Supreme Court: Driving Licence Renewal After a Gap Will Not Take Effect From Expiry Date  ||  Supreme Court: High Courts Cannot Quash Cheque Bounce Cases by Pre-Trial Inquiry Into Liability  ||  Supreme Court: Passport Renewal Cannot be Denied if Trial Court Has Permitted it Despite Pending Case  ||  SC: Delay in Depositing Sale Balance Does not Make Specific Performance Decree Inexecutable  ||  Supreme Court: Non-Compete Fees Qualify as Deductible Revenue Expenditure under Income Tax Act  ||  Supreme Court: Section 311 CrPC Should be Invoked Sparingly, Only When Evidence is Vital  ||  J&K&L High Court: Successive Bail Applications Can Be Filed Even Without Change in Circumstances  ||  Kerala HC: Fresh Arbitration Notice is Required For Second Arbitration After Prior Award Set Aside  ||  NCLT Hyderabad: Mortgaging Property Without Lending Money Does Not Constitute Financial Debt  ||  Supreme Court: Vacancies From Resignations under CUSAT Act Must Follow Communal Rotation    

RBI imposes monetary penalty on Nagrik Sahakari Bank Maryadit, Durg, Chhattisgarh- (Reserve Bank of India) (16 Nov 2021)

MANU/RPRL/0200/2021

Banking

The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has imposed, by an order dated November 16, 2021, a monetary penalty of Rs. 2.00 lakh (Rupees Two lakh only) on Nagrik Sahakari Bank Maryadit, Durg, Chhattisgarh (the bank) for contravention of/ non-compliance with the directions issued by the RBI to Urban Co-operative Banks on Exposure Norms & Statutory/ Other Restrictions-UCBs and Know Your Customer (KYC). This penalty has been imposed in exercise of powers vested in RBI under the provisions of Section 47 A (1) (c) read with Section 46 (4) (i) and Section 56 of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949, taking into account the failure of the bank to adhere to the aforesaid directions issued by RBI.

This action is based on deficiencies in regulatory compliance and is not intended to pronounce upon the validity of any transaction or agreement entered into by the bank with its customers.

Background

The inspection report of the bank based on its financial position as on March 31, 2020, revealed, inter alia, that the bank had (i) not adhered to prudential inter-bank (Gross) exposure limit, (ii) not complied with the prudential inter-bank Counter Party limit and (iii) no system in place to identify suspicious transactions in contravention of/ non-compliance with the directions issued by RBI on Exposure Norms & Statutory/ Other Restrictions-UCBs and Know Your Customer (KYC). Based on the same, a Notice was issued to the bank advising it to show cause as to why penalty should not be imposed for non-compliance with the directions.

After considering the bank's replies, RBI came to the conclusion that the aforesaid charges of non-compliance with RBI directions were substantiated and warranted imposition of monetary penalty.

Tags : PENALTY   IMPOSITION   BANK  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved