C Escrows and Specific Capital Account Regulations - A Brief Study

7/31/2021 Escrows and Specific Capital Account Regulations – A Brief Study
Hi, NLU Nagpur Logout
BOOKMARKS TOP STORIES NEWS UPDATES COLUMNS INTERVIEWS


FOREIGN/INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENT RTI KNOW THE LAW VIDEOS SPONSORED
ROUND UPS
LAW SCHOOL CORNER JOB UPDATES BOOK REVIEWS EVENTS CORNER LAWYERS & LAW
FIRMS CARTOONS SC JUDGMENTS लाइव लॉ हिंदी

Home / Columns / Escrows and Specific...
COLUMNS
Escrows and Specific Capital Account

Regulations – A Brief Study
Dhruv Desai 21 July 2021 4:56 PM
SHARE THIS -
https://elibrary.nlunagpur.ac.in:2054/columns/reserve-bank-of-india-escrow-accounts-fema-regulations-177896 1/24
Every country that seeks Foreign Investment in a global and competitive market has to
ensure that, its laws/ regulations are in sync with the ground realities and
expectations of the global and domestic business community, while keeping in mind
the national interest. This article seeks to study specific FEMA regulations, specifically
those regulations where escrow accounts may have a role to play, with the intent of
suggesting modifications/ alternatives basis transactional experience of the author,
for simplifying connected transactions.
Also Read - The Larger Issue Of Copyright Claims In Film Industry
While the primary focus of this article is on escrows in cross border deals and
examines the need for escrows due to singular focus on seamless exchange of
consideration, some views have also been shared on matters incidental to cross
border transactions. The attempt is to review specific provisions of various
regulations inter alia, the Foreign Exchange Management (Non-Debt Instruments)
Rules, 2019 ("Non-Debt Rules"); the Foreign Exchange Management (Mode of
Payment and Reporting of Non-Debt Instruments) Regulations, 2019; Foreign
Exchange Management (Deposit) Regulations, 2016 ("Deposit Regulations" / "FEMA
5(R)"); and inter alia the Master Direction - External Commercial Borrowings, Trade
Credits and Structured Obligations ("ECB Master Directions") issued by the
Government of India[1] / Reserve Bank of India ("RBI" / "Regulator") in accordance with
the powers conferred under the Foreign Exchange and Management Act, 1999
("FEMA"). This article attempts to look for ways in which certainty could be infused in
some of the existing regulations set out below. Also, this article attempts to provide
alternate views for helping parties better manage specific Capital Account[2]
transactions – to help commercial enterprises attract more investments in an ever
growing and competitive market economy.
Also Read - IBC - The Journey So Far – Part I
Deposit Regulations & Escrows:
One of the main benefits of an escrow account in capital account transactions is, to
help assuage any concerns of the buyer (re. financial risk) and to facilitate the
payment mechanism. Escrow, as a payment mechanism, ensures that the transfer of
consideration, as adumbrated under share purchase agreement or underlying
transactional documents, is adhered. Despite this benefit, it appears that, escrows are
still underutilised as a risk mitigator in the Indian market.
Also Read - Insolvency Law in Review – June 2021
To facilitate ease of access to escrow as a mechanism, it is suggested that, point 2 of
Schedule 5 of the Deposit Regulation may be amended to permit other escrows
accounts as well – more particularly specified in this article.[3] Considering that the
RBI has already delegated various supervisory functions to AD Banks, it would only be
appropriate that the supervision of the below mentioned escrow accounts (opening,
operation, and closing) also be delegated to Authorized Dealer Category-I Banks (AD
Cat-I Banks).
Also Read - Requirement For A Stronger Regulatory Regime
Escrow For ODI Transactions (Under General Permission):
The extant Foreign Exchange Management (Transfer or Issue of Any Foreign Security)
(Amendment) Regulations, 2004 ("FEMA 120") read with Master Direction – Direct
Investment by Residents in Joint Venture (JV) / Wholly Owned Subsidiary (WOS)
Abroad ("ODI Regulations") doesn't allow any deferral for payment of consideration
nor does it allow for opening of escrow accounts in India for any ODI transaction
under general permission. While RBI may be open to welcome applications (reviewed/
scrutinised by an AD Bank) for seeking permission for allowing such deferral or
escrow account opening within India or outside, it would certainly facilitate and
expedite such transactions, if general permission is already in place (with required
caveats/ conditions for better regulation). This would help save precious time
otherwise spent in the drafting, review and approval of such applications to RBI.
The RBI could consider allowing, under general permission, deferral of consideration,
as well as the option of keeping part of the total consideration in an escrow account
within India for ODI transactions. The said deferral/ escrow could mirror the guidance
for escrows under FDI transactions with the exception that: (a) escrow account be
allowed to be opened for a period of 3 years[4] (from the date of opening); (b) Indian
Party (as defined in the ODI Regulations) is in compliance with Regulation 6 of the
FEMA 120 dated July 07, 2004 (as amended from time to time); (c) no credit facilities
be availed against the balance in the said escrow account; and (d) escrow be non-
interest bearing.
Escrow Account For External Commercial Borrowing ("ECB") Transactions:
The extent ECB Master Direction in Para 7.5 (Security for raising ECB) and more
particularly Point (iii) (b) thereof (Creation of Charge over Financial Securities) seems
to allow the opening of Rupee Accounts also in the form of escrow accounts or debt
service reserve accounts (DSRA) for servicing/ securing ECB loan payments.
The said provision doesn't explicitly state anything about what conditions will govern
the opening, operation or closing of such escrow or DSRA accounts, but needless to
say, if the Overseas Lender is not allowed to be a named party to the escrow
agreement/ DSRA agreement then exclusive control of the ECB borrower over such
accounts may frustrate the purpose of allowing such escrow / DSRA accounts.
Having said this and considering that, guidance regarding opening, operation and
closing of escrow accounts (where a non-resident is a named party) is covered by the
Deposit Regulations, an amendment to the said Deposit Regulations may be
considered. This point can be addressed by incorporating a written provision explicitly
allowing Overseas Lenders/ Overseas Security Trustee to be named party in such an
escrow/ DSRA account agreements thereby removing the ambiguity on whether an
Overseas Lender / Overseas Security Trustee can be a named party to such an escrow
or DSRA agreement in connection with ECB transactions. This can further be fortified
by allowing the AD Banks to check if it is a bonafide transaction and allow such
escrows/ DSRA if it is compliant with the regulations.
Such an escrow/ DSRA where the Overseas Lender / Overseas Security Trustee is
allowed to be a named party has the following advantages:
• Improves confidence of the lender: Lender gets visibility and control on the
borrower's receivables thereby ensuring timely repayable of loan.
• Removes the requirement of the Borrower to share regular proofs of payment

