Legal Implication of Business Transfer Agreement, by Legal Team, on 22nd May, 2017

Business restructuring is a comprehensive process be it financial or technological or market or organisational. There are various modes by way of which it can take place such as re-organisation of capita, compromise/arrangement, merger/amalgamation, demerger, acquisition/takeover, slump sale, strategic alliance and such other similar modes. The primary motive behind undertaking any such rearrangement would be to prosper both in size and profits. The corporate restructuring process can be either be by any of the much traversed gradual way or a much faster way of selling off the business undertaking. Read more

Accounting treatment of securitization transactions undertaken by financial entities in India

By Vijaylakshmi Agarwal & Kanishka Jain, (finserv@vinodkothari.com

1.     Introduction

Presently, the accounting treatment for securitization transaction is unclear and ambiguous despite a clear convergence with IFRS. The accounting principle for securitization was contained in AS 30 (based on IAS 39). The ICAI had originally promulgated AS 30 (based on IAS 39) in the year 2009, but was kept in abeyance, and subsequently repealed[1], while IND AS 109 is applicable from the year 2018. Therefore currently, there is no standard as such dealing with securitization for such companies on which IFRS is not applicable. Therefore for the interim period i.e. from 2015 to 2018, there are no standards governing the accounting for securitization in existence. Read more

Comparison of definition of Related Party as per AS -18 and IND -AS 24 by CS Vinita Nair

Several entities will be required to comply with Indian Accounting Standards (IND-AS) w.e.f. 1st April, 2017 with the comparatives for the periods ending on 31st March, 2017, or thereafter.

Accordingly, the related party transactions will also be governed by IND-AS 24. Therefore, it is extremely essential to update the list of related parties in terms of the expansive definition under IND- AS 24 as well as take stock of transactions undertaken with each of these entities in the immediately preceding financial year to get a sense of the nature of transactions in terms of frequency, volume, value and terms of such transactions. Listing of related party transactions as per the expanded ambit of the term will be relevant, for comparison purposes, even for last financial year, that is, 2016-17 as the comparative for the previous period will also be provided. The disclosures from directors and KMP will have to provide list of relatives considering the definition under Act, 2013 as well as definition of close members of the family of such director/ KMP and accordingly details of enterprises where such close members exercise control or significant influence.

In view of Regulation 23 of Listing Regulations, prior approval of Audit Committee is required for every related party transaction. This is required to be affirmed in the corporate governance report every quarter.  Several companies must have taken omnibus approval already in the last meeting of the Audit Committee held in February or March, 2017. Therefore, it is advisable to obtain omnibus approval in the ensuing Audit Committee scheduled to be held in April, May, 2017 for the transactions with the new related parties during FY 2017-18.

In case of unlisted companies or debt listed companies, those are also required to comply with the requirement of Audit Committee approval for all RPTs in terms of Section 177 (4). However, there is a difference as the definition of related party will be as per Act, 2013 but the transactions will not be limited to those covered under Section 188. In that case, IND-AS 24 RPTs will be only for the purpose of disclosure in financial statements as the Standard requires disclosure of related party relationships, transactions and outstanding balances, including commitments, in the consolidated and separate financial statements of a parent or investors with joint control of, or significant influence over, an investee presented in accordance with IND AS 110, Consolidated Financial Statements, or IND AS 27, Separate Financial Statements.

 

A brief comparison of definition of related party under AS-18 and IND-AS 24 is mentioned hereunder:

Particulars AS-18 IND-AS 24[1] Remarks
Relevant Definitions
Relative/ Close member of a person’s family Relative – in relation to an individual, means the spouse, son, daughter, brother, sister, father and mother who may be expected to influence, or be influenced by, that individual in his/her dealings
with the reporting enterprise.
Close members of the family of a person are those family members who may be expected to influence, or be influenced by, that person in their dealings with the entity including:

(a) that person’s children, spouse or domestic partner, brother, sister, father and mother;

(b) children of that person’s spouse or domestic partner; and

(c) dependants of that person or that person’s spouse or domestic partner.

Domestic partner is not defined. Further, children and dependants of person’s spouse or domestic partner are an addition to the list.
Key Management Personnel are those persons who have the authority and responsibility for planning, directing and controlling the activities of the reporting enterprise. are those persons having authority and responsibility for planning, directing and controlling the activities of the entity, directly or indirectly, including any director (whether executive or otherwise) of that entity.

