Vol.I No.

3 July 2009

GATEWAY
TO INTERNATIONAL TRADE
E-Communique of the Committee on Trade Laws & WTO of
The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India

MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT

Dear Professional Colleagues,

Accountability, transparency, fairness of the transactions and good governance are the key words
for today’s business world and the profession, judiciously playing the role of a conscious watch
dog on all these fronts in India, firmly keeping abreast of all the fast paced changes in the global
business environment has carved a distinct niche at all levels and layers of economic activity in all
private, government and social domains. The profession and its practitioners are in high demand today. But the rise in
professional stature and demand has also increased manifold the expectations from it. The hi-tech revolution and
emergence of knowledge based economy and information thirsty class of clients have shot up the expectations even
further, posing some formidable challenges to the profession. These include challenges of utility, expectation, identity &
image, work ethics, accounting & auditing in the hi-tech atmosphere and, most important of them all, diversification of
services beyond traditional accounting sphere and delivery of value added services with professional panache as the
veritable mantra of success for the present day chartered accountant.

While the Institute, on its part, has played a big role for the capacity building of its membership through quality education,
strong regimen for adherence to professional ethics and CPD and is striving to provide a future fillip by having institutional
arrangements by entering into reciprocal arrangements with leading Countries so that the epithet “global village” soon
turns into reality. The ultimate objective is to have a “free” and “fair market” guided by reciprocity so that profession
develops beyond frontiers.

The Committee on Trade Laws & WTO has embarked upon to bring out this International Trade E-Newsletter and I am
happy to see the current issue carrying a number of important commentaries. I am sure that all concerned would find the
information contained in this update useful in their professional areas.

With warm regards,

CA.Uttam Prakash Agarwal

President ICAI
Inside

Messages from …. Doha Round Negotiations

• The President, ICAI Report by the Chairman of the
• Chairman, Committee on Trade Negotiations Committee
Trade Laws & WTO • News
• Announcements
Role of Tax Treaties in the Context of
Cross Border Investments By: Glimpses
• CA. R.E Balasubramanyam
Links to Related Websites
India’s Competition Policy - Past Feedback/ Invitation of Articles
and Present Approach By:
• CA. Umesh H.Dixit CONTACT US
 MESSAGE

MESSAGE FROM THE CHAIRMAN

Dear Esteemed Colleagues,

At the core of the human capital development is education. Therefore developing quality
professionals is at the core to the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India. We can maintain our
edge only if we proactively engage in upgrading the quality of our education to meet the demands of
the day. Our aim is to prepare Chartered Accountants to enable them to deal with complex issues.
It is indeed very important that we keep thrust of our growth and set our goals that would enhance
the image of the profession worldwide. To this effect, the Committee on Trade Laws and WTO has
been taking several initiatives. A “Study on Benefits of Preferential Trade Agreements” has been
brought out by the Committee as in recent times, the Preferential Trade Agreements have become a global phenomena
and more critical covering trade in services, investments, technology transfers and various other issues.
An Interaction with the Trade officials of various Embassies in India was also organised by the Committee to foster and
promote bilateral co-operation between the trade and industry and to explore areas whereby ICAI can collaborate with
similarly placed organizations/institutions in those countries to promote bilateral co-operation between the accounting
profession of India and those countries.
Also, the Committee had organised an International Tour to Thailand during May 4- 8, 2009 hosted by Bhilai branch of CIRC
of ICAI to strive for capacity building of our members in the rapidly changing world trade scenario in order to technically
equip the members of the Institute to face the challenges and derive advantages to broaden the scope of their expertise in
the new world trading regime and to contribute towards the economic development of India.
In this direction, this E- Communique’ is another initiative taken by the Committee to focus on the development of our
professional brethren to enable them gain knowledge in the areas related to International Trade and be of value to
stakeholders and the society.
Important commentaries on a number of issues on International Trade Laws & WTO have been appearing in this issue. I
sincerely hope that the readers would find the content of the E- Communique’ useful.
With warm regards,

CA. Anuj Goyal

Chairman, Committee on Trade Laws and WTO

2 GATEWAY
TO INTERNATIONAL TRADE
 ARTICLE

Role of tax treaties in the context of cross

border investments
By: CA. R. E. Balasubramanyam*
The liberalization process that was started in the early
90’s and the resultant opening up of the Indian
economy has been a great learning process for one
and all during the last fifteen years. Countries across
the globe, Governments, professionals, economists
and the captains of the industries with the usual
assorted soothsayers and doomsday prophets on the
subject have all been proved both right and wrong in
their assumptions and forced not only to change their
views more than once but also to become students all
over again.
One of the four principal agreements signed by the
member countries of the WTO is the Agreement on
Trade Related Investment Measures, popularly
referred to as the TRIMS. TRIMS are basically agreed
upon measures by the member countries of WTO to
enable international firms to access foreign markets
easily by phasing out domestic rules, which discourage
or limit foreign investors in their countries. These
limitations and restrictions were primarily in the nature
of giving excessive protection to domestic firms and/or
imposing certain stiff and often unreasonable
conditions on those foreign players who ventured to
invest in domestic markets. Admittedly, the OECD and
the developed countries of the west rooted for this
agreement for their own selfish ends on the
assumption that the opening up of the economies in
countries like India and China would enable them to
expand their business exponentially and thereby they
can gain control over the resources in these countries.
Those opposing this in India were also equally
convinced that the Multi-national companies would
devour the domestic industries and there would be
misery and unemployment all over. Both sides had
visions of cola flowing down the streets and people
addicted to burgers and potato chips in the developing
countries. Fifteen years down the line, both have been
proved wrong. While the foreign companies have
definitely obtained access to Indian markets, there has
also been a significant amount of flight of capital and
manufacturing bases out of the developed countries
and the emergence of the Indian MNCs.
An enterprise traditionally grew in size by investing
more and more with a view to expanding its operations.
However in the present scenario mergers and
acquisitions is the most popular way to grow. When
these are resorted to with a view to capture foreign
markets, the terminology used is Cross Border
Investments. The main reasons for Cross Border
investments are:
Quickest way of going global
o empowered to enter into an agreement with the
Access to raw materials, qualified labour, IP rights,
o granting of relief in respect of taxes of both countries.
*
The author is a member of the Institute. He can be reached at contactus@balunand.com
new technologies and other resources in bulk
Gaining
o entry into foreign market by riding on
established brand names and business groups
Expanding range of products and services through
o
backward and forward integration
Once a cross border investment decision is taken, the
investment advisors/ managers are faced with the
problem of formulating the most effective model for the
same. This would involve selecting the most
appropriate mode of investment, the method of
controlling the investment, the ease with which the
investment can be liquidated and last but most
importantly to ensure that the entire process involves
the least tax impact. In this process, the study and
application of the various tax treaties or conventions
between countries have assumed great importance
and interest. This article gives a very brief overview of
the manner in which the tax treaties are being applied
in cross border investments. The study is done in four
parts viz,
Meaning and the legal implications of tax treaties
Necessity for tax treaties
The use of tax treaties as tools for minimizing tax
impact
Current trends.
Meaning and the legal implications of tax treaties
A tax treaty is essentially an agreement between two
sovereign countries for governing the collection and
levy of taxes arising out of transactions between the
residents of the two countries. The treaty is not a law
although the instrument signed by the respective
countries is governed by international law. The power
to enter into treaties is normally derived from the
constitutional powers of the respective countries and
its coming into effect also varies from country to
country.
When it comes to fiscal treaties dealing with double
taxation avoidance, different countries have varying
procedures. In the USA a treaty becomes a part of
municipal law when it is ratified by the Senate, while in
UK, such a treaty would become effective only after it is
endorsed by an order made by the Queen in Council. In
India, there is no provision for parliamentary ratification
of the treaty but by a special procedure given in Section
90 of the Income Tax Act, the Central Government is
Government of any country outside India for the

