Mumbai corporate lawyer
Cross-border corporate matters between the United States and India—including those centered in Mumbai, India’s financial capital—involve the intersection of US federal and state corporate law with Indian statutory frameworks. Law Offices of SRIS, P.C., a US law firm practicing since 1997, addresses the US-law dimension of these matters through its US-admitted attorneys. Atchuthan Sriskandarajah, Esq., the firm’s founder, is admitted to practice in Virginia, Maryland, the District of Columbia, New Jersey, and New York. For India-law aspects, the firm collaborates with Sowmya R, Of Counsel, who is enrolled with the State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh (Enrollment No. MP2285/2014) and is not admitted in any US state bar; her role is limited to India-law matters in collaboration with the US-admitted attorneys of the firm. All US-law aspects are handled by Mr. Sris and the US-admitted attorneys of the firm.
Cross-Border Corporate Practice Between the United States and India
Cross-border corporate practice between the United States and India encompasses entity formation, regulatory compliance, commercial contracting, and transactional structuring where parties, assets, or operations span both jurisdictions. A Mumbai-based business entering the US market, or a US company establishing operations in India, encounters distinct legal requirements on each side of the border. The US-admitted attorney addresses US federal and state corporate law—including entity formation under Delaware or other state law, securities regulation, and compliance with the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (15 U.S.C. § 78dd-1 et seq.)—while the India-admitted attorney addresses Indian corporate law under the Companies Act, 2013, foreign direct investment policy administered by the Reserve Bank of India, and Indian tax considerations. Neither attorney advises on the other jurisdiction’s law; the two collaborate to ensure the transaction is compliant on both sides.
Common cross-border corporate engagements include structuring a US subsidiary of an Indian parent company, negotiating a joint venture agreement between a US and a Mumbai-based entity, conducting due diligence on a cross-border acquisition, and drafting international distribution or licensing agreements. Each engagement requires careful attention to the choice of governing law, the dispute resolution mechanism—often international arbitration under the New York Convention, to which India is a signatory—and the tax implications under the US-India double taxation avoidance agreement. The division of legal work between US-admitted and India-admitted counsel is a structural feature of every such matter.
About the Firm’s US-India Corporate Practice
Law Offices of SRIS, P.C. was founded in 1997 by Atchuthan Sriskandarajah, Esq., who is admitted to practice in Virginia, Maryland, the District of Columbia, New Jersey, and New York. The firm’s US-admitted attorneys handle the US-law dimension of cross-border corporate matters, including entity formation, FCPA compliance, cross-border commercial agreements, and US regulatory matters. For India-law aspects—including Companies Act compliance, foreign direct investment restrictions, Reserve Bank of India regulations, and Indian tax law—the firm collaborates with Sowmya R, Of Counsel, who is enrolled with the State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh (Enrollment No. MP2285/2014) and is not admitted in any US state bar. The firm holds no location in India; its US principal location is in Virginia, by appointment only.
Related practice areas include India business immigration, US-India joint venture structuring, cross-border contracts with India, and India family law matters.
Frequently Asked Questions
What does a cross-border corporate lawyer handle in US-India matters?
A cross-border corporate lawyer addressing US-India matters handles the US-law dimension of transactions, entity formation, regulatory compliance, and contractual arrangements involving parties or assets in both countries. This includes structuring US subsidiaries of Indian parent companies, advising on FCPA compliance as it applies to US-India business, negotiating cross-border commercial agreements, and coordinating with India-admitted counsel on Indian-law aspects such as Companies Act compliance, foreign direct investment restrictions, and Indian tax considerations. The US-admitted attorney and the India-admitted attorney each address the law of their respective jurisdiction and collaborate to produce a transaction structure that is compliant on both sides.
Do I need both a US-admitted attorney and an India-admitted attorney for a cross-border corporate transaction?
Yes, a cross-border corporate transaction between the US and India typically requires both a US-admitted attorney and an India-admitted attorney because each jurisdiction’s laws govern different aspects of the transaction. The US-admitted attorney addresses US federal and state corporate law, securities regulations, FCPA compliance, and US tax considerations. The India-admitted attorney addresses Indian corporate law under the Companies Act, 2013, foreign direct investment policy, Reserve Bank of India regulations, and Indian tax law. Neither attorney can advise on the other jurisdiction’s law. The two collaborate to ensure the transaction is compliant on both sides, with each attorney’s role clearly delineated by jurisdiction.
