"There cannot be any discrimination against outward investment from India," Commerce and Industry Minister Kamal Nath told PTI.

He said in an era of globalisation, "trade and investment is a two-way street". Orient Express had cited possible erosion in value of its premium brands as reason for turning down the offer for a tie-up with the "predominantly Indian" chain.

"We do not believe that there is a strategic fit between your predominantly domestic Indian hotel chain and our global portfolio of luxury hotels," Orient Express CEO Paul White wrote to Indian Hotels vice-chairman R K Krishna Kumar.

Nath said at a time when Indian companies were making global acquisitions, such remarks represent "a mindset of the past. They have to see the architecture of the future".

Leading industry chambers also slammed the attitude of discrimination shown by US firms against India Inc. Assocham President Venugopal N Dhoot described Orient Express Hotels' reaction as its "arrogance toward one of India's most respected business houses". It was also biased against the country, he said.

A Ficci official said if Orient Express has spurned Tatas' offer, the loss is that of the US company. "Our hospitality firms know their business well" and added that remarks made by Orient Express could be due to their lack of experience in doing business with Indian firms. However, a CII spokesperson refused to comment on the issue.