3 GATEWAY
TO INTERNATIONAL TRADE

The Supreme Court which had an occasion to examine
the role of tax treaties in its landmark decision in the
Azadi Bachao Andolan case (263 ITR 706), has
explained it very well when it remarked thus:
The power of entering into a treaty is an inherent part of
the sovereign power of the State. By Article 73, subject
to the provisions of the Constitution, the executive
power of the Union extends to the matters with respect
to which Parliament has power to make laws. Our
constitution makes no provision making legislation a
condition for the entry into an international treaty in time
either of war or peace. The executive power of the
Union is vested in the President and is exercisable in
accordance with the Constitution. The executive is qua
the State competent to represent the State in all
matters international and may by agreement,
convention or treaty incur obligations which in
international law are binding upon the State.
Over the years, the role of the DTAA’s has itself become
increasingly important resulting in certain well settled
rules and precedents. The major impact of tax treaties
are highlighted below with reference to important
judicial pronouncements and Departmental circulars:
The chargeable income and the tax thereon under
section 4 and 5 of the Income tax Act, are expressly
made "subject of the provisions of the Act" which
means that they are subject to the provisions of section
90. By necessary implication, they are subject to the
terms of the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement, if
any, entered into by the Government of India.
Therefore, the total income specified in sections 4 and
5 chargeable to income-tax is also subject to the
provisions of the agreement to the contrary, if any. Per
the Andhra Pradesh High Court in CIT v.
Visakhapatnam Port Trust [1983] 144 ITR 146
The correct legal position is that where a specific
provision is made in the Double Taxation Avoidance
Agreement that provision will prevail over the general
provisions contained in the Income-tax Act, 1961. In
fact the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreements which
have been entered into by the Central Government
under section 90 of the Income-tax Act, 1961, also
provide that the laws in force in either country will
continue to govern the assessment and taxation of
income in the respective country except where
provisions to the contrary have been made in the
Agreement. Thus, where a Double Taxation Avoidance
Agreement provided for a particular mode of
computation of income, the same should be followed,
irrespective of the provisions in the Income-tax Act.
Where there is no specific provision in the Agreement, it
is the basic law, i.e., the Income-tax Act that will govern
the taxation of income. Per CBDT Circular No 333
dated April 2, 1982 and later approved as the correct
position in law by the Calcutta High court in CIT v. Davy
Ashmore India Ltd. [1991] 190 ITR 626
The entire impact of the tax treaties on local tax
assessment was summarised very neatly by the
Karnataka High Court in CIT v. R.M. Muthaiah [1993]
202 ITR 508 as follows:
4 GATEWAY
TO INTERNATIONAL TRADE
ARTICLE
(i) If no tax liability is imposed under this Act, the
question of resorting to the agreement would not
arise. No provision of the agreement can possibly
fasten a tax liability where the liability is not
imposed by this Act;
(ii) If a tax liability is imposed by this Act, the
agreement may be resorted to for negating or
reducing it;
(iii) In case of difference between the provisions of the
Act and of the agreement, the provisions of the
agreement prevail over the provisions of this Act
and can be enforced by the appellate authorities
and the court.
Necessity for tax treaties
The usual rules of the tax laws of countries across the
globe have necessitated the concept of tax treaties.
One of the common rules of taxation is that a resident of
country is taxed on his global income while a non
resident is taxed only to the extent of the income earned
by him in that country. Accordingly if X is a resident of
India , then he would be liable to pay tax in India on the
entire income earned by him from anywhere in the
world. On the other hand if he were to be a resident of
say UK , with some interest and rental income in India ,
then he would be taxable in India only on the income
that is deemed to arise and accrue in India . In the UK
however, he would be liable to pay tax on not only the
income earned in UK but also in India . Thus the
problem is summarized as below:
> India as the Country of source for the rental and
interest income would levy tax on those items as
per its domestic laws on the logic that they have
accrued to him within the territorial jurisdiction of India.
> UK as the country of his residence would also seek
to levy a tax on the same rental and interest income
on the basis of his being a resident of that country.
Thus it can be seen that the same item of income has
been sought to be taxed by two different countries and
would act as a deterrent for the efficient use of capital. A
tax treaty (generally called Double Taxation Avoidance
Agreement or DTAA) is therefore drawn as an
instrument to avoid double taxation of the same income
in both countries and also to grant relief in one country
to a taxpayer in respect of the taxes paid in the other
country.
The use of tax treaties as tools for minimizing tax
impact
While the tax treaties are entered into by the
contracting states within the ambit of their domestic
tax laws, it is also an established rule that the
provisions of the treaty shall override the domestic law
if they are more beneficial to the tax payer. Again
countries enter into these treaties keeping in mind
very many considerations involving political,
economic and other considerations. In this process,
the contracting countries may agree to exempt
income earned by the resident of one country in the
other or one country may even exempt or give up its

