Our businesses comply with ASIC legislation
The Hindenburg Report presents transactions related to Adani’s Australian businesses in a misleading way to purposefully undermine the reputation of the Adani Group, in order to pursue their own profit by short-selling shares in Adani Group companies.
All our businesses are Australian companies that comply with Australian corporations and securities legislation.
None of our businesses have been contacted by ASIC or the ATO about any of the allegations in the Hindenburg Report.
We provided full details of all the transactions involving our Australian businesses that were highlighted in the Hindenburg Report on the public record on Monday (30/1/23). These are detailed below.
It is disappointing that some Australian media outlets have knowingly chosen to omit this information from their reporting of these issues.
Response to allegation #61 North Queensland Export Terminal:
The transaction highlighted in the report between NQXT and Adani Mining Pty Limited (subsidiary of Adani Enterprises Limited) was legal and legitimate.
The North Queensland Export Terminal is an Australian company owned by a private trust and all its financial arrangements comply with Australian law.
It has clearly been disclosed by us that North Queensland Export Terminal Pty Ltd (formerly known as Adani Abbot Point Terminal Pty Ltd) (“N XT”) is a related party of Adani Mining Pty Ltd (a stepdown subsidiary of Adani Enterprises Limited), and transactions between them are related party transactions. Hindenburg has also conveniently failed to mention that NQXT is a multi-user terminal and Adani Mining Pty Ltd is one of more than nine major long-term customers of NQXT.
As part of any long term take or pay contract for accessing the port infrastructure such as NQXT, users typically provide credit support in order to secure their obligations. In this case, as fully disclosed, Adani Mining Pty Ltd paid NQXT a ‘security deposit’ to secure its obligations under the long term take or pay contract.
The amount was neither ‘charged’ nor was a ‘fee’ as incorrectly alleged in the report. Instead, Hindenburg seems to suggest, in flagrant violation of standard governance requirements for related party transactions, that simply because two parties are related, NQXT (which is a separate corporate entity and subject to the regulations of Australian Securities & Investment Commission) should have provided long term access to the terminal for no security deposit or charges at all rather than a contract on arm’s length basis.
Response to allegation #45 Adani Mining Pty Ltd and Carmichael Rail Network Trust financial statements:
The transactions relate to transfer of the cost to the specific project entity which was incorporated for rail businesses (Carmichael Rail Network Trust incorporated on 17th September 2014). These transactions have been carried out in compliance with applicable law and on arm’s length terms. The amounts transferred included: (i) Exploration and Evaluation Assets (i.e. Capital works in progress (‘C I ’)); and (ii) Amounts already expensed to profit and loss account and an arm’s length management fee charged by Adani Mining Pty Ltd (a step-down subsidiary of Adani Enterprises) These transactions were fully disclosed in the financial statements Adani Mining Pty Ltd. (AMPL), as below.
Source: Page 14 of the Financial Statement of AMPL for FY15 showing the part-transfer of Exploration and Evaluation Assets.
Source: Page 13 of the Financial Statement of AMPL for FY15 showing the reversal of cost which was expensed in P&L account in earlier years and other income on account of management fee.
Treatment of these amounts in the acquiring entity The transaction represented a transfer of project specific amounts from CWIP & P&L, and to keep the treatment of the amount consistent with how it was originally treated in the financials of AMPL. The amount of A$92,928,540 (which represented the transfer of Exploration and Evaluation Assets) was recorded as CWIP and the balance amount taken to the P&L account through an expense of A$23,255,069 as general and administration expenses. The amount of A$23,255,069 presented as day one write off of CWIP were already part of the expenses of AMPL in the previous years and current year in which the transfer occurred and hence it was not an immediate write off of acquired assets but an accounting transfer of an amount from CWIP to P&L account as required and consistent with accounting principles.
Source: Page 13 of the Financial Statement of Carmichael rail network trust for FY15.
Allegations relating to Mr Samir Vora:
The allegations against Mr Samir Vora and Adani Enterprises are one of the many examples of how the report’s authors have cherry-picked information to create a false narrative about our business.
Hindenburg omits the key fact that Mr Vora and Adani Enterprises were cleared by Indian courts of allegations regarding the import/export of diamonds.
In August 2015, India’s Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), an appellate legal body equivalent to Australia’s Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT), adjudicated the matter and found no wrongdoing had occurred. The Tribunal found Adani Enterprise Limited had declared the correct values for cut and polished diamonds and had not engaged in circular trading or misused the export incentive scheme.
The finding of no wrongdoing was first confirmed by Supreme Court of India on 22 July 2016 when it rejected the appeal filed by Customs Department and subsequently Supreme Court of India also rejected the review petition filed by the Customs Department on 30 March 2017. Supreme Court is the highest court in India equivalent to Australia’s apex court, the High Court of Australia. (See attached ruling).
We are dismayed that Hindenburg Research has chosen to maliciously smear Mr Vora’s character to pursue their own profit by short-selling shares in Adani Group companies.
Original documents relating to this issue can be found in the Adani Group’s full response.
The Hindenburg Research report published on 24 January 2023 is an intentional and reckless attempt to mislead investors using selective misinformation and discredited allegations.
The Adani Group’s full response to all allegations can be found here.
ENDS