, .

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

U.S. SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION,

I
100 F St. NE, Washmgton DC 20549-5030 I
Case: 1:11-cv-00672
Assigned To : Huvelle, Ellen S.
Plaintiff, Assign. Date: 4/5/2011
v. Description: General Civil
SATYAM COMPUTER SERVICES LIMITED d/b/a
MAHINDRA SATYAM, COMPLAINT

Defendant.

Plaintiff Securities and Exchange Commission (Commission) for its complaint

alleges as follows:

SUMMARY

1. From at least 2003 through September 2008, defendant Satyam Computer

Services Limited deceived investors by falsifYing the company's revenue, income,

earnings per share, and interest bearing deposits -- the primary indicators upon which

investors rely when making decisions about whether to purchase or sell company

securities. Satyam acknowledges that it falsely reported, among other items, over $1

billion in revenue in its publicly filed financial statements.

2. Then-senior officers and managers at Satyam, an Indian information

technology service company with depository shares traded on the New York Stock

Exchange (NYSE) during the relevant period, directed the creation of over 6,000 false

invoices that they ensured were entered into the company's general ledger and falsely

recorded as, among other things, revenue, income, and accounts receivable in Satyam's

public filed financial statements. The then-senior management at Satyam manufactured

scores of false bank statements to reflect payment of the false invoices and created over

$1 billion in fictitious cash balances and other interest bearing deposits. This false

information made Satyam appear to be substantially more profitable and financially

sound than was actually the case. When the fraud was revealed, the price of Satyam's

depository shares plummeted and institutional investors located in the United States

realized losses of over $450 million.

3. Satyam's fraudulent accounting practices violated the anti-fraud, reporting,

record-keeping, and internal controls provisions of the federal securities laws. The

Commission requests, among other things, that this Court enjoin Satyam from

committing further violations of the federal securities laws as alleged in this complaint,

and order Satyam to pay a monetary penalty based upon its violations of the federal

securities laws.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

4. The Commission brings this action pursuant to Section 21 (d) of the Securities

Exchange Act of1934 (Exchange Act) [15 U.S.c. 78u(d)].

5. This Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to Section 27 of the

Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. 78aa].

6. Certain of the acts, practices, and courses of conduct constituting the

violations oflaw alleged in this complaint occurred within this judicial district and,

therefore, venue is proper pursuant to Section 27 of the Exchange Act.

7. Defendant, directly and indirectly, has engaged in transactions, acts, practices,

and courses ofbusiness that violate Sections 10(b) and 13(a), 13(b)(2)(A) and

13(b)(2)(B) ofthe Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. 78j(b), 78m(a), 78m(b)(2)(A), and

78m(b)(2)(B)] and Exchange Act Rules 10b-5, 12b-20, 13a-l, and 13a-16 thereunder [17

C.F.R. 240.lOb-5, 240. 12b-20, 240.13a-1, and 240.13a-16].

DEFENDANT

8. Satyam is a large information technology service company incorporated in the

Republic of India with its principal executive offices in Hyderabad, India. During the

time period of the fraud, Satyam employed more than 50,000 people worldwide and

maintained offices across the globe, including nine offices that it still maintains in the

United States. As of March 31, 2010, Satyam had the equivalent of 1.176 billion total

shares outstanding, including shares traded on the Bombay Stock Exchange, the National

Stock Exchange ofIndia, and 65 million American Depository Shares (ADS). From

March 31, 2004, through March 31, 2010, Satyam's ADS represented between 11 and 20

percent of the company's total shares outstanding.

9. At all relevant times, Satyam's equity shares underlying the ADS were

registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Exchange Act, and Satyam's ADS were listed

on the NYSE. On October 4, 2010, Satyam filed a Form 25 with the Commission

voluntarily removing its securities from listing on the NYSE and from registration under

Section 12(b). Satyam's equity shares underlying the ADS are currently deemed

Tegisteredpursuant to Section 12(g) of the Exchange Act, and Satyam's ADS are

currently quoted on the OTC Market under the symbol SAYCY.PK. On September 29,

2010, Satyam filed a Form 6-K containing its statement of annual audited financial

results as per Indian GAAP for the fiscal years ended March 31, 2009 and March 31,

2010. On November 16, 2010, Satyam filed a Form 6-K containing its statement of

unaudited financial results as per Indian GAAP for the quarter ended June 30, 2010 and

quarter & half-year ended September 30, 2010. On February 14, 2011, Satyam filed a

Fonn 6-K containing its statement ofunaudited financial results as per Indian GAAP for

the quarter and nine months ended December 31, 2010. Satyam has yet to restate its

historical financial statements in the United States, and is currently delinquent in its

Exchange Act reporting obligations having failed to file its Fonns 20-F for fiscal years

ended March 31,2009 and March 31, 2010.

10. Shortly after the fraud became public, the Government of India assumed

control of the company by dissolving Satyam' s existing Board of Directors and

appointing new Government-nominated directors. In mid-February 2009, the Company

Law Board of India authorized the company's new Board to select a strategic investor for

Satyam. In a bidding process overseen by a retired Chief Justice of India, Venturbay

Consultants Private Limited, a subsidiary of Tech Mahindra Limited, an Indian

infonnation technology competitor, was selected. Beginning in May 2009, Tech

Mahindra Limited, through Venturbay, purchased approximately 42 percent of Satyam's

shares in India and became the new controlling shareholder of Satyam. In June 2009,

Satyam installed a new senior management team, consisting of executives associated with

Tech Mahindra Limited. Satyam's current Board of Directors consists of six members:

three associated with Tech Mahindra Limited, two nominated by the Government of

India, and one other independent director. Each of the three independent directors serves

on the Audit Committee of the Board.

11. In June 2009, Satyam filed a press release announcing "Mahindra Satyam" as

the company's new "brand identity." The company continues to be registered as a

corporation doing business in the State ofNew York and as a foreign issuer with the

Conimission under the name Satyam and files foreign issuer reports with the Commission

under the name Satyam. Since the establishment of the Government-appointed Board,

and continuing under Satyam's new management, the company has taken significant

remedial action and has cooperated in the SEC staffs investigation ofthe issues

described in this complaint.

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

Satyam's U.S. Reporting Obligations

12. Satyam made an initial public offering of ADS in the United States in May

2001. As a foreign issuer, Satyam is required to submit periodic financial reports with

the Commission on Forms 6-K (quarterly report) and 20-F (annual report). These

periodic financial reports include an income statement and a balance sheet. Satyam's

balance sheet reports, among other things, Satyam 's assets and liabilities at the end of

each fiscal quarter and year. Satyam's income statement reports, among other things,

revenue recognized, expenses incurred, and income earned for each fiscal quarter and

year. Within an income statement, expenses are subtracted from revenues to calculate

income.

13. Satyam provides information technology services to a variety of customers

wor~dwide. Satyam prepares invoices for the services that it provides, submits the

invoices to its customers, and records the invoices in an electronic invoice management

system. The data from the invoice management system is exported into Satyam's

financial system where the revenues are recorded in the company's books of account.

Satyam uses its books of account to prepare the financial statements that it submits to the

Commission on Forms 6~K and 20-F.

5
 14. At all relevant times, Satyam operated on a fiscal year that ran from April 1

through March 31. For example, Satyam's fiscal year 2004 began on April 1, 2003 and

ended on March 31, 2004.

Satyam' s Then-Chairman Confesses to Fraud

15. After seven years during which its ADS traded on the NYSE, on January 7,

2009, Satyam submitted a Form 6-K with the Commission that included a letter prepared

by the then-Chairman of Satyam, B. Ramalinga Raju (Raju), admitting that the company

had been engaged in a billion dollar financial fraud involving, among other things, the

reporting of materially false revenue. Raju explained that as of September 30, 2008,

Satyam's balance sheet reflected over $1 billion in fictitious cash and bank balances

when the actual amounts were $66 million. According to Raju, Satyam's revenue for the

quarter and operating margin were each overstated by approximately $125 million.