 

Key managerial personnel ‘KMP’ referred in IND-AS 24 is in plural so as to mean a body of individuals which is the Board of directors of the company. It is different from the term ‘Key Managerial Personnel’ referred in Companies Act, 2013.

This is evident from the definition of related party which inter-alia includes a person who is a member of the key management personnel of the entity (or of a parent of the entity).

Hence, every director of the company including the independent directors, would be covered under the definition and their names are required to be disclosed in the financial statements.

Control[2] (a) ownership, directly or indirectly, of more than one

half of the voting power of an enterprise, or

(b) control of the composition of the board of directors in thecase of a company or of the composition of the corresponding governing body in case of any other enterprise, or

(c) a substantial interest in voting power and the power to direct, by statute or agreement, the financial and/or operating policies of the enterprise

IND-AS 110 provides for control as under:

6. An investor controls an investee when it is exposed, or has rights, to variable returns from its involvement with the investee and has the ability to affect those returns through its power over the investee.

7. Thus, an investor controls an investee if and only if the investor has all the following:

(a) power over the investee;

(b) exposure, or rights, to variable returns from its involvement with the investee; and

(c) the ability to use its power over the investee to affect the amount of the investor’s returns.

Joint Control The contractually agreed sharing of power to govern the financial and operating policies of an economic activity so as to obtain benefits from it. IND-AS 111 provides for Joint control as under:

Joint control is the contractually agreed sharing of control of an arrangement, which exists only when decisions about the relevant activities require the unanimous consent of the parties sharing control.

Power to govern has been substituted with control thereby widening the scope.

 

However, the joint control is not merely to govern to obtain benefits but unanimous consent for relevant activities.

Significant Influence Participation in the financial and/or operating policy decisions of an enterprise, but not control of those policies. IND-AS 28 defines significant influence as under:

Significant influence is the power to participate in the financial and operating policy decisions of the investee but is not control or joint control of those policies.

Significant influence is neither control nor joint control.
Person as a related party
Person as a related party (c) individuals owning, directly or indirectly, an interest in the voting power of the reporting enterprise that gives them control or significant influence over the enterprise, and relatives of any such individual; (a) A person or a close member of that person’s family is related to a reporting entity if that person:

(i) has control or joint control of the reporting entity;

(ii) has significant influence over the reporting entity; or

There is not much change except that close member of that person’s family may result in some inclusion.
Person as a related party (d) key management personnel and relatives of such personnel (a) A person or a close member of that person’s family is related to a reporting entity if that person:

(iii) is a member of the key management personnel of the reporting entity or of a parent of the reporting entity.

KMP of parent entity and close member of that person’s family included under IND-AS 24 (similar to provision under Act, 2013 which includes KMPs of holding company and their relative).

However, definition of KMP under IND-AS includes all the directors of the company (executive or otherwise including IDs).

Entity as a related party
Enterprises that directly, or indirectly through one or more intermediaries, control, or are controlled by, or are under common control with, the reporting enterprise (this includes holding companies, subsidiaries and fellow subsidiaries); The entity and the reporting entity are members of the same group (which means that each parent, subsidiary and fellow subsidiary is related to the others). Group companies are an addition.
Associates and joint ventures of the reporting enterprise and the investing party or venturer in respect of which the reporting enterprise is an associate or a joint venture; One entity is an associate or joint venture of the other entity (or an associate or joint venture of a member of a group of which the other entity is a member). Associate or JV of member of a group.
Enterprises over which any person described in (c) or (d) [refer (c) or (d) under persons] is able to exercise significant influence. This includes enterprises owned by directors or major shareholders of the reporting enterprise and enterprises that have a member of key management in common with the reporting enterprise. The entity is controlled or jointly controlled by a person identified in (a); or

A person identified in (a)(i) has significant influence over the entity or is a member of the key management personnel of the entity (or of a parent of the entity).

Similar provision.
No such provision Both entities are joint ventures of the same third party. If A ltd has JV1 (formed by A & B) and JV2 (formed by A & C) then JV 1 and JV2 are related parties.
No such provision One entity is a joint venture of a third entity and the other entity is an associate of the third entity. If A ltd has JV1 (formed by A & B) and A ltd holds 25% in Z Ltd then JV1 and Z Ltd are related parties.
No such provision The entity is a post-employment benefit plan for the benefit of employees of either the reporting entity or an entity related to the reporting entity.

