Dear Tesla buyers, Don't crib about high tariffs. They have helped Indian auto industry
The similar Model Y starts at $37,500 in the US, although a better comparison would be to the £44,990 it costs in the United Kingdom. These translate to Rs 32.3 lakh and Rs 52.1 lakh respectively. The car, which is being imported from the company's Berlin megafactory, is so much more expensive in India because of the high duties on fully-built-up imported vehicles.
Let me address the electric elephant in the room, right away. Earlier this week, the Elon Musk-helmed Tesla Motors opened their first showroom—call it an 'experience centre'— in Mumbai's Bandra-Kurla Complex. Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis did the honours, although Musk himself did not attend. Before the inauguration, Tesla India opened bookings on their website and smartphone application, with their only product in India, the Model Y SUV, starting at Rs 58.89 lakh and a long-range variant at Rs 67.89 lakh.
In fact, the government's duty structure encourages manufacturers to at least assemble—if not manufacture—their products in India. Take the Model Y's direct competitor in the global and Indian market, the BMW iX1. Launched by BMW India in January this year, it's reportedly flying off the shelves, with over 200 units sold every month, with a 3-4 month waitlist.
But since BMW assembles the car at its factory in Chennai, and even incorporates some local parts like tires, rubber lining, carpets, and seats, it's able to price the iX1 at just Rs 49 lakh. Better still, it is the long-wheelbase variant, unique to the Indian market in its right-hand drive. For comparison, the regular wheelbase iX1 in the UK costs £43,295, which amounts to Rs 50.1 lakh.
So, the BMW is not only more affordable in India but also more practical, thanks to the long wheelbase. It is the same story with Mercedes-Benz India, which assembles its EQS sedan and SUV at the Chakan plant.
Astonishing speed of Tata Harrier.ev
While 'heavy' manufacturing, like panel stamping and shell welding, is not happening in India for these global brands just yet, Indian manufacturers are already doing it. Earlier this year I had visited the new Mahindra electric vehicle manufacturing facility at Chakan that employs over a thousand people, many of them women. While many parts and components even for these vehicles are imported, particularly from China, a gradual shift towards 'Make In India' is taking place, as Vinnie Mehta, Director General, Automotive Components Manufacturers Association (ACMA) told me recently.
I just drove possibly the best 'Made In India' electric vehicle yet, also made in Pune, which proves that Indian manufacturers are right up there with the rest. The Tata Harrier.ev Quad-Wheel Drive (QWD) was quite an impressive drive.
It has amazing onboard technology, but what really stood out was the dual-motor set-up on the car, one on each axle, producing 158PS at the front and 238PS at the rear. While you can't select four-wheel drive, this system functions more like a mechanical all-wheel drive. When you floor the accelerator, it really moves.
If you have seen the Tata Harrier on the road, you know it is a big vehicle. But switch to 'Boost' mode, and you will hit 100 km per hour from a standstill in 6.3 seconds. That is fast for any car, but astonishing for a bulky SUV. And this, despite Tata Motors dialling back the total power output of both motors to around 315-317PS, likely to reduce stress on the battery, motors, and wiring.
I could not drive the Harrier.ev like a maniac even if I wanted to. And that is when I started to enjoy the onboard tech. Some features felt a bit redundant—a camera mounted on the 'shark-fin' receiver that projects a feed onto the inside rear-view mirror. But the Dolby Atmos-enabled system? Wow. That was special. In-car audio systems have come a long way, but this one stood out. I tested it by listening to classic Hollywood film scores, and it was outstanding.
But when I found an open stretch on the Faridabad-Gurugram road, and let the Harrier.ev show what it could do, I was steering. At higher speeds, the steering could have been a bit sharper; there is no way to adjust the steering 'feel'. But overall, this electric Harrier was far superior to the diesel version (which makes just 170PS and lacks four-wheel drive). In fact, it was better than the Mahindra XEV 9e and even entry-level luxury EVs—not just in terms of performance but also in onboard tech.
