Effective from 1st July 2026 instead of 1st April 2026
Banks may opt for early adoption in its entirety
This would mean an additional window of 3 months towards implementation of the revised rules on capital market exposures.
Acquisition Finance: clarifications on mergers and amalgamation, on-lending for acquisition permitted: target not to be a financial entity
Mergers and amalgamations permitted within acquisition finance, definition amended [Para 4(1)(ia)]
This is a clarificatory change
Target can be non-financial entity only [Para 170A]
Restriction extends to indirectly acquiring control over financial entities who are subsidiaries/ JV of target entity [proviso to Para 170B]
Earlier Directions referred to restriction on the Acquiring entity as a financial entity, the Revised Directions extends the restrictions on the target company too, thus limiting the scope of companies that may be acquired through
On-lending by Acquiring entity to subsidiaries for acquiring control permitted [Para 170E(2)]
Earlier, lending was permitted to subsidiary/ SPV based on strength of Acquiring company by the bank, now, the Revised Directions further permit on-lending by the Acquiring entity to its subsidiary
Potential synergies to be collectively met for all companies of a group acquired pursuant to acquisition finance [Para 170B]
Lending to subsidiary/ SPV based on strength of Acquiring company, corporate guarantee to be provided by Acquiring company
Capital Market Intermediaries: relief that does not last long
Bank financing for proprietary trading permitted subject to 100% collateral in the form of cash and cash equivalents [third proviso to Para 219ZA]
While the proviso enables bank finance, in view of the 100% liquid security requirements, the industry participants does not seem to consider this a favourable change towards meeting the working capital requirements. However, the 3-months’ breather may be considered a favourable step.
For non-debt Mutual Funds, intraday facilities secured by guaranteed receivables not to be considered as Capital Market Exposure
Receivables guaranteed on account of maturity proceeds of G Secs, T-Bills, SDL, or interest from G-Sec and SDLs held by such mutual funds, or maturity proceeds of TREPS from CCIL
Lending to individuals: limits to be monitored at banking system level
Cap of Rs. 1 crore on lending against eligible securities and Rs. 25 lacs for IPO/ FPO/ ESOP financing to be applicable at banking system level
While the borrower-level limits stand increased on an individual basis, the application of such limits at a banking system level will ensure that excessive borrowings are not done by an individual borrower for capital market dealings
See a detailed article on the Amendments on Capital Market Exposures here.
https://vinodkothari.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/vinod-kothari-logo.png00Staffhttps://vinodkothari.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/vinod-kothari-logo.pngStaff2026-03-31 17:19:022026-04-01 09:35:57RBI’s 3-month breather for new rules on capital market exposures
An August 2025 Informal Guidance by SEBI for Welspun Corp Limited sought to clarify the applicability of contra trade on release of pledge. However, it goes on to say that: “…in case of creation of pledge/ revocation, the beneficial ownership does not change till pledge is invoked”. While the IG was specific to revocation of pledge, this seems to be creating a confusion on the contra trade restrictions on creation of pledge. In this article, we discuss the nature of pledge as a trade, and applicability of trading related restrictions on various stages of pledge. Also see a detailed article on treatment of various stages of pledge as trading under PIT Regulations.
Is pledge a trade?
Answer is yes
Trading means dealing in securities in any form [Reg 2(1)(l) of PIT Regulations]
Explanation to the definition expressly includes “pledging”
Creation of pledge may be considered equivalent to disposal/ intent to dispose the shares
Is release of pledge a trade?
Technically, a release (or so-called revocation) of a pledge is also a trade. However, given there is no change in beneficial ownership, there is no concern, at least from a contra trade perspective
There is no actual acquisition or intent to acquire shares, it is mere restoring back the position as it was prior to the creation of pledge
The shares are coming back to the person who was the beneficial owner of such shares previously.
Is invocation of pledge a trade?
No, since invocation of pledge is not at the discretion of the holder of shares
Invocation results in actual disposal of shares, however, related compliances w.r.t. such shares are undertaken at the stage of creation of pledge itself
Examples to understand contra-trade on pledge
Any opposite trade within 6 months of a prior trade attracts violation of contra-trade, except in case of specific waiver for a bona fide purpose. We discuss various combinations of trades within a span of 6 months to understand whether such trades attract contra-trade restrictions.
