Vodafone International Holdings BV v Union of India and anotherThe Vodafone case is extremely large and the facts are very extensive. This is one of the landmark cases brought before the Supreme Court of India which discusses Indian taxation and addresses the scenario where capital gains arise from transfer of shares from a foreign holding company to another international company. The capital gains in these cases would be those arising from the benefits that the company gets from its India-based subsidy. The main question is whether such transactions should be taxed in the Indian tax system. To understand the facts without getting lost in the immensity of events, below is the series of facts that present a more concise yet in-depth chain of events. • Hutchison group companies had taken some interest in the Indian telecom sector by investing in Hutchison Essar Ltd (HEL) in 1992. Hutchison had a subsidiary listed in Hong Kong and which was incorporated in the Cayman Islands in 2004. This subsidiary was HTIL. • Vodafone has acquired around 67% interest in HEL from HTIL. Vodafone and HTIL entered into a share purchase agreement in February 2007, wherein HTIL agreed to transfer the share capital of CGP without any encumbrance and with all rights attaching or arising therefrom.• Essar Teleholding Limited (ETL), HTIL , Essar Communications (India) Limited (ECIL), Essar Communication Limited (ECL), Essar Tele Investments Limited (ETIL), signed a settlement agreement in May 2007, regarding Essar The Group's support for the completion of the proposed transaction and the agreement not to sue any Hutchison group company etc., in lieu of HTIL's payment of US$373.5 million after completion and a further... ..rectification of the gap. Capital gains arising from any transaction which may accrue profits from any business or investment in India should be taxable in India as per the subsequent amendment. Indeed, it forced a quick amendment because, even though taxing such transactions was the government's intent, the drafters, while drafting the law, could not foresee such international transactions and were therefore unable to legislate accordingly. This case was one of the most published and viewed sentences in recent times. This is one of the most sought after rulings in tax matters. The ruling, while providing a clear and timely vision of the law, did not help the government in its intentions and did not help the Revenue Agency to achieve its aim of making operations such as that of Vodafone taxable.