The remark was made by his lawyer Vijay Aggarwal in response to the income tax<\/a> (I-T) department's opposition to Li's bail plea. The department had asked the court to reject the plea. In the film My name is Khan, the star's character says: \"My name is Khan and I am not a terrorist.\"
The department told the court that India does not have an extradition treaty with China<\/a> and if the CEO<\/a> leaves for that country, it would \"be very difficult\" to bring him back. The investigation is not yet complete, the department said in its affidavit, which has been seen by ET.
The department posted the affidavit in response to a plea filed by Li seeking the quashing of a look-out circular issued against him by the income tax department. A look-out circular, or LOC, prevents a person from travelling abroad. Authorities use it to prevent people accused in criminal cases from leaving the country; they typically only find out about such curbs against them at the airport.
Objecting to the department's demand, Aggarwal said it was \"disturbing\" that the department was opposing bail in a bailable offence. Claiming that the LOC issued against Li is misuse of power, Aggarwal added that such a curb can only be issued for a cognisable offence. The offence allegedly involving Li is a non-cognisable offence, he argued.
The court verbally observed that it would have to examine safeguards to ensure that Li returns to India if allowed to visit China. \"What if tomorrow he flies (to China) and never returns?\"
Verdict Next Week <\/strong>
The bench enquired about Li's annual salary and asked his lawyer to ensure that two sureties, both Indian nationals, are arranged by next week when the court will pronounce its judgement. The court also enquired about relatives and assets that Li has in India.
Upon the court's query, Li's counsel volunteered seven-day advance intimation to the I-T department before leaving the country.
In its affidavit, the income tax department said that the LOC against the CEO was \"correct and as per the provisions of law.\" The department said that there are \"no grounds for LOC to be revoked in the present scenario.\"
The affidavit added that \"rights of an individual needs to be balanced with safeguarding the interest of the prosecuting and investigating agencies. Foremost in the present case would be the economic interest of the country.\"
The department further submitted that during the search operations in February of premises belonging to the CEO and other staff of Huawei, they \"wilfully skirted\" compliance and indulged in shifting the \"responsibility\/accountability to the next shoulder.\"
The department alleged that the documents submitted by Huawei are \"thoroughly insufficient to ascertain the veracity of various claims made in the returns of income and determine appropriate arm's length price of the substantial related party transactions undertaken by the company in absence of the prescribed books of accounts.\"
It further said that the \"discrepancies in linkages of ERP (enterprise resource planning) data submitted with the final financials of the company, itself establishes a deliberate and wilful attempt on the part of the company and the persons responsible for its affairs including the CEO for not having granted access as mandated under the statute.\"
ET was the first to report on May 25 that Li, a Chinese national, was stopped at New Delhi airport on May 1 and not allowed to board a flight to Bangkok to attend a meeting on behalf of Huawei Telecommunications (India). His boarding pass was cancelled and was not returned to him. He had petitioned the Delhi High Court challenging the LOC.
Li termed the I-T department's action as a \"huge blow\" to his reputation \"as well as to the reputation of Huawei India<\/a>.\" In response, as first reported by ET last month, the I-T department had told the Delhi High Court that an LOC was issued against Li \"because his conduct during the course of the search demonstrated that he was a flight risk.\"
Huawei has denied accusations of non-cooperation. In a statement released to ET last month, Huawei's Indian unit said it is fully cooperating with the authorities and has submitted the requisite information and clarification as sought by the authorities from time to time.