right to collect tax on certain items of income in favour
of the other country for the purpose of attracting
investments from the entrepreneurs of that country.
Considering that different countries have different
rates of taxes on income, it is but natural that an
enterprise seeking to expand globally would try to
route its investments through a country that would
give it a tax advantage vis-à-vis the home country’s
rate or at least minimize its tax burden. While
investments through certain countries which are
known tax havens are generally viewed with
suspicion by the tax authorities, the more popular
method is to take advantage of the treaty provisions
that exist between countries and route the cross
border investments through a country affording the
maximum tax advantage. A typical example is
illustrated below:
Parent Company Intermediary Holding Subsidiary
in USA Company in Mauritius in India
In the above example, assume a company in USA
wants to acquire controlling interest in a company in
India. It registers a holding company in Mauritius and
routes its funds through that company into the Indian
company’s shares. This is because the DTAA
between India and Mauritius provides that capital
gains arising from the sale of assets other than
immovable properties would be taxable only in the
country where the taxpayer is resident. Now
Mauritius does not have any capital gains tax on sale
of shares and India exempts dividends declared by
listed companies from tax. Thus the Intermediary
Company in Mauritius gets tax exempted dividends.
At a future date, should the parent company in USA
decide to divest its holding in the Indian company, it
would ask its subsidiary in Mauritius to sell the shares
of the Indian company or it will sell the shares of the
Mauritius subsidiary itself to the intending buyer and
thus get tax free capital gains.
The example given above is a very simple one and in
practice the cross border investments are done
through a much more complex network of holding and
subsidiary companies across many countries.
5 GATEWAY
TO INTERNATIONAL TRADE
ARTICLE
Current Trends
Thus using DTAAs for global investments have
become the norm of the day and as can be expected
the tax authorities too are not far behind in coming up
with their own methods to counter this. While Courts in
general have ruled that taking advantage of treaty
provisions as legitimate, (Refer the decision of the
Supreme Court in the Azadi Bachao Andolan case, a
landmark case worldwide), they have also sought to
discourage the practice of tax evasion by investing
through shell companies or conduits registered in tax
havens. Governments too have sought to give
themselves extra-territorial jurisdiction and bring to tax
the income that has potentially arisen within their
jurisdiction. Recently the House of Lords ruled that a
payment made by Nike, a well known footwear
company to a one man company owned by Andre
Agassi, for endorsing its products during the
Wimbledon championship was taxable in UK even
though both the payer and payee were non residents
of UK and the payment itself was made outside UK.
Another classic example at home in India is that of the
raging battle in the case of the takeover of Hutch by
Vodafone. Here, Vodafone acquired from Hutchinson
Telecom, registered in Hongkong, a 2 dollar company
registered in Cayman Islands, which held all the
shares of an investment company in Mauritius , which
in turn held the majority stake in Hutchinson Essar of
India. The Income tax department issued a notice to
Vodafone seeking to treat it as a defaulter inasmuch as
it had paid a sum to a non-resident in respect of an
interest attributable to a property in India, without
deduction of tax at source. The writ petition against this
notice has been dismissed by the Mumbai HC.
Although the case is far from decided, the Mumbai high
court has recognized in principle, the right of the Indian
tax authorities to demand tax on transactions entered
outside India involving property situated inside India.
Thus while the battle for going one up continues between
the tax advisor and the tax gatherer, newer and smarter
measures and counter-measures keep coming up.
Whatever may be the outcome; the study of tax treaties
has assumed a great role and offers exciting scope for
both the student and the practising professional.

India’s Competition Policy - Past and Present Approach
By: Umesh H. Dixit **
Introduction
What is Competition?
The term competition in common parlance refers to
situation wherein two or more persons with common
interest in order to achieve a particular goal adopt various
strategies in order to overcome the other aspirant. When
it comes to the business the term ‘Competition’ refers to
the economic rivalry amongst the suppliers and service
providers present in the relevant market who are
engaged in similar trade or provision of services and the
policies implemented by the Government for building up
market structure, conducive to such rivalry. The
Government implements these measures in a designed
manner so that the market is regulated. A regulated
market is the assurance for the customers of the
availability of goods and services at reasonable prices as
compared to the current level of costs.
According to Prof. J.M.Clark ‘Competition’ is the kind of
market pressure, which must be exerted to penalise the
laggards and to reward the enterprising, and in this way
to promote economic progress.
According to a World Bank Report (1999) ‘ Competition ’
has been defined as ‘ a situation in a market in which
firms or sellers independently strive for the buyers’
patronage in order to achieve a particular business
objective for example profit, sales or market share.
One would naturally be curious as to the role of
competition or competition policies. Prevailing of healthy
competition within the various suppliers or service
providers present in a market helps to lead towards to
maximization of consumer welfare and benefit.
Presence of competition in the market does not only
envisage that the goods or services are available at
affordable prices. It also simultaneously needs that the
consumer should get value for his money in the form of
superior quality, utility, ample choice, prompt post sales
service, and other relevant benefits depending upon the
peculiar nature of the goods or service. All these factors
taken together enhance the consumer satisfaction,
which are the basic criteria of consumer welfare.
It is the responsibility of the State to ensure that healthy
competition prevails in the relevant market. For this
purpose it has to frame its competition policy in order to
ensure that healthy competition prevails in the relevant
market. While framing the competition policy the
combined effects of various factors like demand/supply
position; consumer choice and preference; tradition etc.,
have to be taken into consideration. It is further important
to note that the policies once framed and implemented
cannot remain static, but they need to have regular
review of the after effects on the market forces and
consequent reaction of the suppliers and consumers. In
**
The author is a member of the Institute. He can be reached at uhdixit123@rediffmail.com
6 GATEWAY
TO INTERNATIONAL TRADE
ARTICLE
view of the responses, the policy has be amended from
time to time so that the competitive atmosphere in the
market is maintained. While framing the polices it has to
be taken into consideration while maximising the
consumer surplus equal justice is given to the supplier in
order to enable him to recoup value for his money.
If the competition policy is not framed in an effective
manner, the suppliers will try to dominate market and
exploit the consumers. The dominance can be either
individually i.e. by achieving monopoly. In case of
oligopoly, the exploitation shall be in consortium i.e. by
entering into collusive agreements. Thus prevailing of
healthy competition in the market is of utmost
importance.
What is Competition Policy?
Competition policy has been defined as “those
Government measures that directly affect the behaviour
of enterprises and the structure of industry” (Khemani
R.S. and Mark A. Dutz, 1996). Proper implementation of
competition policy leads to promotion of efficiency, which
in turn maximizes welfare. The term welfare implies the
sum total of consumer’s surplus and producer’s surplus,
as well as taxes collected by the Government.
Often the words competition policy and competition law are
alternately used, which is not correct. There is distinction
between the competition policy and competition law.
Competition policy refers to all those measures, executive
policies, guidelines and approach by the Government to
the competition issues in the relevant market. Whereas
competition law is the legal enactment, which can be
enforced in the court of law. Thus, competition policy is the
main frame of which competition law is the ancillary
support. Competition Policy is pronounced in the trade
policies in terms of which trade is regulated and does not
require legislative sanction before enforcing the same.
However such policies should have the cover of the law,
because in absence of such a cover there is likelihood that
the polices may become discriminatory
Thus in short competition policy is the main structure of
which competition law is one of the component, which
can legally enforce the issues arising out of the
competition policy.
The need for competition policy
A regulated market creates healthy competition, which is
indispensable for the overall growth of the economy. If the
economic growth is stifled by anti-competitive forces then it
is inevitable that the growth is bound to become unsteady,
and imbalanced. Though it is admitted fact that purchasing
power of individual consumer determines the market
behaviour, however it would be worth to mention here that
it is not only the purchasing power that governs the market

but is only one of the determining factors. Anti-competitive
forces that work against the market behaviour are rampant
which need to be combat by the Government policies.
These anti-competitive forces when act in collusion lead to
disruption of supply, raise prices above competitive levels
and try to reap excessive profits. This can be done by
exploiting the market power possessed by them, which is
termed as abuse of dominance. When these activities are
carried out in consortium, it is termed as cartel.
A regulated market pre-supposes fair competition
amongst the various manufacturers, traders, distributors
or service providers comprised therein. In absence of fair
competition, the anti-competitive forces prevail, which lead
to market collapse. Fair competition has been regarded
as one of the pillars of an efficient market economy.
Competition stimulates innovation and productivity, which
leads to share optimum allocation of resources and
enables better satisfaction of consumer preferences.
Consumer welfare and benefit is the ultimate goal of any
State, to which India is also not an exception. In order to
achieve this goal various measures in the form of
Government Policies are introduced. Thus competition
policy plays a pivotal role in achieving this objective.
The Indian Scenario
As far as India is concerned the competition policy finds
its reference way back in 400 BC in the famous book ‘
Arthashastra’ (Economics) written by Chanakya, the then
Prime Minister of Ruler Chandragupta Maurya, in which
there is reference about the mentality of the traders to
form cartels and make excessive profits. Also mention is
found about the provisions for fines and penalty to combat
cartelism. Thus the ancient Indian rulers were also aware
of the presence of anti-competitive elements in the market
and even had the curbing regulations.
If we take a look at the present status of the India’s
approach to the competition issues, it is seen that during
the post independence era, the objective of
development of Indian economy was establishing a
broad industrial base with the motive of achieving self-
reliance. However, the concept of self-reliance was
considered to be synonymous to import substitution and
hence restrictions were imposed on entry of the foreign
firms into the local markets. The Industrial (Development
and Regulation) Act 1951, provided for licensing
requirement. The pattern and manner of investment,
geographical location, size, production capacity, import
content in the final product etc., were all subject to
Government approval. This left very limited scope for the
entrepreneurs to explore their capability and innovation.
Further, price fixation, cap on foreign capital investment,
were the other tools in the hands of Central Govt.
Massive protection was extended to small-scale
industries under the infant industry argument. A
substantially large number of products were reserved for
exclusive production by SSI sector. As the SSI sector
was entitled to various incentives in form of cash
7 GATEWAY
TO INTERNATIONAL TRADE
ARTICLE
subsidy, reduced rates of electricity, reduction in bank
interest rates etc. the entrepreneurs were reluctant to
expand their operations because of which the Indian
industries remained smaller in size with no capability to
compete with the giant multinational firms.
Further the Government itself had a major role in the
business and industry in the form of State owned Public
Sector Undertakings. These undertakings were State
owned monopolies. Core and infrastructure areas like
Power, Banking, Insurance, Telecom, Rail and Civil
Aviation, were fully owned by the State. Private players
were not allowed entry in these sectors. Number of
commodities like edible oil, sugar, pharmaceutical,
aluminium, steel, cement, coal, petroleum products etc
were subject to price and quantity control. Thus there
was direct or indirect State intervention in every
industry and trade.
Further under the provisions of Foreign Exchange
Regulation Act, 1973(FERA) there was restriction on
equity participation by foreign firms beyond 40 percent.
Because of lower participation capacity the foreign
companies did not have much enthusiasm in investing
on large scale in the Indian industries. Foreign
collaborations were under strict vigil of the various
regulations. The import technology agreements needed
Government approval with power to limit the amount of
royalty that could be paid as well faced rejections if the
import content in the final product was on a higher side.
Also there were stringent restrictions on appointments of
foreign technicians.
In the capital market due to nationalization of 14 major
commercial banks in the year 1969, about 85 % of the
assets of the banking system came under State control.
There were very few term lending institutions. Those
present were state owned and hence acted in consortium
like a cartel. In the equity market, it was imperative to
have permission from the Controller of Capital Issues,
who always intervened with regard to the structure and
quantum of capital to be raised and the issue price.
With a view to protect labour and employment, closure
and labour retrenchment were controlled by the
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Under the Sick Industrial
Companies Act, 1986, Board of Industrial and Financial
Reconstruction (BIFR) was the authority set up to review
the viability of sick units and to recommend for
rehabilitation or closure. Because of such policies the
loss making units were compulsorily required to stretch
their operations, as a result there was substantial loss of
capital, which could have otherwise been utilized for
other profitable purposes.
The triggering effect of all these policies was that the
industrial environment was totally sluggish with no gist
to progress and prosper. Because of the excessive
protection there was no enthusiasm amongst the
Indian entrepreneurs to grow or to operate on large
scale. The stringent laws and regulatory polices never

created competitive atmosphere in the Indian markets.
On the legislative side, in order to take care of the
competition issues, two legislations were enacted,
namely The Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices
Act, 1969 (in short referred to as the MRTP Act) and
Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The MRTP Act was
enacted with the objective of prevention of concentration
of economic power to common detriment, control of
monopolies, prohibition of Monopolistic Trade Practices
(MTP’s), Restrictive Trade Practices (RTP’s) and Unfair
Trade Practices (UTP’s). The Consumer Protection Act,
dealt with Unfair Trade Practices. Thus there was partial
overlapping in between both the laws with regard to the
UTP’s, with the consumer having choice either to take
redressal under the MRTP Act or the Consumer
Protection Act. Some times this led to chaotic situations
when there was confusion as to the legal provisions
under which resort should be taken to.
The MRTP Act had its own limitations. With the objective
of curbing monopolies, it restricted the growth of the firms
beyond a particular size. Any undertaking which by itself
or along with interconnected undertakings produced,
supplied or distributed or controlled not less than 1/4th of
the total goods produced or services rendered in India
was defined to be a dominant undertaking and was not
allowed to grow beyond. Thus, irrespective the product
or service the dominance was stuck up to a static figure
of 25 %. These so called MRTP firms were prohibited
from expanding or entering into any other sector except
those listed in Appendix 1 of the IDR Act, for which they
had to obtain MRTP clearance in addition to usual
industrial licenses.
Thus with this background the Indian industry was
leading on a controlled slow path of growth.
Post 1991 reforms and The Competition Act, 2002
In the wake of globalisation India opened up its
economy, relaxed controls and resorted to liberalisation
and privatisation. Since 1991 the Indian economy
witnessed revolutionary changes. The industrial policy
of 1991 abolished licensing requirement in almost all
industries except for only six as at present. Barring a few
sensitive areas like nuclear minerals, arms and
ammunition, defence equipment, in majority of the
public sector undertakings Government made dis-
investment. Major industries like iron and steel, heavy
electric equipment, civil aviation, insurance were made
open to private investors. The office of the Controller of
Capital Issues had been abolished and the cap on
foreign investments was substantially removed. 100 %
foreign holding was permitted in export-oriented units
and in other sectors the permissible level of foreign
investment was raised to 74 %. Private sector mutual
funds and Foreign Institutional Investors (FII’s) were
permitted to trade in equities. Establishment of National
Stock Exchange increased competition in stock
exchanges. As discussed earlier, in the year 1995 the
8 GATEWAY
TO INTERNATIONAL TRADE
ARTICLE
WTO emerged on the horizon of the international trade
and the Indian markets were thrown open to face
competition from giant multi national firms.
The cumulative effect of all these developments posed
newer and newer challenges before the regulatory
authorities as well. With the efflux of time, traditional
methods of carrying business had been done away with.
Foreign Direct Investment, Technology Transfer, Mergers,
Joint Ventures and many more new concepts came in for
achieving business targets. With this background it could
be easily inferred that as a cascading effect of such
drastically changed situation, in order to maintain and
expand their market share the market players would get
tempted to resort to short cut route of anti-competitive
practices. The free trade would then no more remain fair
resulting into exploitation of the consumer.
In the wake of the challenges put forth by the fast
changing circumstances, the Central Government
appointed a High Power Committee on Competition
Policy and Law, under the Chairmanship of
S.V.S.Raghavan to advice Government on the
competition policy to be adopted. The Raghavan
Committee, in its report observed that the erstwhile MRTP
Act 1969, had become obsolete with regard to various
provisions and it could not cope up with changed
economic scenario. The MRTP Act, does not even have
mention of offences like abuse of dominance, price
fixation, cartels, bid rigging, boycotts and refusal to deal,
predatory pricing etc. which are very common form of
anti-competitive practices adopted by the traders and
service providers. In absence of clear-cut definition of
these terms, it always gave room to different interpretation
by different courts of law and thus the errant undertakings
could fearlessly indulge into anti-competitive practices.
On the recommendations of the Raghavan Committee,
the Competition Act, 2002 (hereinafter in short referred to
as ‘The Act’) has been enacted with the focus on
promoting competition rather than curbing monopolies. It
has been observed that in order to compete with the large-
scale multi national firms; Indian firms need to grow in size.
Thus there is no restriction on the size of the enterprise
and gaining dominance. The restriction imposed is that
dominance if achieved should not be abused.
The objective of the competition policy is to promote
efficiency and maximize welfare. There are two basic
areas of implementation, one is the regulatory policy that
promotes and enhances competition in the local and
national market, give primacy to market forces, allow
entry and exit, reduce administrative controls and
minimize regulations.
The other area is enforcement of law to prohibit anti-
competitive business practices and to regulate
combinations that may adversely affect the competition.
The Act has been recently amended by Competition
Amendment Act 2007.