Transaction 1
Transaction 2
Is it contra-trade?
Can a waiver be granted by CO?
Purchase of shares (Buy)
Creation of pledge (Sell)
Yes, opposite trades within 6 months
Yes, if the DP is able to demonstrate the urgency and bona fide nature of such transaction
Creation of pledge (Sell)
Purchase of shares (Buy)
Yes, opposite trades within 6 months
In such a case, it is very difficult to prove bona fide of the subsequent trades of purchase of shares after creation of pledge.
Creation of pledge (Sell)
Release of pledge
No, since the release of pledge does not result in an opposite trade per se, it is incidental to the primary trade of pledge creation and only restores back the position as it was prior to creation of pledge.
NA
Release of pledge
Creation of pledge with another person (Sell)
No
Yes, if the DP is able to demonstrate the urgency and bona fide nature of the underlying transaction for which the pledge is to be created
Purchase of shares (Buy)
Invocation of pledge (Sell)
No, since the invocation of pledge is not at the discretion of the shareholder. The relevant act of disposal of shares is taken into account as a “trade” upon creation of pledge itself, and hence, not considered as “trade” again, upon such invocation.
NA
Invocation of pledge (Sell)
Purchase of shares (Buy)
NA
What is a bonafide purpose in the case of a pledge?
How does the Compliance officer verify/ensure that the purpose of the pledge is bonafide?
There cannot be any sure or one-size-fits-all response to this. Pledge is not for its own sake; pledge for an underlying transaction, which may be margin trading facility, borrowing, etc. The Compliance Officer should see whether that underlying transaction is within the regular business or activity of the pledgor. Whether the pledge is limited to the shares of the listed entity or has other securities? Whether the pledgee is an entity which is engaged in providing similar facilities to several unrelated entities? Whether the timing of the pledge is not indicating the advantage of a price spurt, etc.
Compliances applicable to various stages of pledge
The applicability of contra trade restrictions on the various stages of pledge are tabulated hereunder:
Stage of pledge
Nature of trade (Acquisition/ Disposal)
Pre-clearance required?
TWC applicable?
Contra-trade restrictions applicable?
Remarks
Creation of pledge
Disposal
Yes
No, if the trade is bona fide
Yes
While creation of pledge amounts to trade, exemptions from TWC and contra trade may be availed if the trade is for bona fide purpose.
Release of pledge
Acquisition
No
No
No
No change in beneficial ownership, and no actual acquisition/ disposal – mere restoration of the position prior to creation of pledge
Notice of invocation of pledge
NA
NA
NA
NA
No dealing in securities, mere notice specifying intent
Invocation of pledge
Disposal, however, continuation of the prior action of creation of pledge
No
NA
No
Invocation of pledge is done by the pledgee upon default. Once a pledge is created, the pledgor has no control over the invocation of such pledge upon default. Further, since creation of pledge is itself considered as ‘disposal’, the same shares cannot be considered to have been ‘disposed’ again, upon invocation.
Sale of pledged securities
Disposal, however, continuation of the prior action of creation of pledge
No (however, intimation to CO post sale, if not covered by System Driven Disclosure)
NA
No
Sale of pledged securities is done by the pledgee, and is not under the control of the pledgor. Further, since creation of pledge is itself considered as ‘disposal’, the same shares cannot be considered to have been ‘disposed’ again, upon sale.
https://vinodkothari.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/vinod-kothari-logo.png00Staffhttps://vinodkothari.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/vinod-kothari-logo.pngStaff2026-03-09 18:32:312026-03-12 09:49:20Span of Welspun: Is pledge/unpledge a trade under PIT?
Budget 2026 proposed to introduce Total Return Swaps (TRS) for corporate bonds, purportedly as a measure for synthetic trading in corporate bonds. However, given the very slow pick up of credit default swaps, the much easier and globally prevalent version of credit derivatives, will the more esoteric TRS really make a difference? We explain what TRS is, how it differs from a CDS, give a sense of the global data on TRS as a part of OTC credit derivatives, and discuss how much the new measure will impact India’s bond market.
India’s credit derivatives market has historically remained shallow, with hardly any transanctions involving credit default swaps. This has resulted in limited hedging options focused only on default risk and an absence of tools for transferring market and price risk.
This contrasts sharply with global trends. As of mid-2025, the notional outstanding volume of OTC derivatives exceeded USD 840 trillion, with credit derivatives, despite being smaller in absolute size than interest rate or FX derivatives, recording the fastest year-on-year growth at approximately 23%.
It may be noted that as of 1996, which is when credit derivatives had almost started emerging and gaining strength, TRS transactions were significant and took up almost 32% of the market share. However, the percentage of TRS dropped. Over time, CDSs overtook the position because CDSs are more definitive and limit the risks of the protection seller. In 2025, as per 118th edition of the OCC’s Quarterly Report on Bank Trading and Derivatives Activities based on call report information provided by all insured U.S. commercial banks and others, the TRSs had become a smaller segment representing 4.9 per cent of the credit derivative market.
Meaning of TRS
In simple terms, a TRS swap transfers the entire volatility of returns of a reference asset from one party to another. TRS is a kind of derivative contract wherein the protection buyer agrees to transfer, periodically and throughout the term of the contract, the actual returns from a reference asset to the protection seller (“floating returns”), and the latter, in return, agrees to transfer returns calculated at a certain spread over a base rate (“fixed returns”) Total returns include the coupons, appreciation, and depreciation in the price of the reference bond. On the other hand, the protection seller will pay a certain base rate, say, risk free rate, plus a certain spread. The protection seller in the case of a TROR swap is also referred to as the total return receiver, and the protection buyer is similarly called the total return payer. The figure below illustrates the essential mechanics of a total return swap.
Impact of TRS TRS swaps originate from synthetic equity structures, where economic returns of an asset are transferred without any actual investment in the underlying. The structure separates economic exposure from legal ownership. In a TROR swap, the economic impact is such that the total return receiver assumes the position of a synthetic lender to or investor in the bonds of the reference obligor, while the total return payer becomes a synthetic lender to the counterparty. Consider the illustration below:
Party PB invests in the unsecured bonds of entity X carrying a fixed coupon of 9.5 per cent.
PB then enters into a TROR swap with PS, under which PB agrees to transfer the actual returns from the bonds of X and, in return, receive MIBOR plus 100 basis points.
Under the terms of the swap, PB periodically transfers the coupon income, plus any market price appreciation minus any market price r depreciation in the bonds, while PS periodically pays MIBOR plus 100 basis points.
Although PB technically holds the bonds of X, in substance PB has neither exposure to X nor to the returns generated by X. Instead, PB is economically exposed to PS at MIBOR plus 100 basis points, which is equivalent to having invested in PS at that rate.
Conversely, PS, despite not holding the bonds of X, is economically exposed to the actual returns from X’s bonds (net of MIBOR plus 100 basis points). The effect of the TROR swap is therefore to synthetically create a fully refinanced investment in the bonds of X, giving a return equal to the actual returns in the bonds, and having a funding cost equal to MIBOR plus 100 basis points.
Thus, the true impact of a TROR swap is the synthetic replacement of exposures. Consequently, the advantages of a TRS can be:
Off-balance sheet exposure: TRS creates synthetic assets without recording loans or bonds on balance sheets improving leverage ratios and capital efficiency.
Regulatory Arbitrage: TRS has been used to bypass investment or lending restrictions, such as exposure norms, concentration limits, etc.
Provides very high leverage: In the above illustration, the synthetic investment made by the O in the bond is highly leveraged, assuming no margin has been put by the PS.
Alternative to a Repo: Assume PB holds a bond and is looking at having it funded. It sells the bond to Q and simultaneously enters into a TRS transaction, paying MIBOR + spread and receiving the actual returns of the bond. Hence, PB continues to have an economic stake in the bond whereas for accounting purposes, the bond may be removed from the balance sheet of PB.
