Posts
BRSR disclosures for Value Chain Partners eased by SEBI
/0 Comments/in Corporate Laws, LODR /by Prapti Kanakia– Prapti Kanakia, Manager | corplaw@vinodkothari.com
Updated on 7th April, 2025
Original Article dated 26th December, 2024
The requirement of disclosing BRSR Core for value chain partners of the listed entity and to obtain its limited assurance was introduced vide SEBI (LODR) (Second Amendment) Regulations, 2023. SEBI vide BRSR Core – Framework for assurance and ESG disclosures for value chain Circular dated July 12, 2023 (Erstwhile BRSR Circular), had come up with the framework on BRSR Core for listed entities and its value chain partners (VCPs).
With the aim to simplify, ease and reduce the cost of compliance from the Ease of Doing Business (EoDB) perspective, SEBI had constituted an Expert Committee on BRSR. Based on the report of the said committee, a Consultation Paper dated May 22, 2024 was issued inviting suggestions. Majority of the suggestions provided in the Consultation Paper have been approved by the SEBI in its Board meeting dated December 18, 2024 and are introduced by way of a Circular titled Measures to facilitate ease of doing business with respect to framework for assurance or assessment, ESG disclosures for value chain, and introduction of voluntary disclosure on green credits dated March 28, 2025 (Revised BRSR Circular).
This article analyses the amendments in line as approved by SEBI with respect to the BRSR framework.
Read more →Roads to Riches: A snapshot of InvITs in India
/0 Comments/in Capital Markets, Corporate Laws, Financial Services, SEBI /by StaffSimrat Singh – corplaw@vinodkothari.com | finserv@vinodkothari.com
Introduction
An Infrastructure Investment Trust (InvIT) is a pooled investment vehicle designed to facilitate collective investment in infrastructure assets. It allows investors to earn returns from assets such as roads, power plants, and telecom towers without direct ownership. Structured as a trust, InvITs generate revenue through various avenues such as toll collections, power tariffs and lease payments etc depending upon the underlying asset class. This mode of investment provides investors with a stable income stream through regular dividends while offering potential capital appreciation.
InvITs attract both institutional and retail investors seeking long-term, predictable returns, making them a crucial instrument in bridging the funding gap for infrastructure development. By serving as an efficient alternative to traditional financing methods, they contribute significantly to the sector’s growth and sustainability.
This article explores the progress of InvITs in India, examining the key asset classes they encompass, emerging asset categories, and a brief overview of the regulatory framework governing their operations.
InvITs: Journey so far
Since the launch of India’s first InvIT, the IRB InvIT Fund, in March 2016, InvITs have evolved significantly. Since FY 2020, InvITs have mobilized a remarkable ₹129,267 crore, helping bridge a portion of the USD 1.4 trillion investment required in infrastructure to achieve India’s goal of a $5 trillion economy by 2030.
Source: SEBI’s statistics on Fund raising by REITs and InvITs
InvITs have emerged as a viable investment avenue for those seeking long-term, stable returns. Foreign investors hold a substantial share of equity in InvITs, reflecting the strong global interest in India’s infrastructure sector. However, retail participation remains limited due to a lack of awareness and high ticket size. As of September 30, 2024, the total AUM of InvITs stood at ₹5.87 lakh crore. Calculating returns on InvITs can be challenging, especially for privately placed InvITs, due to the lack of readily available data. However, when it comes to capital appreciation in publicly listed InvITs, returns have generally been unimpressive (a glimpse of this is shown in the chart below which has been prepared after analysing the listing price and the price as on 1.04.2024 of units of Public InvITs). This is primarily because investors in these units prioritize steady income through interest and dividend payments over capital gains. At this juncture, it will be interesting to note that out of the 25 registered InvITs in India, only 5 have had public issues.
Overview of asset classes under InvITs
Legally, any asset listed under the Ministry of Finance notification dated October 7, 2013, can be included in an InvIT. However, in practice, as of March 31, 2024, InvITs primarily manage assets worth ₹5.87 lakh crore in the following categories and in the following proportions:
Source: CareEdge Ratings
After reviewing the websites and placement memorandums of all the InvITs registered in India, we can categorize them based on the following asset classes in which they operate:
| Sr. No. | Name of InvIT | Underlying asset class |
| 1 | Digital Fibre Infrastructure Trust | Telecom & data transmission |
| 2 | Altius Infra Trust | |
| 3 | Capital Infra Trust | Roads |
| 4 | Highways Infra trust | |
| 5 | IRB InvIT Fund | |
| 6 | Shrem Invit | |
| 7 | Roadstar Infra Investment Trust | |
| 8 | Interise Trust | |
| 9 | Oriental InfraTrust | |
| 10 | Nxt-Infra Trust | |
| 11 | Maple Infrastructure Trust | |
| 12 | IRB Infrastructure Trust | |
| 13 | Indus Infra Trust | |
| 14 | Cube Highways Trust | |
| 15 | Athaang Infrastructure Trust | |
| 16 | Anantham Highways Trust | |
| 17 | Powergrid Infrastructure Investment Trust | Power transmission |
| 18 | IndiGrid Infrastructure Trust | |
| 19 | Energy Infrastructure Trust | Pipeline infrastructure |
| 20 | TVS Infrastructure Trust | Warehousing |
| 21 | NDR InvIT Trust | |
| 22 | Intelligent Supply Chain Infrastructure Trust | |
| 23 | Sustainable Energy Infra Trust | Renewable energy |
| 24 | Anzen India Energy Yield Plus Trust | |
| 25 | SchoolHouse InvIT | Educational infrastructure |
Revenue generation mechanisms by asset class
Telecom
Telecom InvITs, such as Digital Fibre Infrastructure Trust (DFIT) and Altius Infra Trust, generate revenue by leasing telecom infrastructure to operators. DFIT, for instance, owns and operates fiber optic networks leased to large companies like Reliance Jio. It also earns interest income from its 51% stake in Jio Digital Fibre Private Limited (JDFPL). Altius generates revenue through long-term Master Service Agreements (MSAs), including rental charges, location premiums and infrastructure expansion fees. These structured agreements ensure predictable cash flows, enhancing the financial resilience of telecom InvITs.
Power Transmission
One of the major players in this sector, Powergrid Infrastructure Investment Trust (PGInvIT) generates revenue through long-term Transmission Service Agreements (TSAs), typically spanning over 35 years. These agreements ensure stable income by collecting transmission charges from power distribution companies (DISCOMs) and state electricity boards. Revenue is pooled and managed by the Central Transmission Utility of India Limited, reducing counterparty credit risks and ensuring timely payments.
Road Infrastructure
One of the most popular and growing asset class, road InvITs generate income through:
- Toll Collections: Vehicles pay toll charges for road usage.
- Annuity payments: The government or contracting authority makes periodic payments for a specified period to ensure steady cash flows.
- Hybrid models: A combination of toll income and government annuities under the Hybrid Annuity Model.
For example, National Highways Infra Trust (NHIT), backed by the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI), monetizes highway assets under the Built-Operate-Transfer (BOT) model. NHIT raised ₹46,000 crore through InvIT issuances, providing investors with steady income while enabling NHAI to reinvest in new projects.
Warehousing
Warehousing InvITs in India generate revenue primarily through long-term lease agreements with logistics companies, e-commerce firms, and manufacturers. These leases often follow a triple net lease, ensuring stable cash flows.
- TVS Infrastructure Trust manages 10.6 million square feet of Grade A warehousing and leases these assets to major corporations such as Amazon and Nestlé.
- NDR InvIT Trust reported a 5.65% revenue growth in Q3 FY 2025, with a 98% occupancy rate.
- Intelligent Supply Chain Infrastructure Trust, sponsored by Reliance Retail, follows a similar leasing model.
Pipeline Infrastructure
As on date there is only one InvIT which operates pipeline assets and it generates revenue through tariff-based gas transportation fees, regulated by the Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board. This InvIT secures long-term contracts and capacity reservation fees, ensuring stable revenue. They also benefit from interconnection fees with third-party pipelines, expanding income streams.
Educational Infrastructure
SchoolHouse InvIT, India’s first educational asset focused InvIT, earns revenue by leasing school and student housing properties to educational institutions under long-term agreements (15-30 years). The triple net-lease model, where tenants cover maintenance, property tax, and insurance, ensures minimal revenue leakage.
Overview of regulatory landscape for InvITs
The SEBI (Infrastructure Investment Trusts) Regulations, 2014 (‘InvIT Regulations’) categorize InvITs into three types. The key conditions related to their issuance, distribution, and borrowings are summarized in the table below:
| Feature | Public | Private Listed | Private Unlisted |
| Mode of initial offer | Public issue | Private placement | Private placement |
| Minimum asset value | Rs. 500 Cr. | Rs. 500 Cr. | Rs. 500 Cr. |
| Minimum initial offer size | Rs. 250 Cr. | Rs. 250 Cr. | Rs. 250 Cr. |
| Listing requirement | Mandatory | Mandatory | Not permitted |
| Minimum subscription in initial offer from any investor | INR 10,000 – INR 15,000 | INR 1 Crore / 25 Crore | INR 1 Crore / 25 Crore |
| Distribution requirement | At least 90% of NDCF ; at least once every six months | At least 90% of NDCF; at least once every year | At least 90% of NDCF; at least once every year |
| Permitted investors | Can invite funds from public as well (subject to minimum public float as per Reg 14(1A) | Institutional investors and body corporates, whether Indian or foreign | Institutional investors and body corporates, whether Indian or foreign |
| Borrowing limit | Up to 25% of asset value – no approval required More than 25% but up to 49% of asset value:Obtain credit ratingApproval of unit holders More than 49% but up to 70% of asset value:AAA ratingRecord of at least 6 distributions.Approval of unit holders. (75%) | As per trust deed | |
| Number of investors | Minimum 20 | Minimum 5 and maximum 1,000 | Minimum 5 and maximum 1,000 |
Lock-in requirements for sponsors.
To ensure that sponsors maintain a minimum stake in the investment, Regulation 12 of the InvIT Regulations outlines the following lock-in requirements based on a gliding platform approach.
| Minimum holding period | Lock-in requirement |
| For a period of 3 years from listing. (Units in excess of 15% to be locked in for a period of 1 year from listing) | 15% of total Units |
| From the beginning of 4th year and till the end of 5th year from the date of listing | 5% of total Units or Rs. 500 crores, whichever is lower |
| From the beginning of 6th year and till the end of 10th year from the date of listing | 3% of total Units of the InvIT or Rs. 500 crores, whichever is lower |
| From the beginning of 11th year and till the end of 20th year from the date of listing | 2% of total Units of the InvIT or Rs. 500 crores, whichever is lower |
| after completion of the 20th year from the date of listing | 1% of total Units of the InvIT or Rs. 500 crores, whichever is lower |
Applicability of the Listing Regulations, 2015
Regulation 26G of the InvIT Regulations specifies the applicability of certain provisions of the Listing Regulations to InvITs, with necessary modifications. These provisions includes:
- Constitution of the following:
- Audit Committee
- Nomination and Remuneration Committee
- Stakeholder Relationship Committee
- Risk Management Committee
- Limits on maximum number of Directorships
- Appointment and qualification of Independent Directors
Conclusion
InvITs have significantly transformed India’s infrastructure investment landscape, providing an alternative financing mechanism that bridges the funding gap while offering investors stable returns. Their evolution from road and power transmission assets to emerging categories like warehousing, pipeline infrastructure, and educational institutions highlights their growing versatility. Despite challenges such as limited retail participation and moderate capital appreciation in public InvITs, the segment continues to attract institutional investors, particularly foreign investors, signaling strong confidence in India’s infrastructure sector.
As the regulatory framework evolves to enhance transparency, governance, and investor confidence, InvITs are poised to play an even greater role in India’s economic growth. By enabling long-term capital infusion into essential infrastructure projects, they not only support the nation’s $5 trillion economy vision but also ensure sustainable development across key sectors. Looking ahead, increased awareness, improved accessibility, and regulatory refinements could unlock further potential for InvITs, making them a more attractive and robust investment avenue in the years to come.
Senior Management: A list too dynamic to remain static?
/6 Comments/in Corporate Laws, LODR, SEBI /by Team CorplawIdentification as such attracts obligations and information
– Pammy Jaiswal and Mahak Agarwal
[Updated as on 27th March, 2025]
Contents of the article:
Meaning of Senior Management under the Act, 2013
Meaning of SMPs under the Listing Regulations
Understanding the implications
Evolution of the definition of SMPs
Introduction
A senior management (SM/ SMPs) in a company means that their association as well as disassociation with the company can create a lot of impact in the operations as well as external outlook of the company. Besides this, there are several legal requirements that applies to the recruitment, pay scale and other aspects of the senior management. Further, especially for a listed company several obligations are imposed on the senior management like affirming with the code of conduct, disclosure of material financial transactions, responding to market rumors, etc. Hence, it becomes imperative for a company to categorize its officials as senior management after due consideration.
While considering, the company will also be required to refer to the definition of senior management under the applicable laws, most commonly, the Companies Act, 2013 (Act, 2013) as well as the SEBI Listing Regulations (Listing Regulations).
Further, SEBI LODR (Second Amendment) Regulations, 2023[1] introduced several new information requirements and obligations pertaining to SMPs. The same has given rise to the need of relooking at the said position from a fresh perspective.
Given the fact that the amendments specify new and stricter obligations and disclosure norms for SMPs, it becomes imperative for companies to look back and revisit on the following fronts:
- Who all are currently designated as SMPs? and
- Identifying, with a new perspective, the persons who shall explicitly fall under this definition
and accordingly, attract the applicability of various requirement as discussed hereinbelow.
Our detailed FAQs on the LODR (2nd Amendment) Regulations, 2023 can be viewed here.
This write up discusses major aspects with respect to SMPs, the first being the comparison of the definition of SMPs under the Companies Act, 2013 and the Listing Regulations, then the meaning of core management team and its relevance in drawing up the list of SMPs in a company, major implications on the company and the SMP under applicable laws and evolution of the definition over time.
Meaning of Senior Management under the Act, 2013
The scope of law revolving around ‘Senior Management’ under the Act, 2013 is limited. It discusses the meaning of and the manner of appointment and removal of SMPs.
Meaning
The meaning of the term ‘Senior Management’ under the Act, 2013 provides to mean personnel of the company who are members of its core management team excluding Board of Directors comprising all members of management one level below the executive Directors, including the functional heads.
Appointment, Removal and Remuneration of SMPs
Section 178 of the Act, 2013 requires the NRC to be responsible for identifying persons who may be appointed in senior management and are also required to recommend to the Board their appointment or removal. Further, the law also provides emphasis on formulation of requisite criteria for ensuring balance between fixed and incentive pay w.r.t the remuneration payable to SMPs.
Meaning of SMPs under the Listing Regulations
The present definition of senior management has been given under Regulation 16 of SEBI LODR, which reads as under:
“Senior management” shall mean the officers and personnel of the listed entity who are members of its core management team, excluding the Board of Directors, and shall also comprise all the members of the management one level below the Chief Executive Officer or Managing Director or Whole-Time Director or Manager (including Chief Executive Officer and Manager, in case they are not part of the Board of Directors) and shall specifically include the functional heads, by whatever name called and the persons identified and designated as key managerial personnel, other than the board of directors, by the listed entity ”
Accordingly, following are the inclusions and exclusions in the definition:
Inclusions:
- Members of core management team
- All members of the management one level below the CEO or MD or WT or Manager
- CEO, Manager (in case not part of BOD)
- Specifically include Functional heads
- persons identified and designated as KMP
Exclusions:
- Board of Directors
On reading of the aforesaid definition of SM personnel, it is understood that the same is an inclusive definition and therefore, the actual identification of SM in a company will depend on the on several factors, like the meaning and participants of core management team, members falling under one level below the board, organizational hierarchy, etc. For defining the offices falling under ‘core management team’ one may consider the members of the promoter group taking part in the crucial management discussions, in case there is a formal committee/ group to that effect. As regards, the members falling under ‘one level below the board’ is concerned, the ones who report to the MD/ CEO who are responsible for general management of the company would be regarded as an inclusion in the said category.
Comparative analysis between the Act, 2013 and the Listing Regulations
| Act, 2013 (Explanation to section 178) | Listing Regulations [Reg 16(1) (d)] |
| ‘‘senior management’’ means personnel of the company who are members of its core management team excluding Board of Directors comprising all members of management one level below the executive directors, including the functional heads. | “senior management” shall mean the officers and personnel of the listed entity who are members of its core management team, excluding the Board of Directors, and shall also comprise all the members of the management one level below the Chief Executive Officer or Managing Director or Whole Time Director or Manager (including Chief Executive Officer and Manager, in case they are not part of the Board of Directors) and shall specifically include the functional heads, by whatever name called and the persons identified and designated as key managerial personnel, other than the board of directors, by the listed entity |
On a combined reading of the above definitions, it is observed that identifying the core management team is a must for a company which in turn shall be linked with those officials who are either the functional heads or one level below the CEO/MD/ WTD /Manager as well as those who are identified and designated as a KMP in a company. While the definition under the Act, 2013 may give an indication that all members who are one level below the executive directors irrespective of being part of core management or not will be considered as an SMP, however, one has to read the two definitions in a harmonious construction which takes out the scope of any differences between the two even though there are differences in the language.
Understanding ‘Core Management’ and ‘functional heads’
Generally speaking, core management would mean members of the management responsible for core business functions of the organization.
Core Management
To further understand who shall fall under the ambit of core management, reference may be taken from Singapore Guidelines on Individual Accountability and Conduct applicable to Financial Institutions (regulated by Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS)) which provides a list of persons to be included in ‘core management functions’[2]. The list includes CEO, CFO, Chief Risk Officer, Chief Operating Officer/Head of Operations, Chief Information Officer/Chief Technology Officer/Head of Information Technology, Chief Information Security Officer/Head of Information Security, Chief Data officer, Chief Regulatory officer, heads of business functions, head of actuarial/appointed actuary/certifying actuary, Head of HR, Head of Compliance, Head of Financial Crime Prevention, Head of Internal Audit.
Similarly, the Ministry of Economic, Trade and Industry (METI), Japan in its revised CGS Guidelines has laid emphasis on the composition and delegation of powers to ‘top management[3]’. It provides an indication on the nature of work done and the members falling under the said category which includes president, CFO, CXO, etc.
Defining a core management team is both the prerogative as well as the domain of a company and the same will differ from one to another. It will therefore be significant for companies to identify its core management team as the same will decide the list of SMPs.
Functional head
[4]Business functions are the activities carried out by an enterprise; they can be divided into core functions and support functions. Core business functions would mean those functions which yield income for an enterprise and these functions generally make up the primary activities of the enterprise. These would normally include Operations, Marketing, Finance, Compliance and could otherwise vary based on the nature of the enterprise. [5]Support business functions are ancillary (supporting) activities carried out by the enterprise in order to permit or to facilitate the core business functions, its production activity. These activities may include distribution and logistics, IT services, technical services, etc.
However, in the context of defining SMPs, what shall be relevant are the heads of the core functional departments of the company who report directly to the MD or WTD while the ancillary or supporting heads shall be disregarded while interpreting the definition of SM.
On the joint reading of the aforesaid discussion on core management as well as functional head, it becomes clear that senior persons from ancillary or support services are less likely to form part of the core management, and hence, would fall outside the purview of SMP.
Illustrations to understand core management team and functional heads
Illustration 1 – For a large-scale organization, the identification becomes even more crucial since a liberal interpretation of the meaning would involve number of employees under the said definition and thus, lead to several implications as discussed below. To understand the same, if we consider an example of K Ltd which has several plant locations around the country with plant heads controlling the functions at each plant. All the plant heads report to the head of operations as well as the CFO. Further, the said company has around 15 functional departments, out of which 12 are main line functions and the rest are ancillary to one of the main functions. Every main line function has a functional head and the ancillary functions have controllers reporting to the one of the functional head of the main line function. The heads of the main line functions report to the MD of K Ltd.
In the given case, if we take a close look at the definition of SM, then the following should be the result of the identification of SMs in K Ltd:
- Plant heads – Not an SM since they report to Head of operations, therefore, not falling under one level below the board.
- Heads of main line functions – Should be categorized as an SM since they fall under one level below the board and part of core management team.
- Controllers of ancillary functions – Not an SM since they report to head of main line functions
Illustration 2 – In a listed company X Ltd, the reporting is such that besides the Managing Director to whom some of the functional heads report, there are several other functional heads who report to the WTDs in the company given the fact that the respective WTDs oversee those functions. Additionally, few officers in the Company have been designated as a KMP other than the CS and the CFO who also are heading some of the core functions in the said Company.
In the given case, if we take a close look at the definition of SMP, then the following should be the result of the identification of SMPs in X Ltd:
- Functional heads reporting to WTDs – Given the intent of the definition of SMP, it is clear that one level below the WTD is also part of SMP. In this case, we need to understand that when it comes to reporting to the general management, considering only the MD in that case should not be sufficient where the company has WTDs as well. Also, it is also likely that to distribute the supervisory powers effectively, the MD and the WTDs may have kept a hierarchy where for some functions, MD oversees and for other functions, the WTDs oversee. Hence, in this case, not considering these functional heads as part of SMP would not be correct
- Functional heads reporting to MD – Forms part of SMP
- Officers designated as KMP – Forms part of SMP
- CS and CFO – Forms part of SMP
Understanding the implications
On SM personnel
The amended regulations along with the existing regulations applicable to SMs impose the following obligations on them:
- SM are required to act with operational transparency while also maintaining confidentiality of information [Regulation 4(2)(f)]
- They are required to disclose to the board, all material, commercial and financial transactions in which they have personal interest and which may lead to potential conflict of interest with the listed entity at large [Regulation 26(5)]. Here, conflict of interest relates to:
- Dealing in shares of listed entity
- Commercial dealings with bodies, which have shareholding of management and their relatives
- SPs shall also be required to affirm compliance with code of conduct of senior management on an annual basis [Regulation 26(3)]
On listed companies
- Succession Planning [Reg 17(4)]
The board of directors of the listed entity shall satisfy itself that plans are in place for orderly succession for appointment to the board of directors and senior management.