How does an Indian company establish a US subsidiary?
An Indian company establishing a US subsidiary typically forms a corporation or limited liability company under the laws of a chosen US state, most commonly Delaware. The process involves selecting the entity type, filing formation documents with the state’s secretary of state, obtaining a federal employer identification number from the IRS, and complying with state-level business licensing requirements. The Indian parent company must also comply with Indian overseas direct investment regulations administered by the Reserve Bank of India. A US-admitted attorney handles the US formation and regulatory steps; an India-admitted attorney addresses the Indian ODI compliance requirements under the Foreign Exchange Management Act.
What is the FCPA and how does it affect US-India business transactions?
The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (15 U.S.C. § 78dd-1 et seq.) prohibits US issuers, domestic concerns, and certain foreign persons from making corrupt payments to foreign officials to obtain or retain business. In the US-India context, the FCPA applies to US companies doing business in India and to Indian companies that are issuers of US securities or that act in US territory. The FCPA also imposes books-and-records and internal-controls requirements on US issuers. Indian companies engaging with US counterparts should implement compliance programs that address both FCPA requirements and Indian anti-corruption law under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Criminal penalties for individuals are set at up to five years imprisonment per anti-bribery violation under 15 U.S.C. § 78ff.
How are contracts enforced between parties in the US and India?
Contract enforcement between US and Indian parties depends on the dispute resolution mechanism specified in the contract, with international arbitration being the most common choice for cross-border agreements. India is a signatory to the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (the New York Convention), which facilitates enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in Indian courts. Where litigation is the chosen forum, the contract typically specifies the governing law and the court with jurisdiction. A US court judgment may be enforced in India through a fresh suit on the judgment, as India is not a party to any bilateral judgment-enforcement treaty with the United States.
How does service of process work when a US lawsuit involves a party in India?
India is a contracting party to the Hague Convention of 15 November 1965 on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents (the Hague Service Convention), in force for India since 2007. Service of process on a party in India must be made through India’s designated Central Authority. India has objected to Article 10 of the Convention, meaning service by postal channels or by private process server is not permitted. The US court transmits the service request to India’s Central Authority, which arranges service under Indian law. Processing times vary by the Central Authority’s caseload. A US-admitted attorney familiar with the Convention’s procedures can prepare the necessary request.
How does document authentication work between the US and India under the Apostille Convention?
India is a contracting party to the Hague Convention of 5 October 1961 Abolishing the Requirement of Legalisation for Foreign Public Documents (the Hague Apostille Convention), in force for India since 14 July 2005. A public document issued in the United States and intended for use in India may be authenticated by an apostille issued by the competent authority in the US state where the document originated, rather than requiring consular legalization. Similarly, an Indian public document may be authenticated by an apostille from the Indian competent authority for use in the United States. The apostille certifies the authenticity of the signature, the capacity of the signer, and the seal or stamp on the document.
What corporate structures are common for US-India joint ventures?
US-India joint ventures commonly take the form of a newly formed Indian private limited company under the Companies Act, 2013, with both the US and Indian parties as shareholders, or a US limited liability company with the Indian party as a member. The choice of jurisdiction depends on the primary market, tax considerations under the US-India double taxation avoidance agreement, and regulatory factors including Indian foreign direct investment caps in the relevant sector. The joint venture agreement typically addresses governance, capital contributions, profit distribution, deadlock resolution, and exit mechanisms. Both US and Indian legal counsel are needed to structure the entity and draft the operative agreements.
How have India’s new criminal codes affected corporate compliance?
Effective 1 July 2024, the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) replaced the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC); the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) replaced the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC); and the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (BSA) replaced the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. For corporate compliance, the BNS carries forward many economic-offense provisions from the IPC—including those addressing criminal breach of trust, cheating, and forgery—with updated penalties and some new offenses related to digital evidence and organized crime. Companies with India operations should review their compliance programs to ensure they address the BNS framework. India-admitted counsel can advise on the specific implications for a given business.