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSING OFFICER VIDE LETTER DATED 8/12/2 009 INFORMED THAT HE HAS INFORMATION THAT THE ASSESSEE DEPOSITED USD 24,06 6 04.90 IN THE NAME OF AMBRUSOVA TRUST IN LTG BANK (PG-31). THE ASSESSEE W AS ASKED TO EXPLAIN AS TO WHY IT MAY NOT BE TREATED AS INVESTMENT OUT OF UNDI SCLOSED SOURCES AND ADDED TO THE INCOME (PG-34). THE ASSESSEE VIDE LETTER DAT E 18/12/2009 INFORMED THE ASSESSING OFFICER THAT THE EVIDENCES FURNISHED BY H IM IN NO WAY SHOWED THAT THE ASSESSEE DEPOSITED THE SAID AMOUNT IN THE NAME OF THE SAID TRUST DURING THE YEAR (PG-35 PARA-1). THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS AGAIN REQUESTED TO FURNISH THE EVIDENCE OF SUCH DEPOSIT BY THE ASSESSEE AND TH E PERSON WHO DEPOSITED THE AMOUNT (PG-36). VIDE PARA-13 OF THE SAID LETTER IT WAS CLAIMED THAT SHE HAD NOT RECEIVED ANY BENEFIT FROM THE SAID TRUST (PG-39). IDENTICAL PLEA WAS RAISED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) ALSO REGARDING NON-SUPPLY OF MATERIAL OR OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE WHICH HAS BEEN DEALT WITH BY THE LD. CIT(A ) AS UNDER WHICH IS WORTH QUOTING (PAGE-15) WHICH READS AS UNDER :- THE APPELLANT HAS WRONGLY ALLEGED THAT COMPLETE MA TERIAL WAS NEITHER GIVEN NOR OPPORTUNITY TO CROSS EXAMINE WAS GIVEN. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS HANDED OVER COMPLE TE SET OF DOCUMENTS RECEIVED BY HIM TO THE APPELLANT DURIN G THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. FURTHER, AS A PAR T OF THE REMAND REPORT, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD CALLED THE APPELLANT AND OPPORTUNITY TO CROSS EXAMINE THE ASSE SSING OFFICER HIMSELF WAS AVAILABLE TO THE APPELLANT, HOW EVER, THE APPELLANT CHOSE NOT TO APPEAR AND HENCE CANNOT RAIS E THE BOGEY OF CROSS EXAMINATION HERE. FURTHER, THE RIGHT TO CROSS EXAMINE IS AVAILABLE WHEN THE DEPARTMENT HAS ALREAD Y RECORDED THE STATEMENT AND IS BEING USED AGAINST TH E APPELLANT. IN THE INSTANT CASE, NO SUCH THING WAS D ONE BY THE DEPARTMENT OR THE AO. IT IS PERTINENT TO NOTE T HAT THE INFORMATION PASSED TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD BEE N RECEIVED AS A PART OF THE TAX INFORMATION EXCHANGE TREATY AND THEREFORE, THERE COULD NOT HAVE BEEN ANY CROSS EXAMINATION. 29 MOHAN MANOJ DHUPELI & ORS . 2.4.2 SO FAR AS THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT ENOUGH OPPORTUNITY WAS NOT PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE IS CONCERNED WE FIND NO ME RIT IN THIS ASSERTION AS IS EVIDENT FROM PARA-28 (PG-14) OF THE ORDER OF THE LD . CIT(A) (ITA NO.3546/M/11) WHEREIN UN-CONTROVERTED FINDING IS THAT THE ASSESSE E CHOSE NOT TO USE THE SAME WHEN IT WAS PROVIDED . THEREFORE, FROM THIS ANGLE A LSO THE ASSESSEE IS HAVING NO CASE. THE TOTALITY OF THE FACTS CLEARLY INDICATES T HAT THE ASSESSING OFFICER RIGHTLY ASSUMED JURISDICTION