The Act would deal with two categories of anti-
competitive practices i.e. the Monopolistic Trade
Practices (MTP’s) and the Restrictive Trade Practices (
RTP’s). The Unfair Trade Practices (UTP’s) shall be
dealt with by the Consumer Protection Act 1986, for
which suitable forum is available at local, state and
national level. For its purpose a quasi-judicial body
known as Competition Commission of India (CCI) has
been established. The CCI has been cast with the duty
to eliminate practices having adverse effect on
competition, promote and sustain competition, protect
the interests of consumers, and ensure freedom of trade
carried on by other participants in markets in India. It is
also empowered to enter into any memorandum or
arrangement with any agency in any foreign country with
the prior approval of Central Government.
Thrust Areas under the Act
The thrust areas under the Act are
1. Anti-Competitive Agreements
2. Abuse of Dominant Position
3. Regulation of Combination
4. Competition Advocacy
Section 3 of the Act, prohibits Anti-competitive
agreements. Accordingly no enterprise or association of
enterprises or no person or association of persons shall
enter into any agreement in respect of production,
supply, distribution, storage, acquisition or control of
goods or provision of services, which causes or is likely
to cause an appreciable adverse effect on competition
within India.
It identifies four per se illegal anti-competitive
agreements i.e. price fixing, market sharing, bid rigging
and limiting or controlling production, supply, market,
technical development, investment or provision of
services. All other agreements are subject to rule of
reason test. Any such agreement attracts rigorous fines
and penalty.
Section 4 of the Act deals with Abuse of Dominant
Position by dominant enterprises. Accordingly if any
enterprise abuses the market power possessed by it in
any relevant market in India, the same is prohibited.
Rigorous penalty provisions have been prescribed.
In case the offence as discussed in section 3 or section 4
is committed by a company, then the company itself as
well as all those persons who were at the time of
execution of such agreement were in charge of affairs of
such company shall be liable to be proceeded against
and punished accordingly.
Sections 5 and 6 deal with Combination Regulation.
Accordingly in case of any merger, acquisition, or
acquiring of control involving, the value of assets or
turnover exceeding the prescribed threshold limit shall
9 GATEWAY
TO INTERNATIONAL TRADE
ARTICLE
have to be compulsorily notified to the CCI. On scrutiny
the CCI may either clear the proposal as it is or may
suggest suitable modifications or may even out rightly
reject the proposed combination. While scrutinizing the
proposal every care shall be taken by the CCI that on
execution, the proposed combination shall not lead to
have any appreciable adverse effects on competition
within the relevant markets in India.
The Act has extra territorial reach as featured in section
32. Accordingly CCI shall be entitled to pass suitable
orders in case any act, which has taken, place outside
India but is having appreciable adverse effect on
competition in the relevant market India.
Under the Competition Advocacy function, the CCI is
entrusted with the job of creating awareness amongst
the various classes of the society about the competition
policy and issues.
Conclusion
In order to restrict concentration of economic power, it is
imperative for a nation to have a structured competition
policy backed by an effectively enforced completion law.
Absence of such regulatory measures are bound to lead
towards capitalism which ultimately hit the consumer
interest in general and the national interest in particular.
Though the effects are not seen in a short span of time,
over a longer period the economic growth gets stifled
leading to market collapse.
Though it cannot be out rightly said that prior to 1991 the
policies implemented were crooked but may be due to
fact that in the initial years India had pronounced itself to
be an agro based economy, and hence the industrial
policies may not have been as penetrative as they
should have been. However looking at the failure of the
industrial policies as discussed above, drastic majors
were initiated since 1991.
On going through the provisions of the Act, it can be
observed that it is more supervisory than regulatory. With
regard to this aspect it has to be taken into consideration
that the Indian firms, which were fully insulated from any
competition earlier, have been abruptly put to face
challenges from within as well as outside. Naturally it will
take some time for them to cope up with the suddenly
changed situation and gear up for facing the challenges.
It can be seen from the competition policy itself that the
policy makers are aware of this fact and have decided to
implement the Act in a phase wise manner and to give
thrust on the advocacy function so that the awareness is
created at various levels.
As far as the Accounting profession is concerned, it is no
doubt that it has been assigned vital role in
implementation of the Act. The Act is now all set to
become fully operational. With this background, it will be
of immense interest to see how far it does meet the
emerging challenges of the Indian economy.