receipts if all the payments are routed to/ through the said escrow/ DSRA
account.
• Opens up access points within global debt markets for domestic corporates.
Account Bank Construct To Facilitate Trade Payments:
Another illustration of how account bank account (sometimes referred to as trade
escrow account) could reshape age-old payment mechanism is by deployment of
Trade Account Bank structure. Trade (international or domestic) is something that will
always continue in some shape or form – it is the author's view that maybe escrows/
account bank construct could play a role here as well. The payment mechanisms e.g.
Letter of Credit, Standby Letter of Credit, Bank Guarantees etc. could be replaced by
trade escrows.
Those who are unable to secure such non-fund based facilities from their bankers,
could provide required payment assurance to their counterparties through this
mechanism.
Therefore, where "A" USA supplies goods to "B" India, which goods are then sold by "B"
India to "C" India (after value addition by "B" India) – the payment to "A" USA can be
assured through an account mechanism as well. This can be addressed if the
Regulator, under general permission, allows account bank accounts to be opened by
AD Cat-I Banks in the name of "B" India.
Permitted Credit: (a) Deposit by "C" India against invoices raised; and/ or (b) Deposit
by "B" India.
Permitted Debits: (a) Payment to "A" USA; and/ or (b) Payment to current account of B
India (in India).
Parties to the Account Bank Agreement shall be "A" USA; "B" India; and the Account
Bank (i.e. any AD Cat-I Bank that could also review the trade documents and release
payment after checking compliance with the regulations governing such trade
payments.
Such account bank structure may help a new trader or start-up in the place of "B" India
– who may not easily find a banker to support any Factoring or LC/ SBLC requirement.
There is also the possibility that "C" India may not want to acknowledge assignment of
rights by "B" India to any banker.
A simpler variation to the above construct may be possible if "C" India happens to be a
group company or subsidiary of "A" USA. Also, if permitted, a similar construct could
be explored for export related transactions. It seems that, one of the main benefits for
the Indian party in such instances could be the reduction of cost of funds, which may
in turn help price the goods or services better.
Escrow Period For FDI Transactions:
The objective of law/ regulation, in this context, is to facilitate or augment genuine
business requirements, keeping in line with the best interest of the nation. It will
certainly help if a study is undertaken to see what other variations of escrows could
genuinely help balance both the commercial/ business needs of the market and the
objectives that foreign exchange regulations aim to achieve.
In this regard, it may be said that, RBI's Authorised Persons Directive Circular 58 of
2011 (May 02, 2011) was certainly a good step towards liberalising the conditions and
granting general permission for 6 (six) months for opening escrow accounts with a
non-resident entity/person as a named party (the said six months began from the date
of opening of escrow account). Circular 58 was superseded by the Deposit
Regulations.[5] The Deposit Regulations also allows another escrow of 18 months
(from the date of the Transfer Agreement (SPA) - with a non-resident entity/person as
a named party.
While Point 2(d) of Schedule 5 of the Deposit Regulation allows parties to an escrow
agreement to approach RBI (through AD Banker) to seek an extension for any period
beyond 6 months, no such explicit provision has been made for seeking extension of a
period beyond 18 months (in Point 2(e) of Schedule 5 of FEMA 5(R)). It is humbly
submitted that, such explicit language allowing parties to make an application be
considered for addition in in Point 2(e) of Schedule 5 of FEMA 5(R) by the Regulator in
their next review.
Such restrictions on period of escrow (i.e. maximum period of 6/ 18 months) is
dehors the laws of countries like United Kingdom, USA, Singapore, or the EU. It is not a
practice in any of the top 10 free market economies. If the objective is to be at par
with the global competition, maybe one could try to mould the capital account
regulations in line with the practice prevalent in these jurisdictions. Many parties in
M&A transactions seek 2 to 7 years deferral of consideration for addressing taxation
or capital adjustment clauses in their underlying transfer agreements. Some parties
prefer making an application to the regulator, while other mould their transfer
agreements around the present construct of 18 months.
Alternatively, the Regulator could consider allowing the period of 18 months[7] to
commence from the date of opening of escrow account because invariably there will
always some time lag between the execution of the actual Transfer Agreement and
the opening of the escrow account. The parties have to address several conditions
precedent (CPs) before they begin to address the payment mechanism (escrow). This
may help give some immediate relief while the overall period enhancement from 18
months to 3 years can be deliberated.
Noting the intent behind the original framework, perhaps the meter clock could be
reset by the Regulator with relative ease. The time of opening of an escrow account
may be an easy update, as the Regulator has already allowed the seller to give an
indemnity undertaking for 25% of the total consideration for a period of 18 months
from the date of receipt of full consideration. Any indemnity undertaking without
assurance of escrow behind it, may easily run into litigation. This can be addressed by
mutually acceptable contractual provisions of SPA and Escrow. [Regulation 9(6) of the
Non-Debt Rules: "In case of transfer of equity instruments between a person resident
in India and a person resident outside India, an amount not exceeding twenty five
percent of the total consideration… (iii) may be indemnified by the seller for a period
not exceeding eighteen months from the date of the payment of the full consideration,
if the total consideration has been paid by the buyer to the seller] [Emphasis added]
It is suggested that, if the aforesaid is not possible, then in the least, the Regulator
may consider substituting the word "or" with "and/ or" at the end of Regulation 9(6)(i)
and (ii) of the Non-Debt Rules.
Escrow For Earmarking More Than 25% Of Total Consideration And Remittance
Under General Permission Of Indemnity Payment Pursuant To Court Order:
The Regulator's guidance on payment of Fair Market Value (FMV) in capital account
transactions, while being helpful, could be further deliberated basis the commercial
realities prevalent. The objective is to protect the interest of the resident party, but if
the objective is also to augment investor confidence, then maybe an additional proviso
could be considered in connection herewith. Perhaps the Regulator could, under
general permission, allow payment (clawback or otherwise) of more than 25% of the
total consideration where the investor has obtained a court order and an AD Banker
has satisfied itself of the bonafide nature of the transaction.
Considering that buyers and sellers in M&A transactions are quite commercially
mature and savvy, it is suggested that escrows/ deferral of consideration or clawback
of consideration should be subject to contractual agreement. In this context, the
Regulator could consider allowing more than 25% to be deferred for a period of 3
years. Further, a consequential review of the Pricing Guidelines may also be
undertaken.
Also, it is observed that, several investors do not prefer the approval route on account
of the time required in making an application, and the time required to get a definitive
answer,. It is humbly submitted that maybe the time for review/ approval could be
defined e.g.: rejection/ approval decision be conveyed with some rational within 20
working days from the date of submission of the application through an AD. Breach of
law should always be prohibited; but liberty for deal structuring (sans opaqueness)
should be allowed.
Where FDI Does Not Fall (Clawback Terms Of SPA, Subject To Pricing Guidelines
Being Adhered):
A minor proviso could be added in Point 2(b)(ii) (read with Point 8) of Schedule 5 of
FEMA 5(R) to also allow debits in the escrow account for partial/ complete remittance
of funds in the said account for clawback, or otherwise where there is no failure/ non-
materialisation of FDI transactions; but just partial or complete clawback is proposed

in line with (a) the provisions of Transfer Agreement and (b) Point 9(6) of the Non-
Debt Rules. Suggest that an explicit provision will be helpful here.
Escrows For LLP/ Invit/ REITs:
Since general permission has been granted by RBI for Non-Resident (NR) – Resident
(R) transfer of shares of an Indian Company, as clarified in Schedule 5 of FEMA 5(R),
granting similar general permission for allowing escrow accounts in connection with
transactions involving shares/ units of LLPs/ INVIT/ REITs may be considered by the
Regulator. Note: There seems to be no rationale provided in the current regulations for
differential treatment towards these entities.
Also, it will be helpful if the definition of "Capital Instruments" under FEMA 5(R) is
revised to help ensure proper cross referencing with "Equity Instruments" under Non-
Debt Rules and the definition of equity instruments (or capital instruments) be
modified to also include LLP/ INVIT/ REIT for such escrows.
Reporting Requirements:
With the increase of FDI inflow in India, one may need to consider the associated
reporting requirements. It is suggested that, the next step in making the process of
investment easier could be in relation to the reporting of such FDI transactions.
It is suggested that the following points be considered in the next review of Reporting
Guidelines:
FC-TRS ó DI Interface: The Form FC-TRS interface be modified/ updated to
automatically capture Foreign Owned and Operated Company ("FOCC") investments
i.e.: when FOCC buys a resident company's shares from a non-resident. This will
address the additional requirement of filing Form DI which one would file after the
Form FC-TRS is reported. Alternatively, it could be suggested that, maybe the RBI
could explicitly state in the Master Direction on Reporting that when a FOCC buys
shares of an Indian company from a non-resident, no Form DI will have to be filed by
the FOCC.
FC-TRS and FC-GPR: Form FC-TRS (for transfer of shares) and FC-GPR (for allotment
of shares) could be revised to all add the consent letter or extract of SPA/ SSA
requirements therein. Possibly, a field in the Form to add comments, if any could also
help. This modification of the Form will remove few physical pages that need to be
printed and signed by the parties. Retaining requirement of attaching the following
documents would certainly be supported by the market: valuation reports, board
resolutions of the parties involved, and a no-objection certificate (NOC) (i.e. on-behalf
payment/ Nominee etc.).
FC-TRS: An express provision could be included in the Form FC-TRS reporting
guidelines to allow one seller to undertake FC-TRS filing for all other sellers, when all
of these sellers are selling the capital instruments of the same Indian company to the
same buyer.
Single Window For FDI/ ODI/ ECB Application:
With due regard to the nature of structured transactions, it would certainly be helpful if
the RBI could consider opening a single window for receiving, reviewing and approving
(or rejecting) various applications under approval route for FDI/ ODI/ ECB
transactions. If possible, maybe a scanned copy of the client application, along with
the covering letter of the AD Banker to such single-window will help expedite the
application and review process. Even a dedicated and specialised single department/
team within RBI - addressing such FDI/ ODI/ ECB applications will help process the
applications and possibly bring more clarity for the parties involved and their
respective deal structures. Also, with all due respect to the citizens' charter, perhaps
the number of days for such review could be crystalised at 20 working days, this will
help avoid follow-up/ queries from clients or AD Banks.
Standalone Master Direction For Escrow/ Trust Retention Account/ Account Bank/
DSRA:
While there are several touch points in the FEMA guidelines for addressing escrows, it
be suggested that a standalone Master Direction on Escrow/ Trust Retention
Account/ Account Bank/ DSRA could be circulated for better and uniform
understanding of all market participants. This could be similar to other Master
Directions such as the Master Direction on Foreign Investment.
Seeking More Clarity On Few Points:
Subscription of Share Warrants of unlisted India companies:
The explanation (i) under the definition of the term "equity instruments" re. Non-Debt
Rules seems to state that: "Share Warrants" are those issued by an Indian company in
accordance with the regulations by the Securities and Exchange Board of India. This is
also captured in Point 4.4.1 of the Master Direction – Foreign Investment in India.[9]
Though Point 4.1 of the same Master Direction also reads as follows: An Indian
company is permitted to receive foreign investment by issuing capital instruments to

the investor. The capital instruments are equity shares, debentures, preference shares
and share warrants issued by the Indian company.
It is suggested that the Regulator may please consider adding an express provision to
allow unlisted Indian companies to issue share warrants to non-residents.
Purchase of shares of unlisted Indian company by NRI/OCI on Repatriation basis:
While the market has interpreted that an NRI may buy shares of an unlisted Indian
company on repatriation basis, maybe an explicit provision could be added in
Regulation 12(1) (under Chapter V) as well as in Schedule III of the Non-Debt Rules to
ensure presence of explicit general permission allowing NRI to purchase of shares of
an unlisted Indian company as well.
NB: Point 7.3.1 of the Master Direction on Foreign Direct Investment[10] confirms that
NRI can hold (and therefore sell) shares of Indian company on repatriation basis]
NB: Point 4.1 of the Consolidated FDI Policy[11] states as follows: "…In case the buyer
is an NRI, the payment may be made by way of debit to his NRE/FCNR (B) accounts.
However, if the shares are acquired on non-repatriation basis by NRI, the consideration
shall be remitted to India through normal banking channel or paid out of funds held in
NRE/FCNR (B)/NRO accounts."
Definition of 'listed Indian company':
Considering that unlisted companies can also list their debt instruments, it is
submitted that, if possible, the Regulator may consider revisiting the definition of
listed Indian company and keep the reference to companies whose debt instruments
are listed under a separate heading - as pricing/valuation of unlisted companies may
be impacted in other transactions in case an incorrect interpretation is drawn.
Final Remarks:
The Regulator has been helpful in ensuring that best practices in capital account
transactions are adopted. However, given that the aforesaid regulations are issued
under specific powers granted to Regulator under FEMA, it is befitting that the law/
regulation governing such FDI/ODI/ECB transactions are all encompassing, specific,
and explicit. As certainty continues to be the mother of repose, it will be helpful if
there is less room kept for interpretation, as it will help all parties concerned in the
long run. It is recommended that a wider consult with other market participants
(including on-ground transaction managers) to help simplify the regulations (by end
user) with explicit elaboration of requirements may be equally helpful in attracting
more foreign investments in India.
The views expressed here are shared to evoke further review and discussion from a
wider group, including transactional lawyers and on-ground transaction managers.
One hopes that popular opinion on these points will help move the discussion in the
right direction. The objective is to help commercial transactions, ensuring: (a) they
remain within the legal framework, and (b) that the regulations are in step with the
market requirement.
Author is a lawyer with cross border transactional banking experience of more than
10 years
The views are personal and do not reflect the views of any organisation or firm.
[1] NB: Non-Debt Rules and the Foreign Exchange Management (Mode of Payment
and Reporting of Non-Debt Instruments) Regulations, 2019 were issued by the Central
Government.
[2] Foreign Exchange Management (Permissible Capital Account Transactions)
Regulations, 2000.
[3] See – Point 2(d) and (e) of Schedule 5 of Deposit Regulations for specifics on
which two escrow accounts are permitted.
[4] Inter alia, addressing taxation or capital adjustment clauses in their underlying
transfer agreements.
[5] FEMA 5(R) was issued first on April 01, 2016. Please see Point 2 (d) of Schedule 5
of FEMA 5(R).
[6] Please see Point 2 (e) of Schedule 5 of FEMA 5(R).
[7] ibid
[8] FED Master Direction No. 11/2017-18.
[9] FED Master Direction No. 11/2017-18.
[10] ibid
[11] https://dipp.gov.in/sites/default/files/FDI-PolicyCircular-2020-
29October2020_1.pdf
[12] See – Regulation 2(ag) of Non-Debt Rules: "listed Indian company" means an
Indian company which has any of its equity instruments or debt instruments listed on
a recognised stock exchange in India and the expression "unlisted Indian company"
shall be construed accordingly.
TAGS RESERVE BANK OF INDIA (RBI) ESCROW ACCOUNTS FEMA REGULATIONS
CROSS BORDER TRANSACTIONS FDI TRANSACTIONS DEPOSIT REGULATIONS
FOREIGN INVESTMENT FOREIGN EXCHANGE MANAGEMENT (NON-DEBT INSTRUMENTS) RULES
EXTERNAL COMMERCIAL BORROWING (“ECB”) TRANSACTIONS
loading....
+ VIEW MORE
SIMILAR POSTS
The Larger Issue Of IBC - The Journey So Far – Insolvency Law in Review –
Copyright Claims In Film Part I June 2021
Industry
31 July 2021 3:30 PM 31 July 2021 12:27 PM 29 July 2021 6:50 PM
Requirement For A Stronger In Praise Of The CLAT India's Merger And