- Appointment, removal and remuneration of SMPs [Reg 19 read with Schedule II]
The NRC is required to identifying persons who are qualified to be appointed in senior management in accordance with the criteria laid down, and recommend to the board of directors their appointment and removal. Further, NRC is also required to recommend to the board, all remuneration, in whatever form, payable to senior management.
- Role of SMP to respond to market rumours Reg 30 (11A)
Besides the promoter, director, KMP, the SMP of a listed entity shall provide adequate, accurate and timely response to queries raised or explanation sought by the listed entity in order to ensure compliance with the requirements for either denying, accepting or clarifying a market rumour and the listed entity shall disseminate the response received from such individual(s) promptly to the stock exchanges.
- Fraud by SM [Clause 6 of Para A of Part A of Sch III]
The definition and implications of being identified as an SM under the amended regulations is very wide and it is therefore, likely that the companies may not consider covering several persons under its ambit. Fraud with respect to SM has been inclusively defined to also mean fraud under Regulation 2(1)(c) of Securities and Exchange Board of India (Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices relating to Securities Market) Regulations, 2003 which itself has a very wide scope. The same covers wide range of activities including misrepresentation of truth, concealment of material facts, a suggestion as to an untrue fact, active concealment of fact in knowledge of the person making such representation, promise made without intention of performing it, reckless/careless representation, any act or omission which law declares as fraudulent, deceptive behavior, false statement, misinformation about securities that affects market price of such securities.
Having said that, companies which take a liberal interpretation of the definition of SM and accordingly, keep a long list of such persons, might have to keep constant track of such activities being undertaken by their SM which, goes without stating, is a cumbersome task.
Furthermore, such cases of fraud have been classified as deemed material event under Reg 30 read with Para A Part A of Schedule III, which will have to be reported by the company to the stock exchange within 12 or 24 hours, as the case may be.
- Default by SM [Clause 6 of Para A of Part A of Sch III]
The meaning of ‘default’ with regard to SM shall be seen in the following light:
- non-payment of the interest or principal amount in full on the date when the debt has become due and payable; and
- such default which hasimpact on the listed entity
Further, such defaults by SM, pursuant to the recent amendments, shall be considered a deemed material event and accordingly required to be disclosed to the stock exchange within 12 hours of such default coming into notice.
- Change in SM [Clause 7 of Para A of Part A of Sch III]
Pursuant to recent amendments, change in SM shall now be a deemed material event under Reg 30 read with Para A Part A of Schedule III. In addition, the particulars of SM along with changes therein since the close of the previous financial year shall also be required to be disclosed by the company in its Corporate Governance Report.
- Resignation of SM [Clause 7C of Para A of Part A of Sch III]
The amended Listing Regulations require companies to disclose to the SE, the letter of resignation as given by the concerned SM along with detailed reasons for such resignation within seven days from the date such resignation comes into effect.
Such resignation letters carry a grave potential for the outgoing SM to negatively portray the image of the company. Accordingly, identification of SM personnel becomes of immense relevance. Further, in terms of the Industry Standards Note issued in consultation with SEBI on 25th February, 2025, it clarifies that in cases of resignation, the phrase “resignation comes into effect” as used in Para A(7C) shall mean the last date of the concerned person in the listed entity, and the timelines for disclosure as per Para A(7C) shall be calculated accordingly. For instance, if Ms. X is an SMP in a listed entity, who submits her resignation letter on January 1, 2024, the management of the listed entity accepts the resignation on January 31, 2024 and her last date in the listed entity is February 28, 2024, the listed entity will be required to make the disclosure of her resignation on or prior to February 29, 2024 (i.e. within 24 hours of such resignation coming into effect) as per Para A(7C)
- Announcement/Communication through social media intermediaries or mainstream media by SM [Clause 18 of Para A of Part A of Sch III]
It is stated by via the recent amendments that if the SMPs of the LE make any announcement or communication through social media intermediaries or mainstream media and such information is material in terms of Regulation 30 and is not already made available in the public domain by the listed entity, the same shall be deemed to be a material event under Para A Part A of Schedule III and consequently required to be disclosed to the SE.
- Disclosure relating to SMPs under Para A (19) and (20) of Part A of Schedule III in connection with actions initiated or taken
Under the said clauses, if the same is on the SMP and as clarified by the ISN that it is in relation to the listed entity will be required to be disclosed if it has an impact on operations, financial position or reputation of the listed entity.
Evolution of the definition of SMPs
The concept of Senior Management (herein, ‘SM’, and senior management person or personnel are referred to as ‘SMP’ or ‘SMPs’) was not there under the regime of the Companies Act, 1956 and was first introduced under Section 178 of the Companies Act, 2013 (Act, 2013). The introduction was a result of several rounds of discussion under the report of the 21st Standing Committee on Finance on the Companies Bill, 2009 as well as the JJ Irani Committee in 2005 as also the Narayana Murthy Committee in 2003. The current law requires the Nomination and Remuneration Committee (‘NRC’) to identify and recommend to the board, the individuals who can be appointed as SMP along with their remuneration. The definition under the SEBI Listing Regulations (‘Listing Regulations’) has, over time, been aligned with that under the Act, 2013. These definitions have been around for more than decade, and have seen improvisation over time.
If we discuss about the improvisations, it will be interesting to refer to the trajectory below:
| Evolution of SMP Definition📍 2003 – Narayan Murthy Committee ➡ Defined SMP as core management. ➡ Included all members of management one level below the board.📍 2005 – JJ Irani Committee ➡ Expanded the definition to include functional heads.📍 2009 – 21st Standing Committee Report ➡ Proposed aligning the definition with the JJ Irani Report.📍 2013 – Companies Act , 2013 ➡ The definition of SMP became legally effective.📍 2017 – Kotak Committee Report on Corporate Governance➡ The definition of SMP was clarified to include all members one level below the CEO/MD/ WTD/ manager and specially include CS and CFO. |
As evident from the aforesaid figure, the definition of SMP has been in discussions and has also been subject to variations over time. This is more so because of the relevance of this position in a company whether it is to have strong management lineup in a company or involvement in sharing of key strategic issues and solutions, SMPs have a significant role to play in a company.
We can also refer to the evolution of the definition as per the figure given below:

To explain it further, the definition of SMP was amended several times starting from the SEBI LODR (Amendment) 2018 effective from 1st April, 2019 followed by the SEBI LODR (Amendment) Regulations, 2023 effective from 17th January, 2023 and recently pursuant to the SEBI LODR (Third Amendment) Regulations, 2024 effective from 12th December, 2024, post which the amended definition of SMP stands today.
Conclusion
In essence, the existing Listing Regulations deal with several provisions revolving around SMP, imposing several disclosure norms on the company and on the SM as well. Considering these disclosures include some very sensitive areas, an immediate step for companies now will be to take a close re-look and identify the personnel that fall in this comprehensive definition in such a manner that enhanced compliances in relation to such personnel, as brought about by the recent amendments are being adequately adhered to without any adverse implications on the listed entity.
[1] SEBI LODR (Second Amendment) Regulations, 2023
[2] Guidelines on Individual Accountability and Conduct issued by Monetary Authority of Singapore
[3] Revised CGS Guidelines by METI, Japan
[4] https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Glossary:Business_functions#:~:text=Business%20functions%20are%20the%20activities,market%20or%20for%20third%20parties
[5] https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Glossary:Business_functions#:~:text=Business%20functions%20are%20the%20activities,market%20or%20for%20third%20parties
See our other resources:
Youtube video on Senior Management Personnel
Upsurge in UPSI list: Deemed UPSI or sensitivity dependant?