TRS structures have been used globally across a wide range of asset classes, including equities, bonds, loans, real estate and property interests, credit-linked notes, and portfolios or indices of such assets. Hence, a TRS is a credit derivative only when the reference asset is a credit asset, otherwise it is a generic total return derivative. The Draft CD Direction framework deliberately confines TRS usage to specified debt instruments in order to prevent synthetic funding and balance-sheet arbitrage.
CDS Vs TRS
Aspects
CDS
TRS
Basic Definition
A credit derivative contract where a protection seller commits to pay the buyer in the event of a credit event.
A credit derivative contract where a payer transfers the entire economic performance of an asset to a receiver (protection seller).
Risk Transferred
Transfers only the credit risk associated with a specific obligation. The protection seller is only concerned with the risk of default or increase in credit spreads of the asset. That is, the reference transaction only shifts the risk of credit spreads
Transfers the total volatility of returns, including credit risk, interest rate risk, and market risk. The receiver gains exposure to all gains and losses (coupons, appreciation, and depreciation).
Cash Flow Mechanics
The buyer makes periodic premium payments to the seller until maturity or a credit event
Involves a periodic exchange of cash flow, the payer gives returns and appreciation; the receiver gives a benchmark rate + spread and depreciation.
No fixed premium; the premium is inherent in the difference between actual returns and the agreed-upon spread
Synthetic Impact
Used primarily for credit insurance or hedging against specific default.
Used to synthetically replace the entire exposure of the parties, causing the receiver to assume the position of a synthetic lender to the reference obligation.
Types of TRS
Total Return Swaps can be categorized into several types based on their underlying assets and funding structures:
Index-Based TRS: Instead of a specific bond, the returns are linked to a diversified index (e.g., a broad-based index of 100 high-yield corporate bonds). The RBI specifically allows these if the index is composed of eligible debt instruments and published by an authorized administrator.
Equity Swaps: A type of TRS where the reference asset is one or more equity securities. Here, the total return payer pays the return from the equity or the portfolio, and in turn, receives a base rate spread.
Property Derivatives: The TRS methodology has been applied to swapping the returns of property investments also, allowing investors to synthetically invest in properties or property indices.
Structured TRS: Here, the reference assets would be a pool of loans or bonds. The transaction will make uses of the credit-linked notes.
The Draft CD Directions permit the use of TRS while adding multiple safeguards to ensure that TRS functions strictly as a credit risk transfer instrument and not as a means of synthetic funding, balance-sheet arbitrage, or regulatory circumvention. The regulatory framework governs four key aspects:
Eligible participants,
Permissible reference assets,
Permitted purposes for which these instruments may be used, and
Prudential safeguards.
Eligible participants for TRS
Para 4.1.2(iii) of the revised Directions stipulates that at least one counterparty to every credit derivative transaction must be a market-maker. For this purpose, market-makers are defined to include
Scheduled Commercial Banks,
Large NBFCs (including HFCs and SPDs) with a minimum net owned fund of ₹500 crore, and
Specified financial institutions such as NABARD, SIDBI, and EXIM Bank.
This requirement ensures that TRS transactions are intermediated by regulated entities with adequate risk management capabilities.
In alignment with this overarching requirement, the Draft CD Directions prescribe the following specific eligibility conditions for TRS:
TRS may be offered only by market-makers, ensuring that such transactions are undertaken by regulated entities with adequate risk management capabilities.
Residents (other than individuals) may enter into TRS without any restriction on the purpose, allowing both hedging and non-hedging purposes.
Persons resident outside India may enter into TRS only for the purpose of hedging, and such TRS may be offered to them exclusively by market-makers.
Reference entities and reference assets for TRS
In addition to prescribing eligible participants, the Draft CD Directions impose strict controls on the nature of reference entities and assets that may be used for TRS transactions. These controls are intended to ensure transparency, prevent regulatory arbitrage, and avoid the creation of complex or opaque synthetic exposures.
Reference entity:
A reference entity refers to the issuer whose credit risk and economic performance form the basis of the TRS contract. For TRS, the reference entity shall be a indian resident entity that is eligible to issue Reference assets under the Draft CD Directions.