<\/body>","next_sibling":[{"msid":93532279,"title":"Chinese technology in 'Internet of Things' poses new threat to West: Reports","entity_type":"ARTICLE","link":"\/news\/chinese-technology-in-internet-of-things-poses-new-threat-to-west-reports\/93532279","category_name":null,"category_name_seo":"telecomnews"}],"related_content":[{"msid":"93531142","title":"Indian Ocean Region island states on Huawei\u2019s radar for alleged surveillance activities","entity_type":"IMAGES","seopath":"news\/india\/i-am-a-chinese-not-a-terrorist-huawei-india-ceo-to-court\/indian-ocean-region-island-states-on-huaweis-radar-for-alleged-surveillance-activities","category_name":"I am a Chinese, not a terrorist: Huawei India CEO to court","synopsis":false,"thumb":"https:\/\/etimg.etb2bimg.com\/thumb\/img-size-4928\/93531142.cms?width=150&height=112","link":"\/image\/india\/i-am-a-chinese-not-a-terrorist-huawei-india-ceo-to-court\/indian-ocean-region-island-states-on-huaweis-radar-for-alleged-surveillance-activities\/93531142"}],"msid":93532302,"entity_type":"ARTICLE","title":"I am a Chinese, not a terrorist: Huawei India CEO to court","synopsis":"The department told the court that India does not have an extradition treaty with China and if the CEO leaves for that country, it would \"be very difficult\" to bring him back. ","titleseo":"telecomnews\/i-am-a-chinese-not-a-terrorist-huawei-india-ceo-to-court","status":"ACTIVE","authors":[{"author_name":"Raghav Ohri","author_link":"\/author\/479235382\/raghav-ohri","author_image":"https:\/\/etimg.etb2bimg.com\/authorthumb\/479235382.cms?width=100&height=100","author_additional":{"thumbsize":true,"msid":479235382,"author_name":"Raghav Ohri","author_seo_name":"raghav-ohri","designation":"Senior Assistant Editor","agency":false}}],"analytics":{"comments":0,"views":3772,"shares":0,"engagementtimems":15218000},"Alttitle":{"minfo":""},"artag":"ET Bureau","artdate":"2022-08-13 07:46:58","lastupd":"2022-08-13 07:48:17","breadcrumbTags":["huawei","huawei india","li xiongwei","china","ceo","laundering","income tax","Telecom equipment","Huawei India CEO","telecom news"],"secinfo":{"seolocation":"telecomnews\/i-am-a-chinese-not-a-terrorist-huawei-india-ceo-to-court"}}" data-authors="[" raghav ohri"]" data-category-name="" data-category_id="" data-date="2022-08-13" data-index="article_1">
读到
华为电信(印度)首席执行官李Xiongwei对德里法院周五说,“我是一个中国人(国家)而不是一个恐怖分子,”明显借用了沙鲁克汗的电影。
这句话是由他的律师Vijay Aggarwal回应所得税(它)部门的反对李的保释请求。国务院已经要求法院拒绝认罪。在电影《我的名字叫可汗,这颗星的角色说:“我的名字叫可汗,我不是恐怖分子。”
国务院告诉法庭,印度没有签署引渡条约中国如果首席执行官离开那个国家,它将带他回“非常困难”。调查尚未完成,部门在其证词表示,已经被等。
国务院公布的证词来响应请求李寻求撤销申请的了望台循环所得税部门发布了针对他的。其实圆形或LOC,防止一个人出国旅行。当局用它来防止人们在刑事案件中指责离开这个国家;他们通常只有找出这样的限制在机场。
反对该部门的需求,Aggarwal说这是“令人不安”,国务院反对保释可保释的罪行。李声称LOC发表反对滥用权力,Aggarwal补充说,这样的限制只能发布cognisable犯罪。据说犯罪包括李non-cognisable罪行,他认为。
法院口头上观察到,它必须检查安全措施以确保李回到印度如果允许访问中国。“如果明天他飞(中国)和没有回报?”
结论在下周
法官询问李的年薪,问他的律师,以确保两个阿桑奇,印度人,都是由法院将宣布其将在下周安排的判断。法院还询问亲戚和资产,李在印度。
在法院的查询,李的律师自愿七天提前暗示它部门之前离开这个国家。
在其证词,收入税务部门表示,对首席执行官的LOC”正确,按照法律的规定。”The department said that there are "no grounds for LOC to be revoked in the present scenario."
