ED Raids Fraudulent Call Centres Defrauding Foreigners in Chandigarh

Rapid Summary

• The Enforcement Directorate (ED) raided call centres in Chandigarh and surrounding areas, including Mohali (Punjab) and Panchkula (Haryana), on charges of cheating foreigners under the guise of providing technical support services.
• These centres allegedly laundered funds worth crores through fraudulent transactions and were investigated under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
• Call centres used counterpart companies abroad to receive “fraudulent” funds via payment gateways, remitting them to India through banking channels and hawala systems.
• Websites suggested operations like web designing and wireless internet services, but lacked openness about promoters or team members. Misleading images of IT parks were posted online.
• Employees lacked professional training necessary for genuine business process outsourcing activities.
• FSAL Technologies was found operating a fake facility in conjunction with a company named Bios Tech registered in the US,claiming tech support for brands such as Microsoft,HP printers,routers,etc. The company’s website mimicked Geek Squad branding.
• Entities called Terrasparq and Visionaire have allegedly been conducting similar fraudulent activities since 2016.

Indian opinion Analysis

The ED’s crackdown on fraudulent call centres underscores an enforcement effort aimed at protecting foreign consumers from scams originating in India while combating illegal financial flows into the country. Such operations tarnish India’s global image as an IT hub by associating it with deceptive practices rather than legitimate innovation or service reliability.

This inquiry highlights critical gaps in accountability within India’s emerging tech service sector. Proper regulatory oversight over business practices could reduce such occurrences. Additionally, it may encourage broader discussions about tightening cyber-security standards across cross-border payment systems.

Given these allegations date back to 2016 for some entities involved, there is potential concern over how effectively preventive mechanisms were implemented against repeated frauds earlier.

This case brings crucial questions around consumer trust-both globally and domestically-and how transparent communications from businesses can mitigate reputational damage caused by isolated incidents like this one.

Read More: