The Karnataka High Court upholds the Enforcement Directorate’s seizure of Genpact India’s Gurugram head office linked to allegations of illegal foreign exchange transactions, granting the company limited operational relief while leaving key legal questions unresolved.
The Karnataka High Court has upheld the Enforcement Directorate’s seizure of Genpact India’s Gurugram head office, while also giving the company breathing room to keep its day-to-day operations running from the site. According to reports citing the ruling, the court said Genpact may continue lawful business activity at the premises, but cannot create third-party rights over the property while the case remains unresolved.
The case centres on allegations that Genpact routed about ₹7,800 crore through a series of overseas transactions, which the ED says amounted to illegal foreign exchange outflows and round-tripping. The agency has said the flow of funds included principal and interest payments made over several years to Genpact Luxembourg, using a structure it believed fell foul of the Foreign Exchange Management Act. The high court found there was enough material for the ED to act under Section 37A, which allows seizure where foreign exchange is suspected to have been dealt with unlawfully.
At the same time, the court overturned the ED’s refusal to grant Genpact a no-objection certificate to remit $100 million for a planned treasury centre in GIFT City. The judges said the January 13, 2026 refusal did not explain itself adequately and did not clearly connect the pending probe with the proposed investment. The matter has been sent back for a fresh, reasoned decision within 10 days after Genpact files the required material, and the regulator has also been asked to consider extending the investment deadline, which had expired on September 15, 2026.
The court was careful to say that its order was not a final finding that Genpact had violated FEMA. That determination, it said, still rests with the competent authority under the law. For now, though, the ruling leaves the company with a mixed result: its challenge to the seizure has largely failed, but it has won a fresh opportunity to press ahead with its overseas investment proposal.
Disclaimer: This article is intended to inform and educate, not to recommend or endorse any financial product, investment or strategy. Please consider your own financial circumstances and seek professional advice where appropriate before making financial decisions.
