RBI

RBI allows Kotak Mahindra Bank MD/CEO Uday Kotak to remain on Board of ILFSL

RBI allows Kotak Mahindra Bank Managing Director and CEO Uday Kotak to remain on Board of ILFSL as NED up to 02.10.2021
 
MINISTRY OF FINANCE
(Department of Financial Services)
 
NOTIFICATION
 
New Delhi, the 23rd September 2020
 
S.O. 3238(E).—Whereas, sub-clause (i) of clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 10 of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 (10 of 1949) (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), prohibits a banking company to be managed by any person who is a director of any other company not being (a) a subsidiary of the banking company, or (b) a company registered under section 25 of the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956);
 
And whereas, the proviso to the said sub-clause (i) of clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 10 of the said Act provides that the prohibition in the said sub-clause shall not apply in respect of any such director for a temporary period not exceeding three months or such further period not exceeding nine months as the Reserve Bank of India may allow;
 
And whereas, the Reserve Bank of India allowed Shri Uday Kotak, Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer of Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited to be on the Board of Infrastructure Leasing and Financial Services Limited as its Non-executive Director, initially for a period of three months and subsequently for a further period of nine months, under the above provisions of the said Act, till 2nd day of October, 2019;
 
And whereas, section 53 of the said Act empowers the Central Government, on the recommendation of the Reserve Bank of India, to declare, by notification in the Official Gazette, that any or all of the provisions of the said Act shall not apply to any banking company or institution or to any class of banking companies either generally or for such period as may be specified;
 
And whereas, the Central Government, on the recommendations of the Reserve Bank of India, had considered it necessary to grant exemption to Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited from application of sub-clause (i) of clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 10 of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 in so far as it relates to Shri Uday Kotak, Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer of Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited being on the Board of Infrastructure Leasing and Financial Services Limited as its Non-executive Director, for a further period of one year with effect from the 3rdday of October, 2019 and issued a notification number S.O. 3584 (E), dated the 1st October, 2019, Published in the Gazette of India, Part II, Section 3, sub –section (ii), dated the 1st October, 2019, to that effect and the exemption so granted is expiring on 2nd October, 2020;
 
And whereas, the Central Government, on the recommendations of the Reserve Bank of India, has considered it necessary to grant the said exemption to Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited for a further period of one year with effect from the 3rdday of October, 2020.
 
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (1) of section 53 of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, the Central Government, on the recommendation of the Reserve Bank of India, hereby declare that the provisions of sub-clause (i) of clause (c) of sub-section (1) of section 10 of the said Act shall not apply to Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited in so far as it relates to its Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer Shri Uday Kotak being on Board of Infrastructure Leasing and Financial Services Limited as its Non-executive Director for a period up to the 2nd day of October, 2021.
 
[F. No. 7/129/2019-BOA-I]
 
AMIT AGRAWAL, Jt. Secy
 
Share

Recent Posts

  • Income Tax

Information in loose papers not corroborated with assessee, can’t be said to belong to assessee

When information contained in loose papers not corroborated with assessee, there is absolutely no room for presumption that it belongs…

1 day ago
  • Income Tax

Setting aside remand order of CIT(A) without interfering with direction to delete addition, did not revive AO’s order

When CIT(A) order to remand case to AO was set aside without interfering with direction to delete addition, order of…

1 day ago
  • arbitration

Whether Arbitral Tribunal can grant a prohibited claim in a contract – Larger Bench to decide

Whether a prohibited claim in a contract applies only to the employer and not to the Arbitral Tribunal – Matter…

2 days ago
  • contract-law

Court can examine contractual employee termination on sole ground of ineligibility

Where a contractual employee is terminated on the sole ground of ineligibility, the Court is entitled to examine its correctness…

2 days ago
  • EPFO

Upon deceased acquiring family, as specified earlier GPF nomination became invalid – SC

Upon deceased acquiring family, GPF nomination in favour of mother became invalid and in absence of fresh nomination, mother and…

2 days ago
  • GST

Auto Suspension of GST Registration due to Non-Furnishing of Bank Account Details

GSTN Advisory on Auto Suspension of GST Registration due to Non-Furnishing of Bank Account Details as per Rule 10A As…

2 days ago