16. Raju further admitted that he intentionally maintained Satyam ' s inflated

revenue and profits because Satyam ' s promoters held a small percentage of equity and

public knowledge of the company's "poor performance would result in a take-over" of

the company, thereby exposing the fraud. According to Raju, "[i]t was like riding a tiger,

not knowing how to get off without being eaten."

17. Raju also explained that he made a last attempt to ""fill" the company's

"fictitious assets with real ones," by having Satyam acquire a controlling interest in

Maytas Properties and Maytas Infra (Maytas), real estate and infrastructure development

companies then controlled by Raju and his brother, who was then the Managing Director

and Chief Executive Officer ofSatyam. Following the announcement of the Maytas

acquisition in India on December 16, 2008, Satyam's ADS price fell more than fifty

 percent to open on the NYSE at $6.21 from the prior day's close of$12.55. During a

conference call held that morning, investors and analysts questioned the investment into

unrelated businesses during a worldwide recession, as well as the transfer of the majority

ofthe company's liquid assets to the Raju family. Satyam's ADS price closed at $5.70

on trading volume of over 50 million shares. After the close of the market, Satyam

abandoned the Maytas acquisition and on December 17, 2008, Satyam's ADS gained

back fifty percent of their value to close at $8.55.

18. A significant number of former senior and mid-level executives of Satyam,

including Raju, his brother, the former Chief Financial Officer, the former Vice President

for Accounts and Audits (Treasury and Tax), the former Senior Manager for Treasury,

the former Global Internal Audit Head and the former Assistant Manager for Invoicing,

are defendants, along with two lead engagement partners from Satyam's then

independent auditing firm, in a criminal trial in India arising out of the Satyam fraud.

The trial is underway.

19. Satyam now has a new senior management team, consisting of members

formerly associated with Tech Mahindra Limited, Satyam's new controlling shareholder.

Satyam also has replaced all of the Board ofDirectors that were in place during the fraud.

The Satyam Fraud

20. For five years from 2003 through September 2008, Satyam's then-senior

. management knowingly and intentionally falsified the company's reported revenue by

manufacturing false invoices for services never provided and, in some cases, for

customers that did not exist. Satyam' s then-senior management provided certain

employees with an administrative or "super user" login identification and password in

order to access the invoice management system to record the false invoices. The '"super

user" login ensured that the invoices would be used in the calculation of revenue, but

concealed the existence ofthe inyoices from the heads of Satyam's business units who

would recognize that the services reflected on theinvoices had never been provided by

their units and/or that their units had not done business with certain customers included

on the fake invoices.

21. From 2003 through September 2008, Satyam's then-senior management

knowingly and intentionally instructed certain employees to generate 6,603 false invoices

and record them in the company's invoice management system. During these years,

certain Satyam employees working at the direction of then-senior management generated

on average 100 to 200 fake invoices per month in Satyam' s invoice managing system.

The invoice management system exported these 6,603 invoices into Satyam's financial

system where the revenues were recorded in the company's books of account. Satyam's

then-senior management knowingly and intentionally prepared financial statements that

contained the materially false revenue, income, earnings per share, and cash from the

company's false books of account. Satyam's then-senior management knowingly and

intentionally submitted these materially false financial statements to the Commission on

Forms 6.;.K and 20-F.

22. A complete failure of Satyam's internal controls over its invoice management

system, the company's books of account, and its reported financial statements occurred

during 2003 through September 2008. As a result, Satyam's then-senior management

were able to knowingly, intentionally, and materially overstate revenue, income, earnings

per share, cash, and interest bearing deposits from 2003 through September 2008.