/0 Comments/in Corporate Laws, LODR, PIT, SEBI /by Payal AgarwalCritical Reg. 30 events assimilate into ‘illustrative guidance list’ of UPSI as SEBI strives for EoDB and easier compliance requirement
Team Vinod Kothari & Company | corplaw@vinodkothari.com
The idea of unpublished price sensitive information (‘UPSI’) is something which companies have to guard as confidential until disclosed to investors, as it may materially impact the stock prices. Price sensitivity of an event has to do with the impact of the event on the company’s profitability, turnover, long-term or short-term prospects, shareholding base, etc. The identification of these events is done based on the materiality of the event to the business and business model. The more prescriptive the list supplied by the lawmaker is, the more one takes away the sense of responsibility and accountability to the corporate team that flags corporate events as material. If the lawmakers flag them all, or flag a lot, the very seriousness of tagging an information as price sensitive is taken away.
Pursuant to SEBI (Prohibition of Insider Trading) Amendment Regulations, 2025 (‘present amendment’) SEBI has amended UPSI definition, effective from June 10, 2025[1] inserting a longer list of information, some of which may seem purely operational or business-as-usual for listed companies. Whether each of this information will be regarded as “deemed UPSI”, thereby requiring compliance officers to do the drill of structured digital database entry to even trading window closure every time such an event occurs? While the amended definition seems indicative of this, the intent of the regulator seems otherwise. This article tries to explain.
Linking UPSI determination with material events under Reg 30 : the journey
The idea of linking UPSI determination with Reg 30 events is not new. In fact, the definition of UPSI under PIT Regulations originally included “material events in accordance with the listing agreement”, within the definition of UPSI. The same was subsequently omitted vide Amendment Regulations, 2018 effective from 1st April, 2019.
The omission of material events under LODR from the definition of UPSI was a result of the recommendations of the Committee on Fair Market Conduct, under the Chairmanship of Shri T.K. Viswanathan. The Committee noted that every material event under LODR is not necessarily price sensitive, and therefore, the explicit inclusion of the same as UPSI is not appropriate.
The Committee noted that the aforesaid regulation require disclosures of material events or information which may or may not be price sensitive. Accordingly, the Committee is of the view that all material events which are required to be disclosed as per the Regulation 68 of the LODR Regulations may not necessarily be UPSI under the PIT Regulations. Since, the definition of UPSI is inclusive, the Committee recommends the removal of explicit inclusion of “material events in accordance with the listing agreement” in the definition of UPSI.
Thereafter, SEBI vide a Consultation paper dated May 18, 2023, proposed restoration of material events under LODR in the definition of UPSI. The public feedback largely pointed out that all events or information under Regulation 30 of LODR Regulations may not have an impact on the price of securities, hence, it is not rational to extend the UPSI definition to all material events under Reg 30 of LODR.
In view of the same, another Consultation Paper was floated on 9th November, 2024 on expansion of the list of UPSI to include some specific events from Reg 30. Based on the public comments received on the Consultation Paper, SEBI in its Board Meeting dated 18th December, 2024 approved the said amendments to the definition of UPSI.
As mentioned above, the amendments have been notified vide the Amendment Regulations, 2025 effective from June 10, 2025 providing a long list of Reg 30 events within the meaning of UPSI.
List of information under definition of UPSI: illustrative or prescriptive?
The definition of UPSI contains two parts – (a) subjective meaning of UPSI, and (b) a list of events that may be considered as UPSI. To this end, the definition of UPSI reads as:
“unpublished price sensitive information” means … and shall, ordinarily including but not restricted to, information relating to the following:
XXX
The present amendment pertains to the second part of the UPSI definition. A question would arise on whether the list of events may be considered as indicative, illustrative of what may constitute UPSI, or prescriptive, providing a deeming status of UPSI to such events/ information without assessment of the probability of price-sensitive impact of such information.
The answer to the aforesaid has to be traced back from the recommendations of the High Level Committee to Review the SEBI (Prohibition of Insider Trading) Regulations, 1992.
The Committee also felt that some illustrative examples of what would ordinarily constitute UPSI should be set out to clearly understand the concept. It would be important to ensure that regardless of whether the information in question is price-sensitive, no piece of information should mandatorily be regarded as ―UPSI. Towards this end, examples of events and developments information about which would ordinarily be regarded as UPSI, are listed – such as financial results, dividends, mergers and acquisitions, changes in capital structure etc.
XXX
To conclude, whether or not a piece of information is generally available or is unpublished would necessarily be a mixed question of fact and law. A bright line indicating the types of matters that would ordinarily give rise to UPSI are listed to give illustrative guidance. It could well also be possible that information from such events could be routine in nature and consistent with a long history. Information about the repetition of the same event on predictable lines would not render it to be UPSI unless deviated from. For example, the declaration of dividend at the same rate at which a company has declared dividend for the several years as per publicly stated dividend policy.
Hence, it can be well understood that the idea behind providing an illustrative list of events in the definition of UPSI is not to render the same as “deemed UPSI”, thus mandating the treatment of the same as UPSI. Rather, the intent is to provide illustrations for a better understanding of what may ‘ordinarily’, and not ‘mandatorily’, constitute UPSI.
As evident from the discussion in SEBI BM agenda, the events/ information added in the definition of UPSI pursuant to the present amendment are given for ‘illustrative guidance’. For instance, while addressing the comment in case of routine fund raising in the usual course of business, SEBI acknowledged the fact that if the fund raising is routine in nature and on predictable lines it would not materially affect the price and thus, may not be UPSI. Similarly, in response to the comment on providing specific meaning of ‘impact on management’, it was stated that the same would make it prescriptive, which is not the intent of law.
Therefore, listed entities continue to have the power to determine UPSI based on the expected impact of such an event or information on the price of securities of such entities. The list of events under the definition of UPSI only provides an indicative guidance.
Applicability of the amendments
The Amendment Regulations, though notified on 11th March, 2025, are effective on the 90th day from the publication of the same in the official gazette, that is, 10th June, 2025. Does that mean that the listed entities are not required to identify an event falling under the ‘illustrative list’ as UPSI during the said period, even if the same is price-sensitive? Can a listed entity contend that the categorisation of an event as UPSI, where such an event is falling under the elongated “attention list”, though price-sensitive, is not mandatory for UPSI originating prior to 10th June, 2025?
In our view, such a stance cannot be taken. The intent of the regulations have also been such that required companies to evaluate every event or information, for potential price-sensitivity, and based on such judgement, categorise an information as UPSI until made generally available to the public at large. Therefore, one cannot take a view that such an event was not UPSI prior to the amendments becoming effective, and will take the character of an UPSI only after 10th June, 2025.
An example will make the case clearer. Concrete discussions with respect to a proposed fund raising commenced from 1st May, 2025. The board meeting for approval of the fund raising proposal will take place on 12th June, 2025. Will the listed entity be required to categorise the information as UPSI from 10th June, 2025 (effective date of applicability of the amendments) to 12th June, 2025 (board meeting date on which the final decision will be made and Reg 30 intimation will be provided to the stock exchanges making the information generally available)?
Here, what needs to be evaluated is whether, in accordance with the UPSI guidelines of the entity, the person(s) in-charge of the identification of UPSI has considered the information to be of a price-sensitive nature. If the answer is yes, the information should have been categorised as UPSI from 1st May, 2025 itself, regardless of the applicability of the amendments.