DOHA ROUND NEGOTIATIONS
Report by the Chairman of the Trade Negotiations
Committee
Director-General Pascal Lamy, in his report to the
General Council on 26 May 2009 as Chair of the Trade
Negotiations Committee, said that “it is crucial that we
keep our monitoring system on the alert and that we
advance towards the conclusion of the Doha Round.”
“A more solid house will resist the strong political winds
which we unfortunately have to forecast,” he added.
Report by the Chairman of the Trade Negotiations
Committee
“Let me start by welcoming today the participants to the
Geneva Week for non-residents who have the
opportunity to attend this General Council meeting. I
am pleased that we again have been able to synergize
the Geneva Week and this session so as to allow
participants to get the overall picture of what is
happening here.
Since my last report to the General Council in February,
the economic situation has continued to worsen for all
WTO Members. Trade has become a casualty of this
crisis. Our forecast shows that world trade will contract
by 9 per cent this year, driven lower by the collapse in
global demand and by shortages of trade finance that
have created supply-side constraints to export growth,
in particular in many developing countries.
No-one can foresee how long this recession might last,
nor how deep its consequences will be on our social
fabrics, but there can be no doubt either about the
fragility of the world economy or about the central
importance of trade in the recovery.
This current global economic crisis has taken centre
stage at a number of international meetings I have
attended recently and I wanted to share with you some
of my impressions and conclusions from these
gathering as well as from some of my recent bilateral
meetings. I would also like to provide you with my
sense of the way ahead in the Doha Round over the
next couple of months.
As you know, I participated in the G20 meeting in
London in early April. The focus and agenda of the
meeting was understandably geared towards finding
solutions to the immediate challenges facing the
international financial system. But I was very
encouraged by the sensitivity of the G20 Leaders to the
importance of international trade in general and the
multilateral trading system in particular in terms of
boosting aggregate demand and restoring sustained
growth globally.
In my intervention to the G20 I stressed four main
points.
First, I stressed the importance of keeping trade open
and fighting against protectionist pressures. I
emphasized the need for Leaders to strongly support
10 GATEWAY
TO INTERNATIONAL TRADE
UPDATES
the WTO monitoring mechanism of trade and trade-
related measures taken in the context of the crisis
which provides Members with regular updates, the
next one due before the end of June.
Second, I stressed the importance of keep opening
trade by concluding the Doha Round. I explained the
important progress we have already made in what is
effectively the most ambitious multilateral trade deal
ever and I encouraged them to engage vigorously in
tackling the few remaining challenges.
Third, I also stressed the importance of keeping the Aid
for Trade promises made, in particular since they will
allow many of the poorest countries to prepare their exit
from the crisis by investing and improving their
productive capacity.
Finally, I also raised the importance of ensuring
availability and affordability of trade finance to keep
oiling the wheels of trade.
You will all have seen the G20 Communiqué. In
addition to rejecting protectionism, committing to
provide funding for trade finance, engaging to maintain
Aid for Trade pledges and committing to conclude the
Round, Leaders sent an important signal to the world
that trade and the WTO remain at the heart of a broader
solution to this crisis. This commitment was further
emphasized in a number of bilateral meetings I had
during the G20 meeting.
This renewed focus and political attention to trade and
the Doha Agenda was more recently in evidence at the
spring meetings of the World Bank and the IMF where
my participation in the IMF Committee and the World
Bank Development Committee as well as in meeting
with a number of Ministers confirmed the momentum
which has been building in recent weeks.
As the ILO has recently stated, it is clear that the full
social impact of the current crisis, unfortunately, is still
to come and it will inevitably create more political
pressures on the multilateral trading system. But it is
precisely at this time, when protectionist temptations
flourish, that the value of the multilateral trading system
is all the more apparent to all us.
If there is one consistent message I can take out of my
meetings in these last three months is that
governments are looking to the WTO system of global
trade rules for predictability, transparency, stability and
as a provider of confidence for economic operators. All
stakeholders agree that open trade remains central to
global economic recovery. They are looking at the
conclusion of the Doha Round as the lowest hanging
global stimulus package available.
Turning now to the Doha Round, overall, my
impression is that while the economic crisis has
worsened since the beginning of the year, the political
atmosphere in the negotiations has improved. We
have seen an increasing level of political engagement
and clear signals of renewed commitment and support

for a rapid conclusion of the Doha Round.
The recent visit by new USTR Ambassador Ron Kirk to
Geneva early this month was very welcome and timely.
He clearly expressed his commitment to a successful
conclusion of the Round. We also have seen elections
in India and we are impatiently awaiting the nomination
of the Commerce Minister.
Our Geneva process is continuing to push ahead
across the whole negotiating agenda. While at the
moment much of the work in the Negotiating Groups
could be described as technical, it is no less important
for that. The Chairs are making every effort to clear the
runway for political takeoff, and I thank them for this.
In Agriculture, we have a new Chairman for the Special
Session, Amb. David Walker. Building on the good
work that has been done in the group up to now, he is
continuing his consultations to advance a number of
issues that remain open, among which is the
formulation of the SSM. Also to be considered over the
coming weeks are outstanding technical issues,
among others, under sensitive products, special
products, tropical products and preference erosion,
cotton and tariff simplification. Nor is it, in my view, too
early to start preparing for the scheduling and
verification process and the drafting of legal language.
The NAMA Negotiating Group has recently held an
open-ended meeting. Sponsors of sectorals reported
the technical work at which they have been engaged
and they expressed their intention to engage in the
coming weeks with their trading partners to move this
issue forward. This week there will be a Negotiating
Group session on the textual proposals on Non-Tariff
Barriers. In July, the Group will hold a scheduling
workshop, designed to give participants the
opportunity to prepare themselves in respect of the
technical issues that will come up when the scheduling
phase begins for real.
The Rules Group has also been working on a broad
front, with meetings recently on Anti-Dumping,
Subsidies and Countervailing Measures and Fisheries
Subsidies and further activity planned on Regional
Trade Agreements. On Anti-Dumping, the Group
followed a three-tiered approach in discussing the
Chair's text — first, discussing issues in square
brackets, second, text not in brackets, and third, issues
not currently reflected in the text. The discussions
regarding horizontal subsidies were of a general nature
as delegations were given the opportunity to present
their general views regarding how they view
negotiations in this area proceeding. The Group also
discussed fisheries subsidies and continued its
discussions on the roadmap by focussing on issues
such as prohibition and general exceptions. The next
round of open-ended meetings is scheduled for the
week of 29 June.
The Services Special Session last month saw
participants restate their offensive and defensive
interests. The discussion on LDC modalities is
progressing, but detailed proposals are still awaited
and hopefully will come soon so that this negotiation
11 GATEWAY
TO INTERNATIONAL TRADE
UPDATES
can also move forward. The next meeting of the
Special Session will take place in conjunction with the
next Services cluster, possibly to be preceded by one
of the Chairman's enchiladas.
In the CTD Special Session, Members have been
focusing on coming up with elements of a Monitoring
Mechanism on S&D. iscussions on the Agreement-
specific proposals have been put on hold until
Members are in a position to put forward new ideas or
new language that would de-freeze this part of the
discussion.
The TRIPS Special Session has seen some strategic
positioning going on, and the Chair is working to focus
the group on getting ready to move forward as soon as
the wider environment allows. At the next session on 10
June he will aim to orient the discussion towards issues
rather than specific proposals.
The Negotiating Group on Trade Facilitation has also
been making useful progress on all pillars under its
mandate. Work on the GATT Articles' side produced a
number of additional suggestions on how to improve
the existing texts. Good progress was equally made on
the S&D front where the Friend of the Chair process
now seems firmly established and well under way. The
Group plans to meet again next month.
In Trade and Environment, the Chair has been
consulting delegations on various aspects of the July
work programme. An open-ended transparency
meeting was held recently and overall there is a
willingness to engage in activities that would help
delegations to prepare for the next phase under this
work programme, including technical work on a range
of issues. There is also further scope for deepening
knowledge and understanding of a number of issues
under the mandate, including capacity-building and
development-related issues. The Chair intends to hold
further consultations in the near future to discuss on the
different substantive elements of the work programme,
including the cross cutting issues.
Lastly, the DSB Special Session has recently
discussed litigation costs for small participants, with
the participation of the Advisory Centre on WTO Law.
Delegations are also discussing issues such as panel
composition and confidential information.
So, overall, worthwhile progress at the technical level,
which as we all know is a necessary but not a sufficient
condition for concluding the Round. The key question
remains “when will participants be ready to come back
to the table at political level?” I hope that we will start to
see an answer emerging soon.
As you all know, a series of major international political
meetings are scheduled to take place over the next two
months. We can expect the Doha Round to be a key
consideration at all of these meetings — as it should be
— and we need to work for momentum to build through
this sequence of meetings. This sequence will provide
us with a series of occasions at which the political
process for the Round can be re-ignited.
There will be a meeting of Cairns Group and other
country trade ministers on 8-9 June. The OECD trade