If the reporting entity is itself such a plan, the sponsoring employers are also related to the reporting entity.

No such provision The entity, or any member of a group of which it is a part, provides key management personnel services to the reporting entity or to the parent of the reporting entity.
Exclusions from the definition of related party
(a) two companies simply because they have a director in common, notwithstanding paragraph 3(d) or (e) above (unless the director is
able to affect the policies of both companies in their mutual
dealings);
(a) two entities simply because they have a director or other member of key management personnel in common or because a member of key management personnel of one entity has significant influence over the other entity. Exclusion has been expanded to include directors and KMPs.
(b) a single customer, supplier, franchiser, distributor, or general agent with whom an enterprise transacts a significant volume of business
merely by virtue of the resulting economic dependence;
(d) a customer, supplier, franchisor, distributor or general agent with whom an entity transacts a significant volume of business, simply by virtue of the resulting economic dependence. Similar exclusion.
(c) the parties listed below, in the course of their normal dealings with an enterprise by virtue only of those dealings (although they may
circumscribe the freedom of action of the enterprise or participate in its decision-making process):
(i) providers of finance;
(ii) trade unions;
(iii) public utilities;
(iv) government departments and government agencies including government sponsored bodies.
(c) (i) providers of finance,

(ii) trade unions,

(iii) public utilities, and

(iv) departments and agencies of a government that does not control, jointly control or significantly influence the reporting entity simply by virtue of their normal dealings with an entity (even though they may affect the freedom of action of an entity or participate in its decision making process).

Similar exclusion.
No such exclusion. (b) two joint venturers simply because they share joint control of a joint venture. While co-venturers are not expressly covered under the definition, it has been expressly excluded.

This is much needed exclusion as the venturers inter se should not be regarded as related party unless they fall meet any other parameter specified above.

[1] In considering each possible related party relationship, attention is directed to the substance of the relationship and not merely the legal form

[2] The terms ‘control’ and ‘investment entity’, ‘joint control’ and ‘significant influence’ are defined in IND AS 110, IND AS 111, Joint Arrangements, and IND AS 28, Investments in Associates and Joint Ventures, respectively and are used in this Standard with the meanings specified in those IND ASs.

____________________________________________________________________

By: CS Vinita Nair:vinita@vinodkothari.com

 

Consolidation of accounts of Section 8 companies- whether a correct practice?

– Vallari Dubey | corplaw@vinodkothari.com

Intent of Consolidation

Consolidation is a combined representation of financials of a company and its subsidiaries, joint ventures and associates. Consolidated Financial Statements (‘CFS’) reflect the aggregate wealth of the holding company. Section 129(3) of the Act, 2013 mandates the preparation of CFS in addition to Standalone Financial Statements (‘SFS’), in case where the company has one or more subsidiaries.

In case of a not-for-profit organization, the need for consolidation does not arise. However, when such organization is registered under Section 8 of the Companies Act, 2013 (‘Act’), and by virtue of an interest in it by some company, the organization becomes a subsidiary of the other company, the question of consolidation arises. With the help of this article, we try and analyze the matter in question.

Read more

Demonetization now hits Financial Statement of Companies by Megha Saraf and Abhirup Ghosh

Background

Reserve Bank of India (“RBI”) on 8th November, 2016, has took a very bold move towards the currency market of India. Ministry of Finance (“MoF”) with effect from 9th November, 2016, has brought a serious revolution in the economy of the country by withdrawing Rs. 500 and Rs. 1000 as a legal tender. Due to this, people as well as corporates and Financial Institutions all over the country faced a serious glitch towards monetary transactions.

Further, MoF by its subsequent circulars brought stringent norms towards the monetary market. Several restrictions were imposed on cash and electronic transactions to curb the black market. Read more

Analysis on the IEPF (Accounting, Audit, Transfer and Refund) Amendment Rules, 2017 Companies have less than 3 months time to transfer shares

Background Investor Education and Protection Fund Authority (Accounting, Audit, Transfer and Refund) Rules, 2016[1] (‘Principal Rules’) was brought by MCA on 5th September, 2016 wherein it laid down inter alia the detailed procedure to transfer the shares to the IEPF  Authority. The detailed procedure provided in the Principal Rules had technical as well as practical […]