Also read: India's EV dreams need freedom from China's stranglehold on rare-earth metals. Start mining
Tata Motors (and Mahindra for that matter) have learned from Chinese carmakers such as BYD, which recently dethroned Tesla as the world's leading electric vehicle manufacturer.
As an overall combination of interior space, technology and performance, the Tata Harrier.ev QWD is an excellent vehicle. The 75 kilowatt-hour battery pack is claimed to be good for over 500 km, but I expect a real-world range of around 450 km and can charge at a maximum of 120 kilowatts at a DC fast charger. It is available in only one 'persona' (as Tata Motors calls their specifications) called Empowered and is priced at Rs 29 lakh.
The rear-wheel drive only variant with a 65 kilowatt-hour battery and a real-world range of around 380-400 km, starts at Rs 21.5 lakh. However, I'd go for the Rear-Wheel Drive Empowered Persona, as it is the only variant that gets the Dolby Atmos-enabled audio system (it is really that good), priced at Rs 27.5 lakh. That said, the Harrier.ev is not for erveryone, it is a pricey vehicle but one hopes that as Indian manufacturers, and the Indian arms of global manufacturers absorb skills, they will start making better vehicles and more affordable ones. Just look at what is happening in China.
While some consumers will understandably complain about high tariffs, those very tariffs have allowed Indian manufacturers to gain skills. Yes, many components for EVs like the Tata Harrier.ev are still imported, and China's restrictions on rare-earth motors and lithium batteries may hurt India in the short term. But that only proves that we have to build our own manufacturing capabilities, including components. We can't achieve that through imports; we have to indigenise and get foreign manufacturers to do more of their manufacturing in India.
Kushan Mitra is an automotive journalist based in New Delhi. He tweets @kushanmitra. Views are personal.
(Edited by Ratan Priya)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scroll.in
15 minutes ago
- Scroll.in
India and UK sign free trade agreement, PM Modi says farmers, MSMEs will benefit
India and the United Kingdom on Thursday signed a Comprehensive Economic Trade Agreement. The free trade agreement was signed by Commerce Minister Piyush Goyal and his British counterpart Jonanthan Reynolds during Prime Minister Narendra Modi's visit to the United Kingdom. 'Today marks a historic day in our bilateral relations,' Modi said in a press statement beside UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer after the signing. He said that the agreement aimed to benefit Indian farmers, the micro, small and medium enterprises sector, footwear and jewellery exports, as well as the seafood and engineering goods sectors. Modi also said that British medical devices and aerospace parts would be more easily sold in India. Starmer, on his part, said that the trade deal would help British workers in cutting-edge manufacturing, and would also benefit whiskey distillers across Scotland and the service sector in London, Manchester and Leeds. The UK prime minister said that the agreement was 'the biggest and most economically significant' trade deal the United Kingdom has made since Brexit – when Britain exited the European Union in 2016. The UK government said that the trade deal was set to increase bilateral trade between the two countries by nearly 39% in the long run, The Indian Express reported. This would be equivalent to $34 billion a year compared with the projected 2040 levels of trade in the absence of an agreement, currently at $21 billion annually. In his statement, Modi also thanked Starmer for his support after the Pahalgam terror attack. 'We are united in the belief that there is no place for double standards in the fight against terrorism,' the Indian prime minister said. The terror attack at Baisaran near Pahalgam town in Jammu and Kashmir on April 22 left 26 persons dead and 16 injured. The terrorists targeted tourists after asking their names to ascertain their religion, the police said. All but three of those killed were Hindu. 'We also agree that the forces which espouse extremist ideologies should not be allowed to misuse democratic freedoms,' Modi added. 'Those who misuse democratic freedoms to undermine democracy itself must be held to account.' The Indian prime minister also said that 'today's era demands development, not expansionism'. New Delhi and Britain had announced the free trade agreement in May after more than three years and 14 rounds of negotiations. With the agreement, India opens its doors to high-end British cars and whisky in a phased manner. The agreement ensures comprehensive market access for goods across all sectors, covering all of India's export interests, The Indian Express reported. India's Commerce and Industry Ministry had earlier said that the country would benefit from tariff elimination on approximately 99% of tariff lines, covering nearly 100% of trade value.