ministers meeting will be another opportunity later in
June. In July there will be the meetings of leaders
around the G-8 and G8+ as well as the gathering of
APEC Trade Ministers. Each of these meetings should
provide opportunities for greater political engagement
at Ministerial level and help create the conditions for
moving us toward agreement on agriculture and
industrial goods and of course on the Round as a
whole. As always, I will keep you informed of any
developments on these fronts.
I will also of course be continuing my regular exchange
of views and coordination with the Chairman of the
General Council and the Negotiating Chairs with a view
to advancing each area under the overall umbrella of the
Single Undertaking.
I have been informed of the informal discussions which
have been on-going amongst some of you — looking
outside the current tool box of the negotiating process
with a view to placing the talks on a more direct path, for
commencing the scheduling of Agriculture and NAMA
commitments.
I am well aware that for some of you, the modalities
approach is sacrosanct. It is an approach that makes
clear to all what is on the table through the formula cuts
in tariffs and the specific flexibilities that would be
agreed. But others believe that while the modalities
spell out the defensive elements of the agreement,
through flexibilities, these flexibilities in themselves
make it difficult to ascertain what new market access
opportunities may emerge. If governments could
indicate what products would be accorded more
flexible treatment in the scheduling stage, whether on
sensitive products, on special products, on Duty-Free-
Quota-Free or on NAMA flexibilities, some countries
believe it would lend greater clarity to the process.
My own sense is that there is scope to work on these two
areas along two simultaneous tracks. One would see
technical engagement in the negotiating groups move to
a higher gear to cover a number of technical issues as
mentioned previously. Simultaneously, Members would
start some sort of “outcome testing”, through bilateral or
plurilateral discussions, where they would provide each
other with greater clarity on the use of flexibilities and
through it, on the value of the deal. This is, in my view
doable, provided we see serious political engagement
on the part of Members. In other words, provided
Ministers give the necessary instructions for substantive
work to happen on these two tracks.
12 GATEWAY
TO INTERNATIONAL TRADE
UPDATES
Finally, on Aid for Trade, I am glad to report that
preparations for the Second Global Aid for Trade
Review on 6 and 7 July are advancing well.
I attended the High Level Conference on the North
South Corridor in Lusaka on 6-7 April which allowed the
Chairpersons of COMESA, EAC and SADC to outline
the various projects and programmes that constitute
the North South Corridor Model Aid for Trade
Programme. The Conference offered a good outline of
the bottlenecks to trade that need to be removed in a
sequential manner in order to reduce trade costs.
I also recently attended the second regional review of
Aid for Trade in Montego Bay, Jamaica for Latin
America and the Caribbean where a number of
projects were showcased focusing on progress made
in implementing Aid for Trade on the ground. I will be
flying to Cambodia tomorrow for the Asia and Pacific
regional review.
On all these occasions I have stressed the importance
of ensuring that Aid for Trade promises were kept,
despite the crisis. In fact, Aid for Trade is an ingredient
to help developing countries prepare better to exit the
crisis. By building their productive capacity, they would
unlock their growth potential and this would help them
take advantage of new trade opportunities. I also
emphasized the need to keep fostering this South-
South cooperation on Aid for Trade the importance of
which is obviously on the rise.
Looking ahead I believe that the Second Global Aid for
Trade Review on 6 and 7 July will provide a concrete
and specific occasion to show how Aid for Trade is
working in practice and to review the fulfilment of the
commitments to additionality. I am working closely with
the Chair of the Committee on Trade and
Development, with DDG Rugwabiza and the
membership to prepare this meeting.
To conclude, Mr. Chairman, while, according to some,
we may be seeing the bottom of the economic crisis,
we have not yet seen its full social impact which will
inevitably trigger negative political pressures on the
trade front. I personally believe, and I want to share
this very openly with you, that the “stress test” of the
multilateral trading system is still to come. It is
therefore crucial that we keep our monitoring system
on the alert and that we advance towards the
conclusion of the Round. A more solid house will resist
the strong political winds which we unfortunately have
to forecast.”