证词说,“个体权利与维护的利益需要平衡的起诉和调查机构。最重要的是在目前的情况下将国家的经济利益。”
部门进一步提交,在搜索操作前提2月属于华为的首席执行官和其他工作人员,他们故意回避“合规和沉溺于将“责任/义务下肩膀。”
司法部称,华为提交的文件是“彻底不足以确定返回的各种主张的真实性收入和确定适当的公平价格重大关联方交易进行账户的公司没有规定的书。”
进一步表示,“差异联系的ERP(企业资源规划)与最后的财务公司提交的数据,建立一个深思熟虑的和有意识的尝试的公司和个人负责的事务包括首席执行官没有授权访问授权下的法令。”
ET是第一个报告5月25日,李,中国人,是停在新德里机场5月1日,一架飞机不允许曼谷参加会议代表华为电信(印度)。他的登机牌是取消,没有还给他。他请求德里高等法院有挑战性的地方。
李称它部门的行动作为一个“巨大的打击”,他的名声”的声誉华为印度”。作为回应,上月首次报道等,它部门告诉德里高等法院一个LOC发布对李”,因为他的行为过程中搜索表明,他是一个飞行风险。”
华为否认指控的合作。上个月发表的一份声明中,外星人,华为的印度单位说它完全与当局合作,并提交必要的信息和澄清所寻求的当局不时。
这句话是由他的律师Vijay Aggarwal回应所得税(它)部门的反对李的保释请求。国务院已经要求法院拒绝认罪。在电影《我的名字叫可汗,这颗星的角色说:“我的名字叫可汗,我不是恐怖分子。”
国务院告诉法庭,印度没有签署引渡条约中国如果首席执行官离开那个国家,它将带他回“非常困难”。调查尚未完成,部门在其证词表示,已经被等。
国务院公布的证词来响应请求李寻求撤销申请的了望台循环所得税部门发布了针对他的。其实圆形或LOC,防止一个人出国旅行。当局用它来防止人们在刑事案件中指责离开这个国家;他们通常只有找出这样的限制在机场。
反对该部门的需求,Aggarwal说这是“令人不安”,国务院反对保释可保释的罪行。李声称LOC发表反对滥用权力,Aggarwal补充说,这样的限制只能发布cognisable犯罪。据说犯罪包括李non-cognisable罪行,他认为。
法院口头上观察到,它必须检查安全措施以确保李回到印度如果允许访问中国。“如果明天他飞(中国)和没有回报?”
结论在下周
法官询问李的年薪,问他的律师,以确保两个阿桑奇,印度人,都是由法院将宣布其将在下周安排的判断。法院还询问亲戚和资产,李在印度。
在法院的查询,李的律师自愿七天提前暗示它部门之前离开这个国家。
在其证词,收入税务部门表示,对首席执行官的LOC”正确,按照法律的规定。”The department said that there are "no grounds for LOC to be revoked in the present scenario."
证词说,“个体权利与维护的利益需要平衡的起诉和调查机构。最重要的是在目前的情况下将国家的经济利益。”
部门进一步提交,在搜索操作前提2月属于华为的首席执行官和其他工作人员,他们故意回避“合规和沉溺于将“责任/义务下肩膀。”
司法部称,华为提交的文件是“彻底不足以确定返回的各种主张的真实性收入和确定适当的公平价格重大关联方交易进行账户的公司没有规定的书。”
进一步表示,“差异联系的ERP(企业资源规划)与最后的财务公司提交的数据,建立一个深思熟虑的和有意识的尝试的公司和个人负责的事务包括首席执行官没有授权访问授权下的法令。”
ET是第一个报告5月25日,李,中国人,是停在新德里机场5月1日,一架飞机不允许曼谷参加会议代表华为电信(印度)。他的登机牌是取消,没有还给他。他请求德里高等法院有挑战性的地方。
李称它部门的行动作为一个“巨大的打击”,他的名声”的声誉华为印度”。作为回应,上月首次报道等,它部门告诉德里高等法院一个LOC发布对李”,因为他的行为过程中搜索表明,他是一个飞行风险。”
华为否认指控的合作。上个月发表的一份声明中,外星人,华为的印度单位说它完全与当局合作,并提交必要的信息和澄清所寻求的当局不时。
评论
现在评论 阅读评论(1)所有评论
找到这个评论进攻?
下面选择你的理由并单击submit按钮。这将提醒我们的版主采取行动