Economic Times
15 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Taxpayer wins Rs 1.4 lakh penalty case despite claiming false income tax deductions to reduce income by 50%; Know the details
ET Online ITAT: Penalty of Rs 1.4 lakh deleted despite a taxpayer claiming false income tax deductions to reduce his income by 50%; Know the details The Income Tax Department imposed a penalty equivalent to 17% of Mr Shinde's salary after it was proved that he had claimed false income tax deductions to under-report his income by about 50% to lower his net income tax liability. The penalty imposed by the income tax department amounted to Rs 1.4 lakh. Shinde's actual salary was Rs 8 lakh a year, which he reported as only Rs 4 lakh. Although this might look like a fair punishment for someone who wilfully evaded paying income tax, Mr Shinde argued in court that he was just an innocent employee with a technical background. He said that like him, many other employees from companies like Ceat, Bosch, HAL, Mahindra and Mahindra among others, relied on a tax consultant named Mr Patil to file their Income Tax Returns (ITRs). Patil assured them that he was an expert in tax law and could legally calculate a lower tax, leading to a refund of the TDS deducted by their employer. Shinde's lawyers told ITAT Pune: 'The assessee was unaware about the contents of the Income Tax Return (ITR) filed by Patil & truly believed that the returns are filed legally as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act.' Shinde also informed the court that as soon as he found out about this illegal act of claiming false tax deductions, he had filed a complaint in the Economic Offence Wing, Maharashtra Police against Patil. Moreover, Shinde also paid the full tax amount plus interest, just like he was supposed to, without claiming any bogus tax deductions. However, the income tax department stated that even though he returned the owed tax with interest, he should still face penalty for committing this offence and for not voluntarily submitting a revised first, Shinde filed an appeal against the penalty of Rs 1.4 lakh that the tax department slapped on him with the Commissioner of Appeals (CIT (Appeals)). However, CIT (Appeals) rejected the appeal, leading Shinde to take his case to ITAT Pune. There, he won the case and the entire penalty of Rs 1.4 lakh was cancelled. The main reason why Shinde won this case is because ITAT Pune recognized his good behavior. Shinde, pointed out the illegal actions of his tax consultant (Patil) and also returned the full amount of the income tax owed, along with interest, just as the law required. ITAT Pune said: '....It is found that when the notice under Section 148 was issued, the appellant (Shinde) has disclosed his correct income & paid the due tax before issue of notice. We also find that the Assessing Officer of Income Tax Department has accepted the return (ITR) as it is which was furnished by the appellant (Shinde) in response to the notice u/s 148. We cannot accept the contention of Ld. DR (income tax department lawyer) that the revised return (revised ITR) was not voluntary, therefore the penalty u/s 270(A) of the Act is inevitable….'Check out the info below to find out why and under what circumstances Shinde managed to win this income tax penalty case despite claiming false tax deductions to declare lower income and pay less tax. How did this income tax penalty case for claiming false tax deductions start? According to ITAT Pune judgement dated May 8, 2025. Here's the timeline of events: FY 2017-18: Patil filed Shinde's ITR declaring taxable income of Rs 4 lakh (407,090) by claiming multiple income tax deductions. Patil filed Shinde's ITR declaring taxable income of Rs 4 lakh (407,090) by claiming multiple income tax deductions. May 28, 2019: Shinde came to know that Patil claimed excess tax refund by claiming many false tax deductions. He immediately paid back the due tax with interest. However, the revised ITR could not be filed voluntarily since the date to file one was over. Shinde came to know that Patil claimed excess tax refund by claiming many false tax deductions. He immediately paid back the due tax with interest. However, the revised ITR could not be filed voluntarily since the date to file one was over. February 2020: The Income Tax Department Assessing Officer (AO), on the basis of information received from the Income Tax Officer, (Investigation), that Shinde has claimed excess deductions, initiated proceeding under