On the other hand, if the same was evaluated and not considered to be price-sensitive at the time the information was concretised, assuming there has been no further developments subsequently that would give the information the character of being price-sensitive, such an information would not require UPSI categorisation even after 10th June, 2025. A third scenario would be where the information was, in fact, price-sensitive from the time of its concretisation, that is, 1st May 2025, however, not evaluated for price-sensitivity on the account of not explicitly covered under the definition of UPSI. In such a circumstance, the information was actually an UPSI since 1st May, and should have been categorised as such from that time itself. Pursuant to the present amendments, such information that was price-sensitive but not taken care of in the appropriate manner, would now come under the “attention list” of the listed entities.
Need for elongating the ‘illustrative list’ of UPSI
The discussion above makes it clear that the elongated definition does not necessarily result in providing a deeming character of UPSI to the specified events/ information under Reg 30. In such a case, a question may arise on the relevance of providing such an elongated list of UPSI.
The need for the present amendment has been set out in the Consultation Paper and BM agenda of SEBI in the following manner:
However, contrary to expectations, a study conducted by SEBI along with stock exchanges, revealed that, after the amendment to the definition of UPSI in the PIT Regulations, which removed the expression “material events in accordance with the listing agreement”, by and large, companies were seen to be categorizing only the items explicitly mentioned in PIT Regulations as UPSI. The market feedback also suggested that most companies consider this to be a ‘uniform practice’. Therefore, in light of the above observations, SEBI felt that there exists a need to review the definition of UPSI.
Events included in the ‘illustrative list’ of UPSI
A. Deemed material events (Para A of Schedule III) added to the UPSI list
| Insertion in definition of UPSI | Relevant clause in LODR | Discussion in CP/ BM Agenda | VKCo guidance on UPSI categorisation |
| Change in rating(s), other than ESG rating(s) | New Rating(s) or Revision in Rating(s) | Upward/ downward revision to be considered UPSI.New ratings for fresh issue of securities will get covered under ‘change in capital structure’ or ‘fund raising proposed to be undertaken;Considering ESG Ratings are at a nascent stage, SEBI has excluded ESG rating. | Instances of revision may ordinarily have a price-sensitive impact. Also, while withdrawal of ratings is not explicitly covered, it should also be covered |
| Fund raising proposed to be undertaken | the decision with respect to fund raising proposed to be undertaken including by way of issue of securities (excluding security receipts, securitized debt instruments or money market instruments regulated by the Reserve Bank of India), through … | If the fund raising is routine in nature and on predictable lines it would not “be likely to materially affect the price of the securities” and thus may not be UPSI | It is common for NBFCs and other financial sector entities to raise funds through issuance of NCDs. Being routine in nature, such fund-raising would not constitute UPSI pursuant to the present amendment. |
| Agreements, by whatever name called, which may impact the management or control of the company | Agreements covered by Clause (5) and (5A) of Para A of Part A | Original proposal under CP required two conditions: (i) agreements that impact the management and control of the company and (ii) are in the knowledge of the company However, pursuant to BM, agreements impacting either ‘management’ or ‘control’ have been included. | Usually agreements which may impact the management or control are price sensitive in nature. However, if the change is purely inter-promoter transfers or similar agreements, which may not impact the working or operations of the entity, a view may be taken |
| Fraud or defaults by the company, its promoter, director, KMP, or subsidiary or arrest of KMP, promoter or director of the company, whether occurred within India or abroad | Fraud or defaults by a listed entity, its promoter, director, KMP, SMP or subsidiary or arrest of KMP, SMP, promoter or director of the listed entity, whether occurred within India or abroad | SMP excluded considering the same may not generally have a material impact on the price of securities of the listed entity. Such fraud, default or arrest should be in relation to the listed entity. | In determination of the materiality and hence, price-sensitivity of information under this clause, guidance may also be drawn from the ISN on Reg 30. Refer a brief note on the ISN here. |
| Changes in KMP other than due to superannuation or end of term, and resignation of a Statutory Auditor or Secretarial Auditor | Change in directors, KMP senior management, Auditor and Compliance Officer | MD/WTD/CEO not proposed to be re-appointed may be potential UPSI. Resignation of CFO or CS may be usual movement across entities, and , may not be in the nature of UPSI. On the other hand, any resignation citing governance issues, including that of an independent director, though not covered explicitly in the definition, should be considered as UPSI. Similarly, every instance of resignation by the statutory or secretarial auditor may not be UPSI. For instance, resignation on account of bandwidth or personal limitations of the auditor. .Resignation on account of corporate governance concerns, or indicating frauds/ accounting lapses etc may be considered as UPSI. | |
| Resolution plan/ restructuring or one time settlement in relation to loans/borrowings from banks/financial institutions | Resolution plan/ Restructuring in relation to loans/borrowings from banks/financial institutions. One time settlement with a bank | No threshold limit provided since the same pertains to Para A item under Schedule III. | |
| Admission of winding-up petition filed by any party /creditors and admission of application by the Tribunal filed by the corporate applicant or financial creditors for initiation of corporate insolvency resolution process against the company as a corporate debtor, approval of resolution plan or rejection thereof under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 | winding-up petition filed by any party / creditors events in relation to the corporate insolvency resolution process of a listed corporate debtor under the Insolvency Code | Filing a winding-up petition itself is a material event requiring intimation to the stock exchanges. Admission of such a petition is the second stage, and while the same may be ‘price-sensitive’, it is not clear as to what would be ‘unpublished’ for the purpose of ensuring PIT controls on the same. This appears to be one of the instances of events emanating from outside the entity, and hence, relaxations w.r.t. SDD entries and trading window closure may be availed (see discussion below). | |
| Initiation of forensic audit, by whatever name called, by the company or any other entity for detecting mis-statement in financials, misappropriation/ siphoning or diversion of funds and receipt of final forensic audit report | Initiation of Forensic audit a) The fact of initiation of forensic audit along-with name of entity initiating the audit and reasons for the same, if available; b) Final forensic audit report (other than for forensic audit initiated by regulatory / enforcement agencies) on receipt by the listed entity along with comments of the management, if any. | While it was suggested to not consider receipt of final forensic report as UPSI, the suggestion was not accepted since the information regarding outcome of such forensic audit may also be UPSI | In our view, once the initiation of forensic audit is considered as UPSI, the said event, although disclosed as a material event, should continue to be considered as UPSI till the time the final forensic audit report is not made public. |
| Action(s) initiated or orders passed within India or abroad, by any regulatory, statutory, enforcement authority or judicial body against the company or its directors, key managerial personnel, promoter or subsidiary, in relation to the company | Clause (19) and (20) of Para A of Part A of Schedule III | SMP excluded considering the same may not generally have a material impact on the price of securities of the listed entity | The explanation to the amended definition to UPSI provides that for the identification of events enumerated as UPSI, the guidelines for materiality referred to in para A of Part A will be applicable. Therefore, an imposition of penalty will require disclosure if the same exceeds the limits of Rs. 1 lakh by sector regulators/ enforcement agencies and Rs. 10 lakhs for other authorities. The materiality of an action taken vis-a-vis the price of the securities of the listed entity depends on various factors, such as criticality of the non-compliance warranting an action, severity of the action/ penalty, impact of the penalty on the reputation and profits of the listed entity etc. Hence, not each instance of action taken or penalty imposed would require identification as UPSI. Further, the UPSI under this clause, being an event emanating from outside the listed entity, relaxations with respect to SDD entries and trading window closure may be availed (see below) |
B. Events determined as material (Para B of Schedule III) added to UPSI list
| Insertion in definition of UPSI | Relevant clause in LODR | Discussion in CP/ BM Agenda |
| Award or termination of order/contracts not in the normal course of business | Awarding, bagging/ receiving, amendment or termination of awarded/bagged orders/contracts not in the normal course of business | Expected to have a significant impact on the revenue and profitability of the company. Materiality will be based on thresholds provided under Reg 30(4) of LODR read with the ISN on Reg 30. |
| Outcome of any litigation(s) or dispute(s) which may have an impact on the company | Pendency of any litigation(s) or dispute(s) or the outcome thereof which may have an impact on the listed entity | Initial order and pendency or any litigation is available in the public domain, hence, not UPSI.Materiality will be based on thresholds provided under Reg 30(4) of LODR read with the ISN on Reg 30. |
| Giving of guarantees or indemnity or becoming a surety, by whatever named called, for any third party, by the company not in the normal course of business | Giving of guarantees or indemnity or becoming a surety , by whatever name called, for any third party. | Only such guarantees that are not in normal course of business will be UPSI Materiality will be based on thresholds provided under Reg 30(4) of LODR read with the ISN on Reg 30. |
| Granting, withdrawal, surrender, cancellation or suspension of key licenses or regulatory approvals. | Granting, withdrawal , surrender , cancellation or suspension of key licenses or regulatory approvals | As regards the suggestion of defining key licenses and regulatory approvals, the same being dependent on the industry or sector, the same has not been defined separately. Here again, emphasis has been given on the likelihood of materially affecting the price of security of a listed entity for UPSI identification. |
In our view, wherever an event is determined to be material by a listed entity, under Para B or Para C or any other residual clauses, such events are in the nature of UPSI. Thus, the clauses not expressly covered by the definition of UPSI, viz. product launch, capacity addition, strategic tie-up, loan agreements not in the normal course of business etc can also be in the nature of UPSI, based on its expected impact on the price of the securities of the listed entity.
