Along with the clearances for his capital issues, Dhirubhai also had an easy time fromthe revenue side of the Finance Ministry. At no stage did Reliance ever pay corporateincome tax on its profits, or even feel the need to make more than token provisionfor it. Constant expansion and heavy borrowing gave ever increasing cost deductionsto offset against profits. Reliance became the most famous of India’s ‘zero-tax’scompanies.In his budget for 1983-84, Mukherjee made one of the government’s periodic effortsto crack down on such companies, by introducing an amendment to the income taxlaw requiring companies to pay 30 per cent of profits in tax after depreciation butbefore other deductions. Reliance avoided this by capitalising future interest payableon borrowings for its new projects, hugely increasing its asset value in one hit andallowing greatly increased depreciation claims to deduct from profits. Relianceremained a zero-tax company for nearly three decades after its listing. It was only in1996-97, after the introduction of a 12 per cent ‘, minimum alternate tax’s oncompany profits, that it made its first corporate income tax provision.<strong>The</strong> collectors of indirect taxes were also friendly. While Reliance could not avoid theheavy domestic excise duties levied on manufactures at the factory gate, it wasinitially given considerable leeway in setting aside some production as ‘wastage’s notincurring excise. Bombay Customs accepted a 20 per cent to 23 per cent ‘bulkbuyer’s discount given to Reliance by Japan’s Asahi Chemicals up to 1982, and a 7per cent discount on its purified terephtbalic acid imports thereafter, whereas inother cases they might have inquired about under-invoicing.Many officials in charge of customs and excise were drawn into the Reliance family,rather than adopting the attitude of arms-length enforcers. <strong>The</strong> journalist Kanti Bhattrecalls attending the marriage of Dhirubhai’s daughter Dipti in 1983, when he joinedthe marriage procession, which in the Hindu tradition follows the groom to thevenue, with the guests occasionally breaking into the twirling dance known asdandya raas.‘I found myself in the street playing dandiya raas with the Finance Ministry’s chiefenforcement officer,’s Bhatt said.For his investors, all this added up to greater profitsat Reliance, which multiplied from Rs 82.1 million in 1979 to Rs 713.4 million in 1985(8.69 times), on sales that rose from Rs 1.55 billion to Rs 7.11 billion (4.58 times)over the same years. <strong>The</strong> company was never India’s most profitable, either inabsolute terms or in terms of profit as a return on capital, net worth or turnover. Butfor the times, Dhirubhai was unusually generous with dividends, giving investors areturn of at least 25 per cent on the face value of their shares from the time Reliancewas listed.But it was in the appreciation of their shares that the early investors in Reliance wererewarded. In its first year of listing, 1978, Reliance had reached a high of Rs 50, fivetimes the par value of the share, which was a high premium in those times. In 1980it hit Rs 104 as Dhirubhai promoted the growth potential of the company’s expansionplans at Naroda and Patalganga, and in 1982 it reached a high of Rs 186.In that year Dhirubhai established his name among brokers and investors as amaster of the stockmarket. From the middle of March 1982, a cartel of bearoperators reputed to be based in Calcutta started driving down his and other stocksin the Bombay market. <strong>The</strong> selling pressure was intense on 18 March, creating a
half-hour of panic just before the close. <strong>The</strong> bears sold 350000 Reliance shares,causing the price to fall quickly from Rs 131 to Rs 121, before Dhirubhai got hisbrokers to start buying any Reliance shares on offer. <strong>The</strong> more they sold, thenumber got to 1.1 million shares, the more Dhirubhai picked up, ostensibly on behalfof non-resident Indian (NRI) investors based in West Asian countries. Eventually, thefriendly brokers bought over 800000 of the shares sold by the bears.It was an almighty poker game. <strong>The</strong> bears had sold short-in other words, they hadsold shares they did not own in the expectation that the price would fall and let thempick up enough shares later at a lower price. Reliance itself could not legally buy itsown shares. So who were the NRI investors who arrived so providently on the scenewith more than Rs 100 million (then over US$10 million) to spend?Six weeks later, after several further spells of bear hammering of Reliance shares,Dhirubhai called his opponents -20 cards. Every second Friday, the Bombay StockExchange stopped new transactions while its members settled the previousfortnight’s trades or arranged badla finance to carry them over. On Friday 30 April,Dhirubhai’s brokers used their right under the badla system to demand delivery ofthe shares they had bought for their offshore clients, failing which a badla charge ofRs 25 a share would be levied. <strong>The</strong> bear cartel baulked, throwing the exchange into acrisis that shut it down until the following Wednesday. In following days the price ofReliance shares rose to a peak of Rs 201 as the bear brokers desperately locatedshares to fulfill their sales, incurring massive losses.By 10 May, the Reliance price started easing, signifying that deliveries had beenmade. But Dhirubhai and his company had clearly arrived. Reliance was henceforthtreated by major news-papers as a ‘pivotal’s stock in the market, and Dhirubhaihimself began receiving panegyrics in magazine profiles as the ‘messiah’s of thesmall investor. Dhirubhai went on to pick up a further one million Reliance shares byAugust 1982 for the mysterious NRIS, bringing the outlay since March to about Rs260 million. A few years later, in December 1986 at the time of its massive C Seriesdebenture issue, Reliance advertised that Rs 1000 invested in Reliance shares in1977 would have bought an investment worth Rs 1,10,041 in November 1986, anappreciation of 11,000 per cent. Another calculation made by Reliance put the gainat 12,234 per cent.An analysis by S. R. Mohnot in his Reliance study, points out that to obtain the valuequoted in 1986, the investor would have had to top up his initial Rs 1000 outlay bysubscribing to every rights issue and debenture issue offered to him, taking the totalinvestment to nearly Rs 30000 for assets and accumulated earnings (interest anddividends) worth Rs 1,08,278. This was far from thousands of percentage points, butstill equivalent to an annual compound rate of interest of 44.5 per cent. Tellingly,however, Mohnot noted that, had the investor bailed out at the end of 1983 after fiveyears, the annual compounded return would have been a still more impressive 75per cent.By late 1984, Dhirubhai had reached a new plateau of acclamation, and thereafterfrequently featured on the covers of Indian magazines. Over the next year, heannounced plans for a massive expansion of Reliance, by moving further back alongthe raw petrochemical chain to become India’s first producer of purified terephthalicacid (PTA), to make the other main input to polyester, monoethylene glycol (MEC),and to make the associated products linear alkyline benzene (LAB, for use in
- Page 2: AcknowledgementsIntroduction: an in
- Page 7 and 8: several years. I sent off some clip
- Page 9 and 10: esearch led me into all corners of
- Page 11 and 12: A PERSUASIVE YOUNG BANIAAmong all t
- Page 13 and 14: proportion of these from Kathiawar.
- Page 15 and 16: looked far beyond their immediate p
- Page 17 and 18: which involved boycotting imported
- Page 19 and 20: One of the students was a fellow Mo
- Page 21 and 22: The outpost had been a punishment s
- Page 23 and 24: As he developed more familiarity wi
- Page 25 and 26: water and haven for international t
- Page 27 and 28: Junagadh named Rathibhai Muchhala a
- Page 29 and 30: eing ‘suite luxurious’ compared
- Page 31 and 32: Dhirubhai was again lucky in that,
- Page 33 and 34: A FIRST-CLASS FOUNTAINDhirubhai Amb
- Page 35 and 36: minority government in 1996, and se
- Page 37 and 38: Corporation of India. Soon afterwar
- Page 39 and 40: Over two years in the early 1970s,
- Page 41 and 42: captive market. The ‘Eleven Day W
- Page 43 and 44: GURU OF THE EQUITY CULTIndira Gandh
- Page 45 and 46: politicisation of the machinery Fro
- Page 47 and 48: By the end of 1986, Dhirubhai was t
- Page 49: Reliance made sure that a comment b
- Page 53 and 54: politicians and bureaucrats. ‘It
- Page 55 and 56: Friends in the right PlacesThis was
- Page 57 and 58: act of parliament as far back as 19
- Page 59 and 60: control, and a very long and favour
- Page 61 and 62: in the Telegraph’s leader. Facing
- Page 63 and 64: In December 1983, Dhirubhai had hos
- Page 65 and 66: Pydhonic to sell his polyester and
- Page 67 and 68: give money to political parties. We
- Page 69 and 70: estimated demand of 80 000 tonnes o
- Page 71 and 72: support the big investment in domes
- Page 73 and 74: others. Orkay was accused of pledgi
- Page 75 and 76: corruption. On the backs of ordinar
- Page 77 and 78: Financial Express, had carried both
- Page 79 and 80: constant ridicule and demonisation.
- Page 81 and 82: inquiries overseas, the little-trav
- Page 83 and 84: conversion was allowed, the holding
- Page 85 and 86: The company’s shares had already
- Page 87 and 88: In a four-part article published ov
- Page 89 and 90: The case against Reliance had been
- Page 91 and 92: companies, possibly to help strengt
- Page 93 and 94: Nusli Wadia’s children). Pandit b
- Page 95 and 96: carrying a relentless, campaign of
- Page 97 and 98: The committee asked Reliance at lea
- Page 99 and 100: To clinch a prosecution under the F
- Page 101 and 102:
operators of the Indian havala trad
- Page 103 and 104:
While the law enforcers were closin
- Page 105 and 106:
the obligatory disclosures in the p
- Page 107 and 108:
On 5 December, the Central Excise a
- Page 109 and 110:
LETTING LOOSE A SCORPIONDhirubhai A
- Page 111 and 112:
identified himself as an inquiry ag
- Page 113 and 114:
But the CBI’s two investigating o
- Page 115 and 116:
had been booked into the hotel unde
- Page 117 and 118:
dismissing Rajiv and appointing ano
- Page 119 and 120:
extended and gruelling interrogatio
- Page 121 and 122:
BUSINESS AS USUALDhirubhai Ambani w
- Page 123 and 124:
udget for the year starting April 1
- Page 125 and 126:
asket from UTI (by value) were Lars
- Page 127 and 128:
on the Financial Times of London. A
- Page 129 and 130:
1988, two allied activists, journal
- Page 131 and 132:
But just as the opposing forces see
- Page 133 and 134:
had continued social meetings with
- Page 135 and 136:
they recorded Babaria calling Kirti
- Page 137 and 138:
arrests on 1 August. When a reporte
- Page 139 and 140:
After the initial appearance of Kir
- Page 141 and 142:
Though he could not avert the storm
- Page 143 and 144:
Dhirubhai’s new newspaper, launch
- Page 145 and 146:
and indifferent to the bloodshed in
- Page 147 and 148:
temple at Ayodhya, he put off the f
- Page 149 and 150:
arriving at Rajiv’s heavily guard
- Page 151 and 152:
Securities and Exchange Board of In
- Page 153 and 154:
The shouting continued for half an
- Page 155 and 156:
The 1991-92 boom helped Dhirubhai q
- Page 157 and 158:
Because of this burden, any other n
- Page 159 and 160:
the proceeds of the previous Euro-i
- Page 161 and 162:
The telephone licences covered near
- Page 163 and 164:
HOUSEKEEPING SECRETSOn 29 November
- Page 165 and 166:
compliant bank to give in return fo
- Page 167 and 168:
According to sources close to the M
- Page 169 and 170:
Merrill Lynch. Jain had meanwhile c
- Page 171 and 172:
put on its screens. On 29 November,
- Page 173 and 174:
1992 into the tax evasion aspects o
- Page 175 and 176:
At least one former fund manager, a
- Page 177 and 178:
and avoids a prosecution in court.
- Page 179 and 180:
Reliance could no longer look eithe
- Page 181 and 182:
other hand, the ANZ Grindlays bank