Section 147 after obtaining approval from the authorities and accordingly, a notice under Section 148 was issued. The Income Tax Department Assessing Officer (AO), on the basis of information received from the Income Tax Officer, (Investigation), that Shinde has claimed excess deductions, initiated proceeding under Section 147 after obtaining approval from the authorities and accordingly, a notice under Section 148 was issued. March 11, 2020: Shinde filed an ITR in response to notice under Section 148, declaring taxable income of Rs 8 lakh (8,32,990). Shinde filed an ITR in response to notice under Section 148, declaring taxable income of Rs 8 lakh (8,32,990). March 2, 2021: The Income Tax Department completed the assessment of Shinde's ITR under Section 147 by accepting it. The Income Tax Department completed the assessment of Shinde's ITR under Section 147 by accepting it. September 12, 2021: The Income Tax Department Assessing Officer (AO) imposed a penalty of Rs 1.4 lakh (1,46,760) under Section 270A(8) for under-reporting of income in consequence of misreporting. Shinde filed an appeal in CIT (A) against this penalty order. The Income Tax Department Assessing Officer (AO) imposed a penalty of Rs 1.4 lakh (1,46,760) under Section 270A(8) for under-reporting of income in consequence of misreporting. Shinde filed an appeal in CIT (A) against this penalty order. September 27, 2024: CIT (Appeals) dismissed Shinde's appeal and confirmed the penalty of Rs 1.4 lakh (1,46,760) imposed u/s 270A(8). It is this order of CIT (Appeals) against which Shinde filed an appeal before ITAT (Pune). Also read: Income Tax Bill 2025: Income from house property taxation related two key amendments suggested by select committee, know the impact ITAT Pune's investigation found that Shinde was cheated by Patil to conduct this tax fraud According to the judgement order, here's what ITAT Pune said:(No part of the judgement is altered and the same is presented below as it is) 'We find that the assessee (Shinde) is a salaried employee & belongs to a technical background. The return (ITR) of most of the employees of CEAT LTD, Bosch Company, HAL & M & M including that of the assessee (Shinde) was filed by a tax consultant namely Patil. We further find that the assessee (Shinde) came to know from other employees in the company that Patil with his expertise is able to legally calculate lower tax, resulting in a refund of TDS deducted by the employer. The assessee (Shinde) was unaware about the contents of the Income Tax Return filed by Patil & truly believed that the returns (ITR) are filed legally as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act. The assessee being from technical background does not understand ABCD of Income Tax & therefore completely relied on the above named tax consultant, who without informing him & others, claimed excess deduction under chapter VI-A of the IT Act & claimed refund. It was Patil who cheated all the employees & claimed excess deduction in their returns without informing them for his own benefit. The fact of the cheating came to light when a survey u/s 133A was conducted at the premises of Patil. When the fact that this kind of fraud was made in the name of a number of persons all of them complaint to the Economic Offence Wing of Police, against the tax consultant Patil. It is also apparent that there is no mistake of the assessee but it was the hidden interest of the tax consultant who triggered the gun by using the shoulders of the assessee & many more for his own benefit.' Also read: Capital gain on property: How to pay lower LTCG tax using indexation benefit What did ITAT Pune say about Shinde's action post the fraud coming to his notice According to the judgement order, here's what ITAT Pune said: It is also found that as soon as the fact of excess deduction claimed, came to the knowledge of the assessee (Shinde) he immediately paid the due tax with interest, even before the issue of notice under Section 148 & contacted another genuine tax consultant who prepared and furnished correct return in response to the notice under Section 148. We find that the Assessing Officer has levied a penalty under Section 270(A) of Rs 1,46,760 on the basis of the fact that the correct income was not returned voluntarily but only after issue of notice under Section 148. It is also found that when the notice under Section 148 was issued the appellant (Shinde) has disclosed his correct income & paid the due tax before issue of notice. We also