Actionables pursuant to the revised definition of UPSI
As discussed above, the definition of UPSI, so far as the items specified thereunder is concerned, is illustrative and not prescriptive. Items that are of routine nature, or otherwise, are not expected to have a material impact on the price of securities of the listed entity can be excluded from UPSI categorisation. This requires a listed entity to first of all, have internal guidelines for identification of an event/ information as UPSI. Given the diverse items of information that may be material, it will be impossible to have a closed list of all; therefore, the list of potential UPSI items (UPSI Library) needs to be formulated by every listed entity based on probable impact on the relevant financial parameters (guidance may be drawn from the ISN on Reg 30 for Para B items), as well as feedback based on past events in the listed entity or relevant to such listed entity. The list should be (a) Dynamic – it will have to be populated regularly, based on a feedback system and (b) Granular – the more granular the items are, easier it will be to assign the first point of responsibility and to minimise the nodes or the stop-overs that information travels, from its first source of recognition to the ultimate centre.
Secondly, record is to be maintained with proper rationale for non categorization of an event or information as UPSI, particularly if the same falls within the illustrative list of UPSI as provided in the definition.
Needless to say, sensitisation of the relevant persons handling UPSI or such information that may be categorised as UPSI is crucial to ensure smooth functioning of the PIT controls.
Other amendments
In addition to the amendments made in the definition of UPSI, some guidance has been given with respect to UPSI not originating from within the listed entity.
- Entry in Structured Digital Database (SDD)
For information not emanating from within the listed entity, the SDD entry may be done within 2 calendar days from the receipt of such information.
- Trading window closure
For UPSI not emanating from within the listed entity, trading window closure is optional.
The SEBI Consultation Paper or BM Agenda does not have reference to the aforesaid amendments. However, it can be understood that in case of events not emanating from within the listed entity, the UPSI is neither germinated from the listed entity, nor does it have a journey as an UPSI prior to disclosure, since the disclosure is required to be made within a maximum of 24 hours from the receipt of such information.
The intent of trading window closure is to caution the Designated Persons against trading, while in possession of UPSI. However, for events emanating from outside the listed entity, there is hardly much time between the receipt of information by the listed entity and the publication of such information through stock exchange intimation, thus making it generally available. Refer a presentation on the trajectory of an information from UPSI to material event disclosure here (slide 28 onwards).
Hence, the closure of the trading window is not relevant in such circumstances. The concept of trading window closure and related compliances has been discussed in a short video here. Having said that, any person in receipt of UPSI is bound by the primary charging section of the PIT Regulations to ensure that no trade is undertaken by the person while in possession of UPSI, irrespective of whether the trading window is closed or not.
Conclusion
The present amendments bring in an illustrative list of items that may ordinarily be considered as UPSI, to provide guidance to the listed entities in ensuring compliance with the PIT Regulations in letter and in spirit. As discussed above, this cannot be taken to mean that a list of deemed UPSI has been provided, and the determination of UPSI remains with the listed entities based on the expected impact on the price of the securities. Further, while the new amendments are inspired from Reg 30 of LODR, the definition of UPSI is common for both equity and debt-listed entities. Here, it is also to be noted that Reg 51 of LODR, as applicable to debt-listed entities, requires disclosure of all price-sensitive information to the stock exchanges.
[1] 90th day from the date of publication in the Official Gazette.
Read More:
Sebi elongates unpublished price sensitive information list
Prohibition of Insider Trading – Resource Centre
Sebi elongates unpublished price sensitive information list
/0 Comments/in Corporate Laws, PIT /by Vinita Nair DedhiaCritical Reg. 30 events assimilate into ‘illustrative guidance list’ of UPSI as SEBI strives for EoDB and easier compliance requirement
Refer amendment notified | Refer Consultation Paper
November 11, 2024 (updated on March 13, 2025)
– Vinita Nair | corplaw@vinodkothari.com
If your idea of unpublished price sensitive information (‘UPSI’), which companies have to guard as confidential until disclosed to investors, is something which may impact the stock prices, you now have a longer list of things, which may seem purely operational or business-as-usual for listed companies, but still sitting in the long list of “deemed UPSIs” that SEBI (Prohibition of Insider Trading) Amendment Regulations, 2025 has inserted, thereby making compliance officers do the drill of structured digital database entry to even trading window closure every time such an event occurs. The amendment takes effect from June 9, 2025 .
In our view, price sensitivity of an event has to do with the impact of the event on the company’s profitability, turnover, long-term or short-term prospects, shareholding base, etc. The identification of these events is done based on the materiality of the event to the business and business model. The more prescriptive the lists supplied by the lawmaker are, the more one takes away the sense of responsibility and accountability to the corporate team that flags corporate events as material. If the lawmakers flag them all, or flag a lot, the very seriousness of tagging an information as price sensitive is taken away.
Does the present amendment go in the same direction of making the regulations more prescriptive? May not be the case necessarily as SEBI BM agenda clearly demonstrates that the intent was to provide illustrative guidance and not define a scope making the regulations prescriptive, in view of the EODB perspective. For e.g. in case of routine fund raising in the usual course of business, SEBI acknowledged the fact that if the fund raising is routine in nature and on predictable lines it would not materially affect the price and thus, may not be UPSI. It also took note of certain suggestions and considered them in the final amendment., for e.g. doing away with trading window closure requirements where UPSI is not emanating from within the listed entity, excluding change in ESG ratings from UPSI ambit, excluding reference of senior management in some cases etc.
Background:
The N.K. Sodhi Committee Report of 2015 , while reviewing the definition of UPSI which included ‘material events in accordance with the listing agreement’, emphasized that it would be important to ensure that regardless of whether the information in question is price-sensitive, no piece of information should mandatorily be regarded as “UPSI”. Thereafter, in 2018, noting that all material events which are required to be disclosed as per the LODR Regulations may not necessarily be UPSI under the PIT Regulations, the Committee on Fair Market Conduct , recommended the removal of the explicit inclusion of “material events in accordance with the listing agreement” contained within the definition of UPSI. As listed entities did not follow the principles laid down in UPSI definition, it was decided to elongate the list of deemed UPSI events to guide the entities better in UPSI identification.