By limiting reference entities to domestic issuers of eligible debt instruments, the framework ensures that TRS activity remains in the Indian corporate debt market, which was also the regulatory intent.
Reference assets:
A reference asset refers to the underlying corporate bond or debt instrument issued by the reference entity or an index of underlying debt instruments specified in a total return swap contract. The Draft CD Directions specify the following as eligible reference assets for TRS:
Money market debt instruments;
Rated INR-denominated corporate bonds and debentures;
Unrated INR-denominated corporate bonds and debentures issued by Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs) set up by infrastructure companies; and
Bonds with call and/or put options.
At the same time, the Directions expressly prohibit TRS on certain instruments, including asset-backed securities, mortgage-backed securities, credit-enhanced or guaranteed bonds, convertible bonds, and other hybrid or structured obligations. This exclusion reflects regulatory caution against layering derivatives on complex or credit-enhanced products that could obscure risk transfer.
Index-based reference assets
The Draft CD Directions also permit a TRS to reference an index, provided that:
The index comprises only eligible debt instruments as specified above; and
The index is published by a financial benchmark administrator duly authorised by the RBI under the Reserve Bank of India (Financial Benchmark Administrators) Directions, 2023
Although such index based reference asset has been introduced for CDS and TRS, no such index for debt securities exists currently. Accordingly, such an index must be developed.
Preventing Regulatory circumvention:
Para 4.5.1(ii) of the Draft CD Directions expressly provides that market participants shall not undertake credit derivative transactions, including Total Return Swaps, involving reference entities, reference obligations, or reference assets where such transactions would result in exposures that the participant is not permitted to assume in the cash market, or where they would otherwise violate applicable regulatory restrictions. This provision prevents the use of TRS to bypass exposure limits, concentration norms, sectoral caps, or investment restrictions applicable to the participants.
Additional safeguards for TRS used for hedging
Where a TRS is entered into for the purpose of hedging, the market-maker is required to ensure that the user satisfies the following conditions:
The user has an existing exposure to the relevant reference asset
The notional amount of the TRS does not exceed the face value of the reference asset held by the user, and
The tenor of the TRS does not extend beyond:
The maturity of the reference asset held by the user, or
The standard TRS maturity date is immediately following the maturity of the reference asset.
These safeguards reinforce the principle that hedging-oriented TRS must remain strictly co-terminous and proportionate to the underlying exposure, thereby avoiding over-hedging or speculations. Further, the Draft CD Direction specify that the settlement rules and standard documentation will be specified by shall be specified by the Fixed Income Money Market and Derivatives Association of India (FIMMDA), in consultation with market participants. However, the market participants are allowed to, alternatively, use a standard master agreement for credit derivative contracts.
Will it impact the bond markets in India?
Will this new instrument have an impact on bond markets in India? The first instance of guidelines on credit derivatives was issued in 2011; this failed to have any impact at all. Then, after the report of the Working Group, new Credit Derivatives Directions were issued in 2022. These also, at least based on anecdotal market information, have not had any significant traction at all.
CDS is much more standardised than TRS; as we have noted above, TRS is only 4.9% of the global credit derivatives market. Will the Indian market, which has not yet picked up credit spread trading in the form of CDS, delve into a far more esoteric TRS trade? Was it based on any reasoned or surveyed market feedback that this regulatory change was inspired? These questions, a priori, are difficult to answer. However, like a new flavour of ice cream, you never know until you try it.
https://vinodkothari.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/vinod-kothari-logo.png00Staffhttps://vinodkothari.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/vinod-kothari-logo.pngStaff2026-02-09 18:41:402026-02-09 18:41:42The Swap that does it all: RBI introduces total return swaps on corporate bonds
NFRA moved the needle, and it is to be seen if the ocean starts boiling.! A 7th Jan 2026 circular from NFRA, addressed to listed entities and their auditors, seemed like an attention-drawer to standards of auditing which are already there, and yet, the auditing fraternity is holding meetings with boards and senior management of listed entities, to comply with what was always a compliance requirement. Does the 7th Jan circular bring up any new boxes to be ticked, any new procedures to be laid or responsibilities to be reiterated? As we detail out in this article, there may be need for action on several fronts on the part of listed entities – identification of nodal persons, listing developments that need to be communicated, constituting team for responding to the findings of the auditors in course of their audit other than those that sit in the audit report, formation of sub-groups of TCWG, etc.