Regulatory Regime Consortium: A Visually Acquisition Regime: The
Challenged Candidates Journey So Far
Lens
29 July 2021 5:18 PM 29 July 2021 12:20 PM 28 July 2021 5:55 PM
Legal History Of Sedition -

HRERA Regulations For Personal Data Protection
IPC 124A
Sale Of Apartments On The Bill & The Surveillance
Basis Of Carpet Area Framework In India
28 July 2021 9:42 AM 27 July 2021 3:06 PM 27 July 2021 9:14 AM
CLAT Exam - 2021 (UG) A Letter To CLAT Pegasus Snooping & Gogoi
Analysis Consortium Saga : Need For Supreme
Court To Reopen Suo Motu
Case
26 July 2021 11:33 AM 25 July 2021 2:21 PM 25 July 2021 11:45 AM
WEBINARS + MORE
[TODAY AT 5PM] Discussion On DEMOCRACY, DISSENT AND DRACONIAN LAW- Should

UAPA & Sedition Have A Place In Our Statute Books?
+ MORE
LAW FIRMS
Argus Partners Advises Kotak Investment Advisors Limited In Real Estate Investment Start-
Up, Strata In Their Series A fund-Raising Of $6 Million
+ MORE
LATEST NEWS
1 [Live-In] "Court Is Guardian Of Tender Aged Girls Who File Protection Plea
Without Knowing The Consequences": HC Directs Magistrate To Check If Girl Is
Capable Of Taking Decision
2 Senior, Even Though Less Meritorious, Shall Have Priority: Supreme Court
Explains Seniority Cum Merit Principle For Promotion
3 Provision Declared Unconstitutional Doesn't Get Wiped Out From Statute Book;
Only Becomes Unenforceable; Can Be Re-Enforced Once Defects Are Cured :
Delhi High Court
"Required To Ascertain As To Who Prepared Forged Bail Order": Delhi High

Court Denies Anticipatory Bail To Woman

4
5 Delhi High Court Seeks GNCTD's Reply On Qualification Prescribed For Signing
Of Laboratory Reports By Medical Practitioners
6 'At Least 18% Indians Victims ' : Plea In Supreme Court Seeks Guidelines To
Curb Online Banking Frauds
7 'Conflicting Judgments By High Courts": Supreme Court Issues Notice On Plea