Earlier in May 2023, SEBI had proposed considering every material event as UPSI. Based on the feedback received for earlier CP citing concerns of significant increase in compliance management and potential perpetual closure of trading window, SEBI had kept the proposal on hold till revisiting the framework for material events disclosure, market rumour verification, trading plan provisions etc.
In December, 2024 SEBI notified LODR amendments in Reg. 30 & Schedule III for EoDB (effective December 12, 2024). The Industry Standards Note issued in relation to Reg. 30 disclosures guide on the manner of ascertaining the expected impact on value relevant for the purpose of determining the materiality (read our article here). Trading Plans were made flexible (effective November 1, 2024) to enable persons perpetually in possession of UPSI be able to trade.
Present Amendment:
A. Deemed material events (Para A of Schedule III) added to the UPSI list
- Change in rating(s), other than ESG rating(s) [sub-clause vi]
■ Upward/ downward revision to be considered UPSI.
■ New ratings for fresh issue of securities will get covered under ‘change in capital structure’ or ‘fund raising proposed to be undertaken’;
■ Considering ESG Ratings are at a nascent stage, SEBI has excluded ESG rating.
VKCo Comments: Rating revision need not necessarily result in security/ instrument going below investment grade or resulting in a breach of any covenant, to be considered as UPSI. By virtue of the present amendment, revision from AAA to AA+ or from AA to AA (-) will also be considered as UPSI, as it will impact the cost of funds, investor’s perspective etc. - Fundraising proposed to be undertaken [sub-clause vii]
VKCo Comments: Reg 29 covers intimation of fund raising by issue of securities, term loans are anyways excluded. While fundraising by way of issue of capital is deemed UPSI, every instance of debt issuance may not necessarily be UPSI. SEBI BM agenda further clarifies that if instances of fund raising are routine in nature then the particular would not materially affect the price of securities in the first place. Therefore, such fundraising events may not be considered as UPSI. - Agreements, by whatever name called, which may impact management or control of the company. [sub-clause viii]
VKCo Comments: Where the company has knowledge about the agreement. - Fraud or defaults by the company, its promoter, director, KMP, or subsidiary or arrest of KMP, promoter or director of the company, whether occurred within India or abroad [sub-clause ix]
VKCo Comments: Fraud and default to have the same meaning as assigned to them under LODR Regulations [Sch III, Part A, Para A (6)].
■ As explained in LODR, default by a promoter, director, key managerial personnel, subsidiary shall mean default which has or may have an impact on the listed entity.
■ Fraud, defaults, etc. by senior management may not generally have a material impact on the price of securities and therefore, the same has been not included within the ambit of the said clause. - Changes in KMP, other than due to superannuation or end of term, and resignation of Statutory Auditor or Secretarial Auditor [sub-clause v]
VKCo Comments: MD/WTD/CEO not proposed to be re-appointed may be potential UPSI. Further, resignation of CFO or CS for better prospects, while may result in a change, may not be in the nature of UPSI. Resignations citing governance issues should be considered as UPSI.
■ Similarly, every instance of resignation by the statutory or secretarial auditor may not be UPSI. Resignation on account of corporate governance concerns, may be considered as UPSI. - Resolution plan/ Restructuring or one-time settlement in relation to loans/borrowings from banks/financial institutions [sub-clause x]
- Admission of winding-up petition filed by any party / creditors, admission of application by the tribunal filed by the corporate applicant or financial creditors for initiation of CIRP against the company as a corporate debtor, approval of resolution plan or rejection thereof under the Insolvency Code [sub-clause xi]
- Initiation of forensic audit (by whatever name called) by the company or any other entity for detecting mis-statement in financials, misappropriation/ siphoning or diversion of funds and receipt of final forensic audit report [sub-clause xii]
- Action(s) initiated or orders passed within India or abroad by any regulatory, statutory, enforcement authority or judicial body against the company or its directors, KMP, promoter or subsidiary, in relation to the company. [sub-clause xiii]
VKCo Comments: Intent is to include matters covered in Clause 19 and 20 of Para A. Clause 19 items viz. search or seizure, re-opening of accounts, investigation may be in the nature of UPSI, but each of clause 20 items may not be UPSI. Actions like suspension, disqualification, debarment or closure of operations may be in the nature of UPSI. However, in case of fines & penalties, SEBI amended the monetary limits for disclosure of fine or penalty under clause 20 – Rs. 1 lakh for fine/ penalty imposed by sector regulators/ enforcement agencies (as provided in ISN dated February, 2025) and Rs. 10 lakhs for other authorities. Amounts lower than the thresholds are required to be disclosed on a quarterly basis as part of the Integrated Filing (Governance). While imposition of penalty or fine by sector regulators/ enforcement agencies reflect on the state of governance/ functioning of the entity, every instance of levy of fine or penalty may not be UPSI.
B. Determined material events (Para B of Schedule III) added to UPSI list
- Award or termination of order/contracts not in the normal course of business [sub-clause iv]
- Outcome of any litigation(s)/dispute(s) which may have an impact on the company [sub-clause xiv]
- Giving of guarantees or indemnity or becoming a surety, by whatever name called, for any third party, by the company not in the normal course of business [sub-clause xv]
- Granting, withdrawal, surrender, cancellation or suspension of key licences or regulatory approvals. [sub-clause xvi]
VKCo Comments: In our view, each of the events that is determined to be material by the listed entity are in the nature of UPSI. The clauses not expressly covered above viz. product launch, capacity addition, strategic tie-up, loan agreements not in the normal course of business etc can be in the nature of UPSI.
Actionable arising on UPSI identification under PIT Regulations
- Authorised KMPs to consider the illustrative guidance and the industry standards note for determination of expected impact of value (in case of Sch III Para B items) and determine if the information in hand is a UPSI.
- The rationale should be recorded for future reference, in case of any query from stock exchange or SEBI in this regard.
- Closure of trading window for DPs in possession of UPSI;
- Trading window shall not be closed for event / info emanating outside the listed entity;
- The facility of PAN freeze is presently available only in case of financial results. In other cases, the DPs will be required to be informed about the trading window closure and opening.
- Recording of sharing of such UPSI, internally or externally, for legitimate purpose in the Structured Digital Database;
- Recording of UPSI which is emanating outside the listed entity has to be made in SDD within 2 calendar days from the receipt of such information.
- Preserving the confidentiality of UPSI and ensuring making it generally available in accordance with the Code of Fair Disclosure.
Conclusion
While the present amendment indicating specific material events as illustrative guidance is better than the earlier proposal, law cannot prescribe an exhaustive list of UPSI events as it will differ from entity to entity. Given the diverse items of information that may be material, it will be impossible to have a closed list of all; therefore, the list of potential UPSI items (UPSI Library) needs to be formulated by every listed entity which is (a) Dynamic – it will have to be populated regularly, based on a feedback system and (b) Granular – the more granular the items are, easier it will be to assign the first point of responsibility and to minimise the nodes or the stop-overs that information travels, from its first source of recognition to the ultimate centre.
Speedy rights issue in 23 working days from BM
/0 Comments/in Corporate Laws, SEBI /by Team Corplaw-Sakshi Patil, Executive | corplaw@vinodkothari.com
Our related resources:


