Money Laundering Case: ED Files Charge Sheet Against Vivo

Business Edited by Updated: Dec 07, 2023, 4:49 pm
Money Laundering Case: ED Files Charge Sheet Against Vivo

Money Laundering Case: ED Files Charge Sheet Against Vivo

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has reportedly filed the first chargesheet in connection with a money laundering investigation against Chinese smartphone maker Vivo. The Press Trust of India (PTI) reported that the chargesheet had been filed before a special court in Delhi on Wednesday, December 6.

PTI, citing sources, reported that Vivo has been named as an accused in the chargesheet, which is filed under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). Earlier, the probe agency had arrested four people in connection with this case. This includes the MD of the Lava International mobile company, Hari Om Rai, Chinese national Guangwen alias Andrew Kuang, and Chartered Accountants Nitin Garg and Rajan Malik. All the accused in this case are currently in judicial custody.

In July 2022, the Enforcement Directorate conducted searches at over 40 locations across the country in connection with this case. The probe agency had then alleged that Vivo-India transferred Rs 62,476 crore “illegally” to China to avoid payment of taxes in India. However, the Chinese smartphone maker denied all the allegations and said that the company adheres to its ethical principles.

Recently, Hari Om Rai told the Delhi court that he had nothing to do with Vivo or any of its representatives since 2014. Hari Om Rai’s lawyer told the court that Lava International and Vivo-India were in discussions about launching a joint venture in India a decade ago, but he did not benefit financially nor engage in any transaction with Vivo or any firms allegedly to Vivo. The ED started this investigation in 2022 following a police complaint filed by the Corporate Affairs Ministry against Grand Prospect International Communication Pvt Ltd (GPICPL), an associated company of Vivo. The Corporate Affairs Ministry alleged that GPICPL and its shareholders used “forged” documents and “falsified” addresses at the time of its incorporation in 2014.