Challenging Allahabad HC Order On Rule 9 Of Motor Vehicles Rules
8 COVID 19- Himachal Pradesh HC Seeks Response On Availability Of Medical

Facilities In Every District; Number Of Doctors & Paramedical Staff
लाइव लॉ हिंदी + MORE
'कम से कम 18 प्रतिशत भारतीय पीड़ित': ऑनलाइन बैंकिं ग धोखाधड़ी को रोकने के लिए दिशानिर्देश
जारी करने की मांग, सुप्रीम कोर्ट में याचिका
सुप्रीम कोर्ट वीकली राउंड अप: जानिए सुप्रीम कोर्ट में कै सा रहा पिछला सप्ताह
COVID -19 पीड़ितों के परिवारों के लिए अनुग्रह मुआवजे के आदेश पर पुनर्विचार के लिए सुप्रीम कोर्ट में
तीसरे पक्ष की पुनर्विचार याचिका
इलाहाबाद हाईकोर्ट में अपीलें काफी समय से लंबित : सुप्रीम कोर्ट निपटान के लिए मानदंड निर्धारित
करे गा
सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने टीकाकरण नीति के खिलाफ पोस्टर लगाने पर दर्ज एफआईआर रद्द करने की मांग वाली
याचिका पर सुनवाई करने से इनकार किया
+ MORE
INTERNATIONAL
1 Nepal Supreme Court Constitution Bench Reinstates Dissolved House Of

Representatives
2 George Floyd Murder: Ex-Police Officer Derek Chauvin Sentenced To 22.5 Years
In Prison
3 Right To Life Is The Mother Of All Rights: Malawi Supreme Court Holds Death
Penalty Unconstitutional
4 Google v. Oracle : Perspectives on Copyright, Fair Use and Industry Implications

ENVIRONMENT + MORE
1 NGT Pulls Up Delhi Jal Board For Failing To Control Odour From A Sewage
Treatment Plant, Imposes Rs. 5 Lakh Per Month Cost Till Compliance
2 [Pollution Of Ganga Tributaries In Varanasi] NGT Constitutes Independent

Monitoring Committee For Restoration And Rejuvenation Of Rivers Varuna And
Assi
3 Industrial Units Cannot Operate Without Prior Environment Clearance, State Has
No Power To Exempt Requirement Of Prior EC: NGT
4 Juhi Chawla Moves Delhi High Court Against Roll-Out Of 5G Telecom Services
JOB UPDATES
1. Deputy Director Vacancy At Ministry Of Home Affairs (MHA), NATGRID, Delhi [Apply By
12th September 2021]
2. Deputy Director (UA-Representative) Vacancy At Ministry Of Home Affairs (MHA),

NATGRID, Delhi [Apply By 12th September 2021]
3. Deputy Director (RM-FIU) Vacancy At Ministry Of Home Affairs (MHA), NATGRID, Delhi
[Apply By 12th September 2021]
4. Multiple Teaching, Non-Teaching Positions Vacancy At RGNUL, Punjab [Apply By 2nd

August 2021]
5. Andhra Pradesh Civil Judge (Junior Division) Recruitment 2021: [Apply By 20th August
2021]
+ VIEW MORE
JUST ENTER YOUR EMAIL FOR THE

LIVELAW DAILY NEWS BRIEFING BY
EMAIL ALL THE DAY'S HEADLINES AND
HIGHLIGHTS FROM LIVELAW, DIRECT
TO YOU EVERY MORNING
NEWSLETTERS
DIRECTLY IN YOUR MAILBOX
Enter Your Email
Submit
TOP STORIES KNOW THE LAW
NEWS UPDATE LAW FIRMS
COLUMNS JOB UPDATES
INTERVIEWS BOOK REVIEWS
INTERNATIONAL EVENTS CORNER
RTI UPDATES COVER STORY
EDITOR'S PICK PLACEMENTS
LAW SCHOOL CORNER SCHOLARSHIPS
ARTICLES SEMINARS
CALL FOR PAPERS ENVIRONMENT
COMPETITIONS BOOK REVIEWS
INTERNSHIPS
© All Rights Reserved @LiveLaw
Powered By Hocalwire
Who We Are Careers Advertise With Us Contact Us Privacy Policy Terms And Conditions