 23. Based upon the fictitious invoices, Satyam's then-senior management

knowingly, intentionally, and materially overstated revenue from fiscal year 2004

through the first two quarters of fiscal year 2009 by $ 1.1 billion. Investors routinely rely

upon a company's reported revenues when making investment decisions. Satyam's

unaudited materially false revenue is set forth in the chart below:

Fiscal Quarter False Published False Revenue False Commission

Year Invoices Revenue Filin2s

2004 Q12004 97 $121,550,000 $14,330,000 Fonn6-K

022004 8 $131,780,000 $1,050,000 Fonn6-K
Q32004 50 $148.070,000 $8,840,000 Fonn 6-K
042004 112 $164,980,000 $22,190,000 Fonn6-K
Total 267 $566,370,000 $46,320,000 . Form20-F

2005 Q12005 ]11 $174,990,000 $19,250,000 Fonn6-K

Q22005 63 $188,920,000 $8,810,000 Fonn 6-K
Q32005 69 $204,680,000 $11,020,000 Fonn6-K
Q42005 208 $225,000,000 $30,390,000 Fonn6-K
Total 451 $793,600,000 $68,860,000 Form20-F

2006 Q12006 249 $246,040,000 $35,450,000 Fonn6-K

Q22006 242 $267,850,000 $30,760,000 Forin 6-K
Q32006 29] $281,840,000 $35,220,000 Fonn 6-K
Q42006 398 $300,700,000 $47,980,000 Fonn 6-K
Total 1180 $1,096,300,000 $149,500,000 Fonn20-F

2007 Q12007 ]2 $322,500,000 $30,000 Fonn6-K

Q22007 30 $352,000,000 $29,050,000 Fonn6-K
Q32007 237 $375,600,000 $53,850,000 Fonn 6-K
042007 375 $411,300,000 $69,970,000 Form6-K
Total 654 $1,461,400,000 $151,650,000 Fonn20-F

..2008 Q12008 473 $452,300,000 $78,100,000 Fonn6-K:

022008 . 486 .$509,600,000 .... $79.070,000 Form6-K
Q32008 730 $562,900,000 $133,130,000 Form6-K
042008 794 $613,300,000 $142.030,000 Fonn 6-K
Total 2483 $2138,100,000 $430,390,000 Fonn20-F

2009 Q12009 791 $637,300,000 $141,500,000 Fonn6-K

022009 777 $652,200,000 $134,360,000 Fonn 6-K
Total 1558 $1,289,500,000 $275,860,000

Grand 6603 $7,345,270,000 $1,122,670,000 All of the above

Total

24. During fiscal year 2007, Satyam's then-senior management knowingly and

intentionally reported $58,160,000 of additional false revenue, not included above, by

generating and recording 27 additional fake invoices that did not involve the use of the .

super-user function:

25. Consistent with the reporting of materially false revenue, Satyam's then-

senior management also knowingly, intentionally, and materially reported false net

income of almost $1 billion on the company's publicly filed financial statements from

fiscal year 2004 through the second quarter of fiscal year 2009. Investors routinely rely

upon net income to assess the profitability of a particular company when making

investment decisions. During this time, Satyam 's then-senior management reported that

the company's net income was consistently increasing when, in fact, Satyam's net

income was decreasing. During the last two quarters of fiscal year 2008 and the first

quarter of fiscal year 2009, Satyam reported hundreds ofmillions of dollars of net

income, when in fact the company's actual net income was less than zero.

26. Satyam's then-senior management used the reported false net income to

calculate earnings per share (EPS). EPS is calculated by dividing net income by the

weighted average of a company's outstanding shares of stock. EPS is an important

measure of a company's strength and profitability and is routinely relied upon by

investors in making investment decisions. Satyam's then-senior management knowingly,

intentionally, and materially overstated the company's earnings per share from fiscal year

2004 through the second quarter of fiscal year 2009. During this time, Satyam's then

senior management reported near constant increases in EPS when, in fact, EPS was

consistently decreasing from fiscal year 2005 through the first two quarters of fiscal year

10

2009.

