Some of the overpriced dairy plant equipment from India that was claimed to be new. (Photos: Supplied) 
In 2022, two associates of the Gupta brothers, Kamal Vasram and Saliesh Indurjeeth, directly linked to the failed Estina dairy project, were arrested and later released on bail of R10,000 each. The duo face charges of fraud, contravention of Section 54(1)(a) of the International Trade Administration Act, and Contravention of Regulation 22 of the Exchange Control Act.
This followed an investigation by SARS and the NPA’s Investigating Directorate (ID) into the affairs of the Estina Dairy Project.
The investigation established that Estina submitted customs clearance documents in support of a VAT refund claim that declared a value of more than R37.7-million for a “new” pasteurisation plant imported from India.
Dairy farming equipment at what used to be called the Estina dairy farm. Costs were inflated and siphoned off, the Pretoria Magistrates’ Court heard. (Photo: Ferial Haffajee)
The suspected overpriced pasteurising plant was found to be invoiced to Estina by Gateway Limited in the United Arab Emirates, a company suspected to be controlled by the Guptas as a conduit to launder money and to extract funds from South Africa.
Value ‘inflated’
In an appearance in the Pretoria Magistrates’ Court on Wednesday, witness Dawid Maree, FNB’s agriculture information and marketing head, said the value of the Estina plant was inflated and not market-related and that it was obvious that the imported equipment had previously been used.
This was consistent with the project’s proposal, business proposal, business plan, and feasibility study which were “unrealistic” and “inconsistent”, with some costs overstated.
Maree said that while Estina declared R37.7-million on its customs form, the necessary equipment would have cost R14-million – even if it had been new.
The state argued that Vasram and Indurjeeth intentionally inflated the value of the equipment to launder funds and that they later submitted the bill of entry to the Sars Electronic Data Interchange, declaring that the goods were new and valued at R37,718,634.
Maree’s argument was supported by a gallery of 100 images showing that the equipment had clearly been used, with visible dents, scratches and rust. He stated that these signs of wear would not have appeared in the six months between their importation and when the photos were taken.
Read more in Daily Maverick: The Estina/Vrede dairy scandal: A Gupta project from beginning to end
Formerly known as Estina and now called the Integrated Vrede Dairy Project, this public-private initiative was given land under a free 99-year lease.
The Estina dairy farm project near Vrede on 12 July 2017. (Photo: Gallo Images / Rapport / Deon Raath)
Established in 2012 on Krynaauwslust Farm near the town of Vrede in the Free State, the R280-million project aimed to empower black farmers in the region. However, bank statements reveal that no payments were made to the intended black beneficiaries. Instead, the dairy farm allegedly served as a front to funnel money to India.
Maree was asked to assess SARS documents following his testimony before the Zondo commission.
During Maree’s cross-examination, Vasram and Indurjeeth’s lawyers criticised Maree’s assessment, labelling it as an opinion lacking evidence.
They said Maree had not travelled to the Estina farm to do further assessments or take images of the state of equipment at the time of compilation of his assessment report. The defence further argued that the plant was not second-hand and was bought new.
Read more in Daily Maverick: Guptas’ R280m dairy heist victims get R1,300 gift card and 5kg meat hamper
A second witness before the court on Wednesday, Parbhookumarn Moodley, a SARS employee, told the court that SARS requested information from customs and India on the import of the plant.
Some of the overpriced dairy plant equipment from India that was claimed to be new. (Photos: Supplied)
Moodley said that nine containers were imported and described as dairy machinery and milking machines. However, a container was missing on the bill of lading (a detailed receipt given by the master of the ship to the person consigning the goods).
The defence criticised Moodley’s testimony, stating that it was irrelevant to the scope of the trial in this case.
Before adjourning the court and postponing the case to 11-14 November 2024, the State put before the court that it had five more witnesses.
The presiding magistrate expressed frustration over the case’s prolonged duration, stating, “I don’t want to take the matter to next year, it has been dragging for too long.” DM
Daily Maverick’s journalism is funded by the contributions of our Maverick Insider members. If you appreciate our work, then join our membership community. Defending Democracy is an everyday effort. Be part of it. Become a Maverick Insider.