TO REOPEN THE ASSESSMENT. THUS , THIS GROUND OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE RESPECTIVE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 3. THE NEXT GROUND PERTAINS TO CONFIRMING THE ADDIT ION OF RS.2,34,64,398/- ON ACCOUNT OF ALLEGED UNDISCLOSED INCOME. THE CRUX OF ARGUMENT ADVANCED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE IS THAT THE ADDITION WAS MAD E BY THE AO WITHOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE ALLEGED TRUST WAS DI SCRETIONARY TRUST AND NEITHER THE AMOUNT WAS ACCRUED/CREDITED NOR THE NAME OF THE ASSESSEE APPEARED AS BENEFICIARY OF AMBRUNOVA TRUST. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. SPECIAL COUNSEL BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE CERTAIN DOCUMENTS EVIDENCING THAT THE NAMES OF ALL THE ASSESSEES WERE APPEARING, WHO ARE BENEFICIARIES OF THE SAID TRUST. 3.1 WE NOTE THAT (PG-14 OF THE DOCUMENT FILED BY TH E LD. SPL. COUNSEL) THE TRUST WAS ESTABLISHED ON 21/3/1997 AND THE STATUS O F THE ACCOUNT IS ACTIVE. ON 21 ST NOV. 2013, LIECHTENSTEIN JOINED INDIA AS IMPORTANT PARTNER IN FIGHTING OVERSEAS TAX ABUSE AND BLACK MONEY AND SHED ITS SEC RECY CLOAK AND JOINED THE LEAGUE OF A HOST OF OTHER COUNTRIES FOR AUTOMATIC E XCHANGE OF INFORMATION AND MUTUAL ASSISTANCE IN TAX MATTERS. THUS, BECAME 62 ND SIGNATORY TO A WORLD- WIDE CONVENTION, ACCEPTED BY ALMOST BY ALL ECONOMIC SUPER POWERS AND FORMULATED BY PARIS BASED ORGANIZATION FOR ECONOMIC CO-OPERATION AND DEVELOPMENT (OECD), AN INTERNATIONAL POLICY ADVISOR Y BODY WHICH FORMULATES GLOBAL TAX STANDARD TO FIGHT TAX EVASION AND CONCEA LMENT OF ILLICIT FUNDS. SWITZERLAND JOINED THE SAME CONVENTION IN OCTOBER, 2013. THE LD. SPL. COUNSEL SHOWED THE BENCH A CONFIDENTIAL LIST CONTAINING THE NAMES OF THE PRESENT ASSESSEE AS TRUSTEE/BENEFICIARIES OF THE TRUST. IT WAS REQUESTED THAT SINCE THE INVESTIGATION IS IN PROGRESS, THEREFORE, AT THIS ST AGE IT WILL HAMPER THE 30 MOHAN MANOJ DHUPELI & ORS . INVESTIGATION IF THE DOCUMENT IS MADE PUBLIC AS THE SAME LIST IS CONTAINING THE NAMES OF OTHER BENEFICIARIES ALSO. ON GOING THROUGH THE BANK SUMMARY IN RESPECT OF AMBRUNOVAS TRUST ACCOUNT IN LTG BANK LI ECHTENSTEIN, WE FIND THAT THERE IS A CREDIT BALANCE OF USD 24,06,605 (EQUIVAL ENT TO RS.11,60,99,390/-).IT IS WORTH MENTIONING THE OBSERVATION/CONCLUSION MADE /DRAWN BY HONBLE JUSTICE KRISHNA IYER, (THE HONBLE APEX COURT) IN T HE CASE OF CHAIRMAN BOARD OF MINING EXAMINATION & ORS. VS RAMJEE (1977 AIR 1965) (SC) ORDER DATED 3 RD FEBRUARY 1977. HELD (1 ) LAW IS MEANT TO SERVE THE LIVING AND DOES NO BEAT ITS ABSTRACT WINGS IN THE JURAL VOID. ITS FUNCTIONAL F ULFILLMENT AS 'SOCIAL ENGINEERING' DEPENDS ON ITS SCRUTINIZED RESPONSE TO SITUATION, SUBJECT-MATTER AND THE COMPLEX OF REALITIES WHIC H REQUIRE ORDERED CONTROL. A HOLISTIC UNDERSTANDING IS SIMPLE JUSTICE TO THE MEANING OF ALL LEGISLATIONS. FRAGMENTARY GRASP OF RULES CAN, N MISFIRE OR EVEN BACKFIRE, AS IN THIS CASE. [906 H, 907 A] (2) THE JUDICIAL KEY TO CONSTRUCTION IS THE COMPOSI TE PERCEPTION OF THE DAHA AND THE DAHI OF THE PROVISION. TO BE LITERAL IN MEANING IS TO SEE THE SKIN AND MISS THE SOUL OF THE REGULATION. [ 909 A-B]. (3) OVER-JUDICIALISATION CAN BE SUBVERSIVE OF THE JUSTICE OF THE LAW. TO INVALIDATE THE BOARDS ORDER BECAUSE THE REGIONA L INSPECTOR DID NOT SUSPEND THE CERTIFICATE IS FALLACY. THE BOARD' S POWER IS INDEPENDENT AND IS IGNITED BY 905 THE REPORT, WHICH EXISTS IN THIS CASE, OF THE REGIONAL INSPECTOR. THERE IS AN OV ERALL DUTY OF OVERSIGHT VESTED IN THE BOARD TO ENFORCE OBSERVANCE OF RULES OF SAFETY. [909 D] (4)TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER ON THE GROUND THAT THE R EGIONAL INSPECTOR HAD NO POWER TO RECOMMEND BUT ONLY TO SUSPEND AN D REPORT THAT 31 MOHAN MANOJ DHUPELI & ORS . HIS RECOMMENDATION INFLUENCED THE BOARD'S ORDER IS TO ENTHRONE A PROCESSUAL NICETY DO DETHRONE PLAIN JUSTICE. SUSPE NSION, ON AN ENQUIRY, PREDICATES A PRIOR PRIMA-FACIE FINDING OF GUILT AND TO MAKE THAT KNOWN TO THE BOARD IMPLICITLY CONVEYS A RECOMM ENDATION. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SUSPENSION PLUS REPORT AND R ECOMMENDATORY REPORT IS LITTLE MORE THAN BETWEEN TWEEDLEDUM AND T WEEDLEDEE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE NOT BINDING BUT ARE MERELY RAW MATERIALS FOR CONSIDERATION. WHERE THERE IS NO SURRENDER OF JUD GMENT BY THE BOARD TO THE RECOMMENDING REGIONAL INSPECTOR, THER E IS NO CONTRAVENTION OF THE CANNONS OF NATURAL JUSTICE. (5) NATURAL JUSTICE IS NO UNRULY HORSE, NO LURKING LANDMINE, NOR A JUDICIAL CURE-ALL. IF FAIRNESS IS SHOWN BY THE DEC ISION-MAKER TO THE MAN PROCEEDED AGAINST, THE FORM FEATURES AND THE FUNDAMENTALS OF SUCH ESSENTIAL PROCESSUAL PROPRIETY BEING COND ITIONED BY THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF EACH SITUATION. NO BREACH OF NATURAL JUSTICE CAN BE COMPLAINED OF. UNNATURAL EXPANSIO N OF NATURAL JUSTICE. WITHOUT REFERENCE TO THE ADMINISTRATIVE RE ALITIES AND OTHER FACTORS OF A GIVEN CASE, CAN BE EXASPERATING. COURTS CANNOT LOOK AT LAW IN THE ABSTRACT OR NATURA L JUSTICE AS A MERE ARTIFACT. NOR CAN THE), FIT INTO A RIGID MOULD THE CONCEPT OF REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY. IF THE TOTALITY OF CIRCUMSTANCES SATI SFIES THE COURT THAT THE PARTY VISITED WITH GELVERSE ORDER HAS NOT SUFF ERED FROM DENIAL OF REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY THE COURT WILL DECLINE TO BE PUNCTILIOUS OR FANATICAL AS IF THE RULES OF NATURAL JUSTICE WERE SACRED SCRIPTURES. IN THE INSTANT CASE, THE BOARD CANNOT BE ANATH-EMAT ISED AS CONDEMNING THE MAN WITHOUT BEING HEARD. THE RESPOND ENT HAS, IN THE FORM OF AN APPEAL AGAINST THE REPORT OF THE REG IONAL INSPECTOR, SENT HIS EXPLANATION TO THE CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD. HE HAS THUS BEEN 32 MOHAN MANOJ DHUPELI & ORS . HEARD DAD COMPLIANCE WITH REGULATION 26 IN THE CIRC UMSTANCES IS COMPLETE. [909G-H, 910A-G] TEREAESAI'S CASE [1970] 1 S.C.R 251; MANAGEMENT OF DTU[1973] 2 S.C.R. 114: TANDON'S CASE [1974] 4 SCC 374 REFERRED TO. OBSERVATIONS: SENSITIVE OCCUPATIONS DEMAND STERN JURISTIC PRINCIPLES TO REACH AT SCAPEGRACES, HIGH AND LOW, AND NOT MERE LONG DRAWN-OUT COMMISSIONS WHOSE VERDICTS OFTEN PR OVEDILATORY 'SHELTER' FOR THE MEN IN WHOM PARLIAMENT HIS ENTRU STED PLENARY MANAGEMENT. ANY SENSITIVE JURISPRUDENCE OF COLLIER Y MANAGEMENT MUST MAKE IT CARDINAL TO PT NISH THE BOARD VICARI OUSLY FOR ANY MAJOR VIOLATIONS AND DREADFUL DISASTERS, ON MACR O CONSIDERATIONS OF RESPONSIBILITY TO THE COMMUNITY. THE BOARD MUS T QUIT, AS A LEGAL PENDRY, IF ANY DREADFUL DEVIATION, DEFICIENCY, DE FAULT OR NEGLIGENCE ANYWHERE IN THE MINE OCCURS. THIS IS A GOOD CASE FOR NEW PRINCIPLES OF LIABILITY, BASED ON WIDER RULES OF S OCIOLOGICAL JURISPRUDENCE TO TIGHTEN UP THE LAW OF OMISSION AND COMMISSION AT THE HIGHEST LEVELS. RESPONSIBILITY AND PENALTY MUS T BE THE CONCOMITANTS OF HIGHLY-PAID POWER VESTED IN THE T OP-BRASS. ANY DEVIANCE ON THE PART OF THESE HIGH-POWERED AUTHORI TIES MUST BE VISITED WITH TORTIOUS OR CRIMINAL LIABILITIES. [90 8 F-H, 907 D-FI (THE COURT EMPHASIZED THE NEED FOR EVOLVING A CODE OF STRICT LIABILITY CALLING TO UTMOST CARE NOT ONLY THE CROWD OF WO RKERS AND OTHERS BUT THE FEW SHALL CARE OR QUIT SO THAT SUBTERRANEA N OCCUPATIONS NECESSARY FOR THE NATION ARE MADE AS RISK-PROOF AS TECHNOLOGY AND HUMAN VIGILANCE PERMIT). 3.2 SO FAR AS THE CONTENTION OF THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT SUCH DOCUMENTS WERE NOT PROVIDED TO THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO INCORRECT AS WE HAVE DISCUSSED IN EARLIER PARAS OF THIS ORDER THAT NOT O NLY THE DOCUMENTS RATHER THE 33 MOHAN MANOJ DHUPELI & ORS . ENGLISH TRANSLATED COPY OF SUCH DOCUMENTS WAS ALSO PROVIDED. THEREFORE, THIS ASSERTION OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO WITHOUT ANY BASIS . ANOTHER ASSERTION MADE BY THE ASSESSEE WAS THAT THE INFORMATION WAS UNVOUCHED AND NOT CORROBORATED WITH ANY EVIDENCE. WE NOTE THAT THE SAID DOCUMENTS WERE RECEIVED OFFICIALLY BY THE GOVERNMENT PURSUANT TO AN INVESTIGATION MADE BY PERMANENT SUB- COMMITTEE ON INVESTIGATION OF UNITED STATES SENATE. THE COPY OF EXHIBIT LIST REGARDING TAX HAVEN BANKS HAS ALREADY BEEN REPRODUC ED BY US IN EARLIER PART OF THIS ORDER. AS WE HAVE REPRODUCED IN EARLIER PART O F THIS ORDER (HOST TRUST REG.), THE DISTRIBUTION TO THE BENEFICIARIES AS WELL AS PR OFITS EARNED ARE NOT SUBJECT TO ANY FURTHER TAX AND, FURTHER, THE SUPREME AUTHORITY IS VESTED IN THE SETTLER AND IS TRANSFERABLE. IT CAN BE CONCLUDED THAT THE LIECH TENSTEIN JURISDICTION QUALIFIES AS AN OFF SHORE