https://vinodkothari.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/vinod-kothari-logo.png00Staffhttps://vinodkothari.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/vinod-kothari-logo.pngStaff2026-02-07 13:09:102026-04-23 18:49:25NFRA’s Call for a Two-Way Communication: A New Requirement or a Gentle Reminder?
The recent Finance Bill 2026 brings relief to investors in the form of changes in taxation for buyback consideration. With the omission of sub-clause (f) from Section 2(40) of the Income Tax Act, 2025 [dealing with deemed dividend], the position as it existed prior to 1st October, 2024, has been restored, except for additional tax rates in case of promoter shareholders.
Applicability of the amended provisions
For any buyback of shares on or after 1st April, 2026
Existing provisions on taxability of buyback
Included u/s 2(40)(f) of IT Act
The entire amount paid by the company taxable as “dividend”
Tax payable by shareholders
Entire buyback consideration taxable as dividend
TDS provisions as applicable to dividends apply
Taxable at slab rates as applicable to respective shareholders, with a flat surcharge @ 15%
Entire cost of acquisition in respect of shares bought back to be booked as “capital loss” [section 69 of IT Act]
Such capital loss may be set off against capital gains subsequently
As per section 111 of IT Act, the set-off is available for a period of 8 AYs immediately after the AY in which loss arises
Amended provisions on taxability of buyback
Buyback consideration not to be treated as deemed dividend [omission of clause (f) to Sec 2(40)]
Difference between consideration received and cost of acquisition taxable as capital gains [S. 69(1)]
In the hands of the recipient shareholder
In case of promoter shareholders, tax payable at higher rates depending on whether promoter is a domestic company or not
Effective rate of 22% in case of domestic company and 30% in case of persons other than domestic company
Meaning of promoter
In case of a listed company,
As per Reg 2(1)(k) of SEBI (Buy-Back of Securities) Regulations, 2018
Refers to the definition of promoter under SEBI (Issue of Capital and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2018
In any other case
As per Section 2(69) of the Companies Act, 2013, or
A person who holds, directly or indirectly, more than 10% of the shareholding in the company
Example to understand taxability under old regime v/s new regime
Particulars
Price per share
No. of shares
Amount (Rs.)
Total cost of acquisition
Rs. 50
100
5,000
Shares tendered and accepted for buyback
Rs. 80
40
3,200
Tax under old regime (effective 1st Oct, 2024)
Rs. 80
40
3,200 as dividend @ applicable tax slabs
Tax under new regime (effective 1st Apr, 2026)
Rs. (80-50) = Rs. 30
40
1,200 as capital gains @ short-term/ long-term capital gain rates
Intent of the amendments
The extant tax regime on treating buyback consideration as deemed dividend resulted in taxing a “receipt” as income, without factoring the cost incurred in such receipts. See our article on the same here. The amended tax regime restores back the past position, by treating the difference between the buyback consideration and cost of acquisition as capital gains.
Additional tax rates have been proposed for promoters, in view of the distinct position
and influence of promoters in corporate decision-making, particularly in relation to buy-back transactions.
https://vinodkothari.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/vinod-kothari-logo.png00Staffhttps://vinodkothari.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/vinod-kothari-logo.pngStaff2026-02-01 15:08:392026-02-02 13:08:48Quick Bytes on Union Budget 2026
An AIF raises capital by issuance of units, which are privately placed. Most AIFs follow a commitment–drawdown model, under which investors agree upfront to commit a specified amount of capital (‘committed capital’). The AIF manager then calls this committed capital, either in full or in tranches, as investment opportunities arise (‘drawdown’). This model helps the AIF to minimise the negative carry that would result from raising investments which are yet to be invested.
