Huawei India CEO moves HC over look out notice

Huawei Telecommunications (India) chief executive officer Li Xiongwei challenged a look out circular (LOC) that prevented him from flying out of India earlier this month for a business meeting. The Delhi High Court, which is hearing the petition, asked the income-tax (I-T) department why the LOC shouldn't be quashed on Tuesday. The circular had been issued at the behest of the I-T department.

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 India. The I-T department has been asked to reply to Li's petition within a month.

Despite repeated requests, the authorities didn't provide any reason for the LOC, he said. His boarding pass was cancelled and was not returned to him, according to the petition. This was a "huge blow" to his reputation "as well as to the reputation of Huawei India," the petition said.


Case summary

1. Li Xiongwei was stopped at Delhi airport on May 1 from boarding a flight to Bangkok
2. Li says it’s a “huge blow” to his reputation “as well as to the reputation of Huawei India”
3. The authorities didn’t provide any reason for the LOC despite repeated requests, he says Li also seeks quashing of I-T panchnama, arguing that witnesses during February I-T raids were “not inhabitants of the locality” as required by I-T law

Li said he had no intention of leaving India permanently. His counsel Vijay Aggarwal argued that the LOC was against the principle of natural justice.

'No LOC in Non-cognisable Offence'
As per this principle, every individual should get a chance of being heard, he argued. Aggarwal highlighted the plight of individuals who can't travel on account of LOCs. They are isolated at the airport from their family and don't get a refund on tickets, he said. Those against whom LOCs are issued are not informed in advance, leading to a public spectacle as they are barred from leaving at the airport by the Bureau of Immigration, part of the ministry of home affairs. Li urged the Delhi High Court to direct the authorities to inform him of the reasons for the LOC. His petition cited a February 18 show-cause notice issued by the I-T department to Huawei, arguing that the offence referred to in the notice was non-cognisable. His lawyer argued that an LOC cannot be issued for a non-cognisable offence. Li also pointed out that he's not been served with a show-cause in his name for any prosecution proceedings by the I-T department.

INTERIM RELIEF

In interim relief, the Delhi High Court said Li can approach the investigating officer in case he needs to travel abroad for emergency reasons.

"Needless to state that if such an application is filed, the same shall be considered on its own merits by the I-T department in accordance with law without being influenced by any observation made in this order," said the Delhi High Court order.

At Li's request, the high court also impleaded the central government through the Bureau of Immigration as a respondent to his petition. He also challenged raids carried out by the I-T department at locations belonging to Huawei and himself in February. Li sought quashing of the February 16 panchnama prepared by I-T officials, arguing that the raids were not carried out in consonance with the rules. A panchnama is a document that lists the evidence and findings made by officers at the scene of searches.

Aggarwal said the rules mandate that witnesses to "search proceedings" have to be from the neighbourhood of the search site. He alleged that the witnesses were "not inhabitants of the locality."