C Escrows and Specific Capital Account Regulations - A Brief Study

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

C Escrows and Specific Capital Account Regulations - A Brief Study

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

7/31/2021 Escrows and Specific Capital Account Regulations – A Brief Study

Hi, NLU Nagpur Logout

BOOKMARKS TOP STORIES NEWS UPDATES COLUMNS INTERVIEWS

Escrows and Specific Capital Account

suggesting modifications/ alternatives basis transactional experience of the author,

for simplifying connected transactions.

Also Read - The Larger Issue Of Copyright Claims In Film Industry

border transactions. The attempt is to review specific provisions of various

regulations inter alia, the Foreign Exchange Management (Non-Debt Instruments)

Rules, 2019 ("Non-Debt Rules"); the Foreign Exchange Management (Mode of

Payment and Reporting of Non-Debt Instruments) Regulations, 2019; Foreign

Exchange Management (Deposit) Regulations, 2016 ("Deposit Regulations" / "FEMA

Credits and Structured Obligations ("ECB Master Directions") issued by the

Government of India[1] / Reserve Bank of India ("RBI" / "Regulator") in accordance with

transactions – to help commercial enterprises attract more investments in an ever

growing and competitive market economy.

Also Read - IBC - The Journey So Far – Part I

Deposit Regulations & Escrows:

payment mechanism. Escrow, as a payment mechanism, ensures that the transfer of

consideration, as adumbrated under share purchase agreement or underlying

still underutilised as a risk mitigator in the Indian market.

Also Read - Insolvency Law in Review – June 2021

To facilitate ease of access to escrow as a mechanism, it is suggested that, point 2 of

Schedule 5 of the Deposit Regulation may be amended to permit other escrows

Also Read - Requirement For A Stronger Regulatory Regime

Escrow For ODI Transactions (Under General Permission):

Investment by Residents in Joint Venture (JV) / Wholly Owned Subsidiary (WOS)

scrutinised by an AD Bank) for seeking permission for allowing such deferral or

expedite such transactions, if general permission is already in place (with required

Escrow Account For External Commercial Borrowing ("ECB") Transactions:

closing of escrow accounts (where a non-resident is a named party) is covered by the

Deposit Regulations, an amendment to the said Deposit Regulations may be

considered. This point can be addressed by incorporating a written provision explicitly

allowing Overseas Lenders/ Overseas Security Trustee to be named party in such an

escrow/ DSRA account agreements thereby removing the ambiguity on whether an

by allowing the AD Banks to check if it is a bonafide transaction and allow such

escrows/ DSRA if it is compliant with the regulations.

allowed to be a named party has the following advantages:

• Removes the requirement of the Borrower to share regular proofs of payment

Account Bank Construct To Facilitate Trade Payments:

Another illustration of how account bank account (sometimes referred to as trade

escrow account) could reshape age-old payment mechanism is by deployment of

could provide required payment assurance to their counterparties through this

assured through an account mechanism as well. This can be addressed if the

Regulator, under general permission, allows account bank accounts to be opened by

AD Cat-I Banks in the name of "B" India.

India (in India).

rights by "B" India to any banker.

in turn help price the goods or services better.

Escrow Period For FDI Transactions:

The objective of law/ regulation, in this context, is to facilitate or augment genuine

objectives that foreign exchange regulations aim to achieve.

of opening of escrow account). Circular 58 was superseded by the Deposit

Regulations.[5] The Deposit Regulations also allows another escrow of 18 months

submitted that, such explicit language allowing parties to make an application be

their next review.

Such restrictions on period of escrow (i.e. maximum period of 6/ 18 months) is

M&A transactions seek 2 to 7 years deferral of consideration for addressing taxation

or capital adjustment clauses in their underlying transfer agreements. Some parties

agreements around the present construct of 18 months.

Alternatively, the Regulator could consider allowing the period of 18 months[7] to

months to 3 years can be deliberated.

and (ii) of the Non-Debt Rules.