This fund-raising process is shaped not only by SEBI’s AIF framework but also by the oversight of the respective sectoral regulators of the relevant investors. AIFs are meant strictly for sophisticated investors, and as such, various categories of AIF investors, such as insurance companies, pension funds, banks and NBFCs, etc. are subject to their respective regulations. When they invest in an AIF, they must comply with SEBI’s rules as well as the investment norms prescribed by their own regulators, each seeking to regulate how the capital of the investor is deployed. In fact, SEBI regulations are agnostic as to who the investor is, hence, most of the SEBI regulations relate to the AIF or the manager, with limited provisions dealing with investors. For example, whether and to what extent an insurance company or a pension fund can invest in an AIF is driven by the guidelines issued by the sectoral regulators such as IRDAI or PFRDA.
In this article, we try to bring together, in one place, the key regulatory norms imposed by various regulators; while these are primarily meant for the investor, however, it will be useful for the AIF managers to keep in mind these restraints while expecting or inviting investments from different categories of investors.
Categories of investors and regulatory restrictions on each category
Minimum investment norms: Common across all categories
₹25 crore for investors in Large Value Funds (reduced from ₹ 70 Crore per investor vide SEBI (Alternative Investment Funds) (Third Amendment) Regulations, 2025) [Reg. 2(1)(pa)];
₹1 crore for other investors [Reg 10(c)];
₹25 lakh for employees or directors of the AIF, manager, or sponsor [Reg 10(c)];
No minimum for units issued to employees solely for profit-sharing (and not capital contribution) [Para 4.6 of AIF Master Circular];
For open-ended AIFs, the initial investment must meet the minimum threshold, and partial redemptions must not reduce the holding below this minimum [Para 4.7 of AIF Master Circular].
Individuals
An AIF may raise funds from individual investors, whether resident, non-resident (NRI), or foreign, through private placement, subject to the following conditions (Refer Reg. 10(a) of AIF Regulations r/w Chapter 4 of AIF Master Circular).
Foreign investors: A foreign investor must:
be a resident of a country whose securities market regulator is a signatory to the IOSCO Multilateral MoU (Appendix A) or has a Bilateral MoU with SEBI; or
be a government or government-related investor from a country approved by the Government of India, even if the above condition is not met.
Additionally, neither the investor nor its beneficial owner1:
If a foreign investor ceases to meet these conditions after admission, the AIF manager must stop making further drawdowns from that investor until compliance is restored.
Joint Investments: Joint investments, for the purpose of investment of not less than the minimum investment amount in the AIF, are permitted only between:
an investor and spouse;
an investor and parent; or
an investor and child.
A maximum of two persons may invest jointly. Any other combination of joint investors must individually meet the minimum investment threshold. (Refer Reg. 10(c) of AIF Regulations r/w Chapter 4 of AIF Master Circular)
Terms of Investment: The terms agreed with investors cannot override or go beyond the disclosures in the PPM [Para 4.3 of AIF Master Circular].
The total number of investors is limited to 1000 investors per scheme; also note that an AIF cannot make a public offer. AIF units are commonly offered through distributors; but even the distributors cannot make an open offer (Please refer to our resource on Dos and Don’ts for AIF Distributors and AIF Managers).
Category I AIFs: Infrastructure Funds, SME Funds, Venture Capital Funds, and Social Venture Funds (‘Specified Cat I AIFs’);
Category II AIFs: Only where at least 51% of the corpus is proposed to be invested in infrastructure entities, SMEs, venture capital undertakings, or social venture entities (‘Specified Cat II AIFs’).
Investment in a Fund of Fund (‘FoF’) is allowed only if such FoF does not directly or indirectly invest funds outside India (Refer Section 27E of Insurance Act, 1938). This is to be ensured by inserting a clause in the Fund offer Documents executed by FoF to restrain such FoF investing into AIFs which invest in overseas companies/funds. Further, investment is not allowed in an AIF which in-turn has an exposure to a FoF in which the insurer already invested. Lastly, no investment in an AIF is allowed which undertakes leverage/borrowing other than to meet operational requirements.