27. To support the false revenue and income that Satyam was reporting in the

company's financial statements, Satyam' s then-senior management knowingly and

intentionally prepared materially false bank statements, from fiscal year 2003 through

September of2008, reflecting materially false cash deposits in the company's bank

accounts at, among other places, the Bank of Baroda (BOB) which were recorded within

the cash and cash equivalent balances in the publicly filed financial statements. The chart

below illustrates the actual balances in Satyam's BOB account compared to the balances

that Satyam's then-senior management knowingly and intentionally reported in the

company's publicly filed financial statements:

Fiscal Balance per BoB Balance BoB Balance Reported

Year (BoB) PerSatyam Overstatement Cash & Cash
End Statements (Fraudulent) Equivalent
Balance per
SEC Filings

3/3I/04 $3,652,232 $64,287,652 $60,635,420 $86,730,000

3/3I/05 $10,268,858 $82,953;598 $72,684,740 $129,800,000
3/3I/06 $6,288,103 $218,192,913 $211,904,811 $292,800,000
3/3I/07 $11,452,514 $79,389,673 $67,937,159 $152,200,000
3/3I/08 $10,972,784 $214,506,068 $203,533,283 $290,500,000
9/30/09 $10,836,569 $379,612,394 $368,775,824 $433,400,000

To make it appear that the company was investing its false income during the time period

ofthe fraud, Satyam' s then-senior management knowingly, intentionally, and materially

falsified the company's publicly filed financial statements with regard to the balance and

interest of fixed deposit receipts in accounts held at HSBC, PNB Paribas, HDFC,

Citibank, and ICICI. Satyam's materially overstated balances and interest income are

detailed in the chart below:

11

 Fiscal Reported Actual Balance and Fraudulent

Year Balance and Interest Balance and
End Interest Interest

3/31/04 $252,022,199 $4,369,680 $247,642,519

3/31/05 $417,067,645 $260,436 $416,807,209
3/31/06 $432,722,174 $26,511,770 $406,210,404
3/31/07 $780,756,619 $13,365,348 $767,391,271
3/31/08 $912,660,956 $2,210,812 $910,450,144
9/30/08 $784,605,511 $2,117,546 $782,487,966

28. Satyam included a press release detailing the company's quarterly and annual

performance with each quarterly and annual report that it submitted to the Commission.

Consistent with its false financial statements, from fiscal year 2004 through the second

quarter of fiscal year 2009, Satyam' s then-senior management knowingly and

intentionally submitted press releases that materially misrepresented the overall financial

performance ofthe company. Like the false financial statements, the false press releases

made it appear to investors that Satyam was more profitable and financially strong than

was actually the case. During this time period, Satyam' s then-senior management

submitted 27 materially false press releases to the public.

29. From at least October 23,2003 through December 16,2008, Satyam's then-

senior management knowingly and intentionally provided materially false information on

least 20 occasions regarding Satyam' s financial performance or the purpose ofthe failed

Maytas acquisition to Wall Street analysts during quarterly conference calls. The

materially false statements made during the conference calls made it appear to the

analysts that Satyam was substantially more profitable than was actually the case. These

analysts used this false information in making recommendations to investors about

Satyam's securities.

30. On January 7,2009, following Raju's confession to the massive financial

12

 fraud, the NYSE suspended trading in Satyam's ADS. At the time, Satyam's ADS traded

at a price of$9.35. When trading resumed on January 12,2009, Satyam's ADS price

dropped by nearly 85 percent to close at $1.46 on trading volume of over 95 million

shares.

31. SatYam ADS investors suffered significant losses as a result of the fraud.

Mutual funds managed by one institutional investor suffered realized losses of nearly

$200 million. In total, ADS institutional investors realized losses of over $450 million.

32. From 2003 through December 2008, Satyam's then-senior management

responsible for the fraud knowingly and intentionally made materially false and

misleading statements to the Commission, the public, and Wall Street analysts that made

the company appear more profitable and financially strong than was actually the case.

During the course of the fraud, Satyam was able to maintain its customer base as well as

add new customers to its operations. Additionally, Satyam was able to maintain its share

price at the expense of company's shareholders who lost hundreds ofmillions of dollars.