find that the Income Tax Department Assessing Officer has accepted the return as it is, which was furnished by the appellant (Shinde) in response to the notice under Section 148. ITAT Pune final judgement ITAT Pune deleted the tax notice and thus the penalty of Rs 1.4 lakh stood what ITAT Pune said: We cannot accept the contention of Ld. DR (Income Tax Department lawyer) that the revised return was not voluntary therefore the penalty under Section 270(A) is inevitable. In this regard the contention of counsel (Shinde's lawyer) is also important wherein he stated that the due tax along-with interest was already paid before the issue of notice under Section 148 & admittedly the return of income (ITR) could not be filed as the due date was already over. We find force in the arguments of the counsel of the assessee (Shinde) that the amount of tax & interest was deposited voluntarily much prior to the issue of notice under Section 148 since the income tax with interest was deposited by the assessee on 28-05-2019 whereas the notice under Section 148 was issued on 25-02-2020. Judgement: 'Considering the totality of the facts of the case, we are of the considered opinion that this is not a fit case to impose penalty u/s 270(A) & accordingly the order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC is set-aside & the Assessing Officer is directed to delete the penalty of Rs 1,46,760 imposed u/s 270(A). Thus, the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are allowed.' What is the significance of this judgement for other taxpayers? ET Wealth Online reached out to a number of lawyers and chartered accountants to get their take on the importance of this judgement for other taxpayers. Here's what they said: Rahul Sateeja, Partner, DMD Advocates, says: 'This ruling marks a significant development in tax penalty jurisprudence. It emphasises that even under the newer Section 270A regime, tax penalties are not merely about ticking boxes but involve a fair process that considers the taxpayer's intent and actions. The key takeaway from this ruling is that it reassures taxpayers that if they are honest and proactive—even when faced with mistakes or misleading advice—they are protected by law. Salaried taxpayers and those relying on consultants now see a tribunal recognising their situation and not penalising them for third-party misleading advice or fraud.' Gopal Bohra, direct tax partner, N. A. Shah Associates LLP says: 'In this case, the taxpayer was unaware about the incorrect or excessive claims made by the consultant in his income tax return and had relied entirely upon the consultant's expertise. Subsequently, when he came to know about the incorrect or excessive claim in his return, he promptly recomputed the correct tax liability and interest thereon and voluntarily deposited. This he has done before any notice could be issued by the tax department and this proactive approach saved him from penal consequences. While the applicability of this decision to other cases would depend on the specific facts involved, however, this may serve as a relevant precedent in a situation where a taxpayer voluntarily pays the correct tax and interest before receiving any notice, and is able to demonstrate bona fide reliance on third party consultant along with a lack of his personal knowledge of the tax laws.' Kunal Savani, Partner, Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas, says: 'This is a welcome judgment, particularly in times where taxpayers often face genuine hardship in filing a revised ITR beyond the prescribed due date. The judgment also underscores the bona fide of a taxpayer and the principle that the taxpayer must approach with clean hands, as was demonstrated in this case, where the taxpayer proactively paid the taxes along with applicable interest immediately upon being made aware of the consultant's error, and notably, even before receiving any demand notice.' Ritika Nayyar, Partner, Singhania & Co., says: 'The judgment lays emphasis that due to the assessee's bonafide intentions, proactiveness to make things right, no intention of tax evasion would have weightage over mistakes done in ITR without his knowledge, even if it led to under reporting of income. If the assessee due to his different technical background, fully relied on his tax consultant, who undertook a fraudulent act for which the assessee had no knowledge and as soon as he became aware, he rectified it suo moto, and should not be held responsible or punished ( be