FINANCIAL CENTRE DUE TO A VERY MODE ST TAX REGIME, HIGH STANDARD OF SECRECY LAWS AND FURTHER FOREIGN INVESTORS HAD T HE OPPORTUNITY TO ESTABLISH COMPANIES OR TRUST WITH HOST TRUST REG. IN THE PR INCIPALITY OF LIECHTENSTEIN TO ENJOY THE ADVANTAGES OF OFF-SHORE FINANCIAL CENTRE. AS PER THE REPORT INDIAN INVESTIGATING AGENCIES CAME ACROSS A NUMBER OF CASE S WHERE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITIES FROM INDIA WERE DETECTED USING BANKING CHA NNELS OF LIECHTENSTEIN TO HIDE THEIR ILLEGAL INCOME OR STASH FUNDS AND IT WAS ONLY POSSIBLE WHEN INDIA BECAME SIGNATORY TO A WORLD-WIDE CONVENTION FORMULA TED BY OECD AN INTERNATIONAL POLICY ADVISORY BODY WHICH FORMULATED GLOBAL TAX STANDARDS TO FIGHT TAX EVASION AND CONCEALMENT OF ILLICIT FUNDS. IT ALSO PROVIDED OPTION TO UNDERTAKE AUTOMATIC EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION. IT IS A COMMON KNOWLEDGE THAT DISCRETIONARY TRUSTS ARE CREATED FOR THE BENEFIT OF PARTICULAR PERSONS AND THOSE PERSONS NEED NOT NECESSARILY CONTROL THE AFFAIRS OF THE TRUST. STILL THE FACT REMAINS THAT THEY ARE THE SOLE BENEFICIARIES OF THE TRUST. THUS TOTALITY OF FACTS CLEARLY INDICATE THAT THE DEPOSIT MADE IN THE BANK ACCOUNT OF THE TRUST REPRESENTS UNACCOUNTED INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE, AS T HE SAME WAS NOT DISCLOSED BY THE THESE ASSESSEES IN THEIR RESPECTIVE RETURNS IN INDIA, CONSEQUENTLY, THE ADDITION WAS RIGHTLY MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND CONFIRMED BY THE LD. CIT(A). 34 MOHAN MANOJ DHUPELI & ORS . 4. FINALLY, THE ALL THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEES S TAND DISMISSED. ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31/10/2014 . SD/- SD/- ( N.K.BILLAIYA) (JOGINDER S INGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED - 31/10/2014 JV/SR.PS SHEKHAR, P.S. / . ' . #) #) #) #) * ** * +, +, +, +, -', -', -', -', / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. ./ / THE APPELLANT 2 . +0./ / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 1 ( ) / THE CIT(A)- 4. 1 / CIT 5. 23 +, , , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. 34& 5 / GUARD FILE. #)' #)' #)' #)' / BY ORDER, '0, +, //TRUE COPY// 6 6 6 6 7 7 7 7 (DY./ASSTT. REGISTRAR) , / ITAT, MUMBAI JV/SPS . ' ./ SHEKHAR. P.S./JV, SR.PS
Other Referred Cases
-
Laws Referred To
-
Master The Pitch-Deck Game
₹0
1:1 Consultation on Salary Structuring
₹1
Tax Holiday Secrets for Startups
₹0
CRM Implementation Plan
₹0
Sales Forecasting Sheet
₹100
Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT): Comprehensive Overview and Key Changes under Finance Bill, 2026
Team Counselvise - February 06, 2026
Transfer Pricing and International Tax Reforms under Finance Bill, 2026: A Practical Overview
Team Counselvise - February 07, 2026
Why Meesho got ₹1,500 Crore Tax Demand ?
Team Counselvise - March 09, 2026