CLAIMS FOR RELIEF

FIRST CLAIM

Satyain Violated Exchange Act Section IOCb) and Exchange Act Rule IOb-5

33. Paragraphs 1 through 32 are realleged and incorporated by reference herein.

3 4 . ' As set forth more fully above, Satyam, directly or indirectly, by use ofthe

means or instrumentalities of interstate commerce, or by the use of the mails and of the

facilities of a national securities exchange, knowingly or recklessly, in connection with

the purchase or sale of securities: (a) employed devices, schemes, or artifices to defraud,

13

(b) made untrue statements ofmaterial facts or omitted to state material facts necessary in

order to make the statements made, in the light of the circumstances under which they

were made, not misleading, or (c) engaged in acts, practices, or courses of business which

operate or would operate as a fraud or deceit upon any person.

35. Satyam and members of Satyam's then-senior management acted knowingly

or recklessly in connection with the above described acts and omissions. They knew, or

were reckless in not knowing, (hat the above-mentioned filings with the Commission and

statements to the public and analysts contained material misstatements and omissions.

36. By reason of the foregoing, Satyam violated Section 1O(b) of the Exchange

Act [15 U.S.C. 78j(b)], and Exchange Act Rule lOb-5 [17 C.F.R. 240.10b-5].

SECOND CLAIM

Satyam Violated Exchange Act Sections 13(a), 13(b)(2)(A) and 13(b)(2)(B) and

Exchange Act Rules 13a-1, 13a-16, and 12b-20

37. Paragraphs 1 through 36 are incorporated herein by reference.

38. Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act and Rules 13a-l and 13a-16 thereunder

require issuers ofregistered securities to file with the Commission factually accurate

annual and quarterly reports. Exchange Act Rule 12b-20 provides that in addition to the

information expressly required to be included in a statement or report, there shall be

added such further material information, if any, as may be necessary to make the required

statements, in the light of the circumstances under which they are made, not misleading.

39. Section 13(b)(2)(A) of the Exchange Act requires issuers ofregistered

securities to make and keep books, records, and accounts which, in reasonable detail,

accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the issuer.

14

Section 13(b)(2)(B) of the Exchange Act requires such issuers to, among other things,

devise and maintain a system of internal accounting controls sufficient to provide

reasonable assurances that the Company's transactions were recorded as necessary to

permit preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted

accounting principles.

40. By reason of the foregoing, Satyam violated Section 13(a), 13(b)(2)(A), and

13(b)(2)(B) of the Exchange Act [15 U.S.C. 78m(a), 78m(b)(2)(A), and 78m(b)(2)(B)]

and Exchange Act Rules 13a-l, 13a-16, and 12b-20 [17 C.F.R. 240.13a-l, 240.13a-16,

and 240.b-20].

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, the Commission respectfully requests that this Court enter

Orders:

A. Permanently restraining and enjoining Satyam from violating Section 1O(b) of

the Exchange Act and Exchange Act Rule 10b-5;

B. Permanently restraining and enjoining Satyam from violating Section 13(a),

13(b)(2)(A), and 13(b)(2)(B) of Exchange Act and Exchange Act Rules 12b-20, 13a-l,

and 13a-16;

C. Imposing civil monetary penalties on Satyam pursuant to Section 21 (d) of the

Exchange Act;

15

 D. Ordering, pursuant to Section 308 ofthe Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, that the

amount of Civil penalties ordered against and paid by Satyam be added to and become

part of a fund for the benefit of the victims ofthe violations alleged in this complaint; and

E. Granting such other and additional relief as this Court may deem just and

proper.

Date: April 5,2011 Respectfully su~mitted,

Cheryl J c rboro (D.C. Bar No. 422175)

Jan M. Folena
Reid A. Muoio
James J. Valentino
Jeffrey Leasure
Counsel for the Plaintiff
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
100 F Street, NE
Washington, DC 20549
(202) 551-4403 (telephone Scarboro)

16