WTO News
Trade Aid
WTO, ADB urge more Aid for Trade efforts to
counter the economic crisis
Ministers, trade officials and senior government
officials from around Asia on 28 May 2009 gathered in
Siem Reap, Cambodia, to discuss the impact of the
global crisis on trade, how Aid for Trade can support
private sector growth, and how to include trade into
national development strategies. Director-General
Pascal Lamy said “to make trade work for the people,
we need renewed efforts on Aid for Trade — this is the
time for global solidarity.”
WTO to hold 7th Ministerial Conference on 30
November-2 December 2009
The WTO General Council, on 26 May 2009, agreed to
hold the Seventh Session of the WTO Ministerial
Conference in Geneva, Switzerland, from 30
November to 2 December 2009. The general theme for
discussion shall be “The WTO, the Multilateral Trading
System and the Current Global Economic
Environment”.
Lamy urges follow-through of aid pledges to
weakest countries
Director-General Pascal Lamy, in a speech at the
Erasmus University in Rotterdam on 18 May 2009, said
“it is precisely now that we need to ensure that aid
pledges are kept; that promises are met, so that the
weakest countries have the means to weather the
storm.” He said the crisis “is affecting countries
differently, with the weakest among us bearing the full
brunt of this fall-out”.
Trade Negotiations
Lamy: The world needs a shared vision on food
and agricultural trade policy
Director-General Pascal Lamy, in a speech before the
International Food and Agricultural Trade Policy
Council in Salzburg, Austria, on 10 May 2009, said
“food and agricultural trade policy does not operate in a
vacuum. In other words, no matter how sophisticated
our trade policies may be, if domestic policies do not
themselves incentivize agriculture, and internalize
negative social and environmental externalities, then
we will always have a problem.”
Industrial goods negotiations to continue focus on
non-tariff trade barriers
The chair of the Negotiating Group on Non-Agricultural
Market Access, Amb. Luzius Wasescha, said at an
informal meeting on 20 May 2009 that the Group will
meet again next week to discuss non-tariff barriers to
trade.
13 GATEWAY
TO INTERNATIONAL TRADE
NEWS
Trade Report
WTO Secretariat reports increase in new anti-
dumping investigations
The WTO Secretariat reported that during the period 1
July — 31 December 2008, the number of initiations of
new anti-dumping investigations showed a 17 per cent
increase compared with the corresponding period of
2007. On a yearly basis, there were 208 initiations of
new anti-dumping investigations in 2008, as compared
to 163 in 2007 and 202 in 2006.
Trade Policy Review: European Communities
Sustained economic growth in the European
Communities will hinge on it continuing to undertake
key structural reforms, according to the WTO
Secretariat report on the trade policies and practices of
the European Communities.
DOMESTIC NEWS
India Committed To Successful Conclusion Of
Doha Process: Anand Sharma
In his special address to the Cairns group, in Bali today,
Shri Anand Sharma, Union Minister of Commerce and
Industry has reiterated the Indian commitment to the
successful conclusion of the Doha process through a
constructive engagement.
Implementation Of India Mercosur Preferential
Trade Agreement
India- MERCOSUR PTA has come into effect from 1st
June, 2009. India with a total trade of US $ 4773.39
million with MERCOSUR during 2007-08, had exports
of about US $ 2904.8 million during 2007-08 while
imports stood at about US $ 1868.39 million during the
same period.
Boa Grants 8 Formal And 2 In-Principle Approvals
The Board of Approval of the Special Economic Zones
(SEZs) met on 2nd June, 2009 to consider proposals
for setting up of Special Economic Zones and also to
approve other miscellaneous requests pertaining to
SEZs.
India’s Foreign Trade – April 2009
India’s exports during April 2009 were valued at US $
10743 million (Rs.53779 crore), which was 33.2 per
cent lower in dollar terms (16.4 per cent in Rupee
terms) than the level of US$ 16076 million (Rs.64340
crore) during April 2008.
India’s imports during April, 2009 were valued at US $
15747 million (Rs.78832 crore) representing a
decrease of 36.6 per cent in dollar terms (20.6 per cent
in Rupee terms) over the level of imports valued at US $
24823 million (Rs.99347 Crore) in April, 2008.

New Publication from the Committee on
Trade Laws and WTO
Study on Benefits of Preferential Trade Agreements
The Committee on Trade Laws and WTO of the
Institute of Chartered Accountants of India has
undertaken various studies/research projects in
different fields and on issues of relevance to
International Trade Laws and WTO. The basic
objective of these studies/research projects is to
provide guidance to the Chartered Accountants in
practice and in service and others concerned in the
field of International Trade Laws and WTO.
Salient features of the publication are:
v
Provides guidance to Chartered Accountants in
practice and in service and others concerned to
have an insight in respect of nuances of the
Preferential Trade Agreements and Regional
Trade Agreements giving introduction to global
phenomena of PTAs/RTAs, theories of PTA/RTA,
WTO’s Rules, India’s Engagements in PTAs/RTAs,
Suggestions for deriving benefits from PTAs, Data
Analysis under certain FTAs etc;
v
Provides comprehensive explanation of distinction
between various forms of RTAs, RTAs
Kaleidoscope, RTA Notification System of WTO,
Indian Perspective on major RTAs in South Asia;
14 GATEWAY
TO INTERNATIONAL TRADE
ANNOUNCEMENTS
New Publication
Price: Rs. 200/- (with CD)
No. of Pages: 210
v
Comprehensively lists the Role of Chartered
Accountants in the field of Preferential Trade
Agreements and Regional Trade Agreements;
v
CD contains soft copy of the publication.
Postal Charges:
Courier : Rs. 25/-
Registered Post: Rs. 48/-
Unregistered Parcel: Rs. 31/-
Available at: Sales Counters at New Delhi and the
Regional Offices at Mumbai, Chennai, Kolkata and
Kanpur. Copies can also be obtained by post. To order
by post, send your request along with a demand draft
for the amount of the price of the publication plus the
postal charges in favour of "The Secretary, The
Institute of Chartered Accountants of India", payable at
New Delhi, to the Postal Sales Department, Noida
Stores, The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India,
ICAI Bhawan, A-94/4, Sector-58, NOIDA-201 301-
(U.P) India.
 GLIMPSES

Glimpses
Interaction with Trade Officials of Embassies in India organized by
Committee on Trade Laws and WTO on 15th May 2009 in the Office of the
ICAI at New Delhi.

Links to Related Websites Feedback/ Invitation for Articles

?
United Nations Conference on Trade and The idea of this e-newsletter to give those of you with
Development (UNCTAD) knowledge on the subjects of International trade, a
chance to share your knowledge and experience. You
?
World Bank can submit your articles for future issues as well as
?
International Monetary Fund feedback at ctlwto@icai.org The topics for the future
issues would be:
?
International Labour Organisation
?
European Union • Intellectual Property Rights
• International Commercial Arbitration
?
United States Trade Representative (USTR) • Foreign Trade Policy
?
Commonwealth Secretariat • Cross Boarder Mergers & Acquisitions

15 GATEWAY
TO INTERNATIONAL TRADE
 CONTACT US

Committee on Trade Laws and WTO (2009-10)

Council Members…

CA. Anuj Goyal, Chairman

CA. Vijay K. Gupta, Vice-Chairman
CA. Uttam Prakash Agarwal, President (Ex-Officio)
CA. Amarjit Chopra, Vice-President (Ex-Officio)
CA. Jayant P. Gokhale
CA. Atul C. Bheda
CA. Mahesh P. Sarda
CA. S. Gopalakrishnan
CA. Subodh K. Agrawal
CA. Vinod Jain
CA. Charanjot S. Nanda
Shri Anil K. Agarwal
Shri Manoj K. Sarkar
Shri R. Sekar
Shri O.P. Vaish
Shri Krishna Kant

Co-opted Members…
CA. Sanjay Chandak
CA. Ram Ratan Modi
CA. Pradeep Kumar Tibrewala
CA. Shabbeer Pasha S.
Secretary to the Committee…
CA. Mohit Baijal, Sr. Assistant Director

Contact Us
Secretariat of Committee on Trade Laws and WTO
The Institute of Chartered Accountants of India
ICAI Bhawan, Post Box No. 7100, Indraprastha Marg
New Delhi - 110 002. INDIA.
Telephone : +91 (11) 30110499, 39893989 (Extn. 499), Fax: + 91 (11) 30110 591,
Email: ctlwto@icai.org; ditl@icai.org; Website: www.icai.org ; http://wto.icai.org

16 GATEWAY
TO INTERNATIONAL TRADE