Compliance of conditions laid down in (iii) are to be certified by the concurrent auditor of the insurer and filed along with quarterly periodical returns. Notably, insurance companies are prohibited from investing in Cat III AIFs
Prohibited Structures: Insurers shall not invest in AIFs that:
offer variable rights attached to units.
invest funds outside India either directly or indirectly [s. 27E of Insurance Act, 1938];
are sponsored by persons forming part of the insurer’s promoter group;
are managed a manager who is controlled, directly or indirectly, by the insurer or its promoters;
Investment Limits:
For life insurers, combined exposure to AIFs and venture capital funds is capped at 3% of the relevant insurance fund2.
For general insurers, the cap is 5% of total investment assets3.
Exposure to any single AIF cannot exceed the lower of 10% of the AIF’s corpus or 20% of the insurer’s total AIF exposure. For Infrastructure Funds, the 10% limit is enhanced to 20%.
Banks and other Regulated Entities (REs)
Banks and other REs may invest in Category I and Category II AIFs, subject to layered limits:
Bank level: Not more than 10% of the AIF corpus.
Group level: Up to 20% without RBI approval, and up to 30% with prior RBI approval, subject to capital adequacy and profitability conditions.
System level: Aggregate investments by all regulated entities cannot exceed 20% of the AIF corpus.
Banks must ensure that AIF investments do not circumvent banking regulations by creating prohibited indirect exposures. Banks are not permitted to invest in Category III AIFs, except for the minimum sponsor contribution where a bank subsidiary sponsors such a fund. For a more detailed discussion on Banks’ investment in AIFs, refer to our resource here.
NBFCs
An NBFC shall not individually contribute more than 10 percent of the corpus of an AIF Scheme. [See Para 8 of RBI ( NBFC – Undertaking of Financial Services) Directions, 2025]. The system-level investment limit of 20% for all REs shall also apply. Notably, unlike banks, NBFCs can invest in Cat III AIFs.
Pension, Provident and Gratuity Funds
Pursuant to a 15 March 2021 notification, non-government Provident Funds, Superannuation Funds, and Gratuity Funds may invest up to 5% of their investible surplus in Specified Cat I AIFs and Specified Cat II AIFs, classified as “Asset Backed, Trust Structured and Miscellaneous Investments”.
Key conditions include:
Minimum AIF corpus of ₹100 crore;
Maximum exposure of 10% to a single AIF (not applicable to government-sponsored AIFs);
Investments restricted to India-based entities only;
The AIF sponsor and manager must not be part of the fund’s promoter group.
For Government Sector Schemes such as UPS/NPS/NPA Lite/Atal Pension Yojna and Corporate CG schemes, the conditions are the same as above for non-government pension funds.
Mutual Funds
Mutual funds are governed by the SEBI (Mutual Funds) Regulations, 1996. The Seventh Schedule to these regulations sets out the permissible investment universe. Units of AIFs are not included, and accordingly, mutual funds cannot invest in AIF units.
beneficial owner as determined in terms of sub-rule (3) of rule 9 of the Prevention of Money-laundering (Maintenance of Records) Rules, 2005 ↩︎
The relevant insurance fund would refer to the specific fund of a life insurer from which an investment is made, rather than the insurer’s overall balance sheet. This is because Life insurers maintain separate, ring-fenced funds for different lines of business, such as the life fund, pension fund, annuity fund or ULIP fund and investments must be made out of, and limits calculated with reference to, the particular fund whose money is being deployed. ↩︎
Investment assets would refer to the total pool of assets held by a general insurer that are available for investment, across all lines of non-life insurance business. Unlike life insurers, general insurers do not maintain separate, ring-fenced policyholder funds for each product. Instead, premiums collected from various non-life insurance policies are invested as a consolidated portfolio, and regulatory investment limits such as exposure to AIFs are calculated with reference to the insurer’s aggregate investment assets shown on its balance sheet. ↩︎
https://vinodkothari.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/vinod-kothari-logo.png00Staffhttps://vinodkothari.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/vinod-kothari-logo.pngStaff2025-12-24 16:23:482025-12-24 18:17:23A Guide for AIF Managers on Investor Eligibility and Regulatory Restrictions