it financially) for someone else's malafide act. So if one is aware and prompt in his corrective actions, along with facts and evidence, he can demonstrate his genuine position and get relief from such a penalty.' Jay N. Bhansali, Advocate, Bombay High court, says: 'In the said case, involving peculiar facts, the Appellate Tribunal held that improper deduction claimed in reliance on professional advice—being influenced by an advisor's hidden agenda—should not attract penalties if there was no willful intent by the taxpayer to evade tax. It further clarified that taxpayers who voluntarily correct such errors and pay taxes before detection may be spared from penal consequences. The ruling reaffirms the principle that not every ineligible claim warrants a penalty, especially in cases of bona fide error. With the Income-tax Department intensifying scrutiny of improper deductions, this decision offers timely relief to similarly affected taxpayers.' N.R. Narayana Murthy Founder, Infosys Watch Now Harsh Mariwala Chairman & Founder, Marico Watch Now Adar Poonawalla CEO, Serum Institute of India Watch Now Ronnie Screwvala Chairperson & Co-founder, upGrad Watch Now Puneet Dalmia Managing Director, Dalmia Bharat group Watch Now Martin Schwenk Former President & CEO, Mercedes-Benz, Thailand Watch Now Nadir Godrej Managing Director, of Godrej Industries Watch Now Manu Jain Former- Global Vice President, Xiaomi Watch Now Nithin Kamath Founder, CEO, Zerodha Watch Now Anil Agarwal Executive Chairman, Vedanta Resources Watch Now Dr. Prathap C. Reddy Founder Chairman, Apollo Hospitals Watch Now Vikram Kirloskar Former Vice Chairman, Toyota Kirloskar Motor Watch Now Kiran Mazumdar Shaw Executive Chairperson, Biocon Limited Watch Now Shashi Kiran Shetty Chairman of Allcargo Logistics, ECU Worldwide and Gati Ltd Watch Now Samir K Modi Managing Director, Modi Enterprises Watch Now R Gopalakrishnan Former Director Tata Sons, Former Vice Chairman, HUL Watch Now Sanjiv Mehta Former Chairman / CEO, Hindustan Unilever Watch Now Dr Ajai Chowdhry Co-Founder, HCL, Chairman EPIC Foundation, Author, Just Aspire Watch Now Shiv Khera Author, Business Consultant, Motivational Speaker Watch Now Nakul Anand Executive Director, ITC Limited Watch Now RS Sodhi Former MD, Amul & President, Indian Dairy Association Watch Now Anil Rai Gupta Managing Director & Chairman, Havells Watch Now Zia Mody Co-Founder & Managing Partner, AZB & Partners Watch Now Arundhati Bhattacharya Chairperson & CEO, Salesforce India Watch Now
New Indian Express
15 minutes ago
- New Indian Express
66 Naxalites surrender in five Chhattisgarh districts; 49 carry total reward of Rs 2. 27 crore
BASTAR: A total of 66 Naxalites, including 49 carrying a cumulative reward of Rs 2. 27 crore, surrendered in five districts of Chhattisgarh's Bastar division on Thursday, police officials said. While 25 cadres surrendered in Bijapur, 15 laid down arms in Dantewada, 13 in Kanker, eight in Narayanpur and five in Sukma, they said, adding 27 were women. The ultras surrendered before senior police, Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), Border Security Force (BSF) and Indo Tibetan Border Police (ITBP) personnel citing disappointment with the hollow Maoist ideology, atrocities committed by Naxalites on innocent tribals and growing internal differences within the banned outfit, an official said. "They also claimed to be impressed by 'Niyad Nellanar' (your good village) scheme of the state government, aimed at facilitating development works in remote villages, new surrender and rehabilitation policy of the state government and Poona Margham (Rehabilitation for Social Reintegration), a rehabilitation initiative launched by Bastar Range police," he added. "Of the 25 who surrendered in Bijapur, 23 carried a collective bounty of Rs 1.15 crore. They include Ramanna Irpa (37), Odisha state committee member and special zonal committee member of Maoists who carried a reward of Rs 25 lakh, and his wife Rame Kalmu (30), a platoon party committee member (PPCM) who carried bounty of Rs 8 lakh," Bijapur Superintendent of Police Jitendra Kumar Yadav said. Sukku Kalmu (38), Bablu Madvi (30), Kosi Madkam (28) and Reena Vanjam (28), who were active in crucial positions in different formations of Maoists among other surrendered cadres, carried bounty of Rs 8 lakh each, Yadav added. In Dantewada, five of the 15 surrendered cadres carried total reward of Rs 17 lakh, Dantewada Additional Superintendent of Police Udit Pushkar said.
