Partnership to Enable Voice-First, Multilingual AI for Citizen-Centric Governance (See 'Corp Brief') Union Minister of Textiles inaugurates IIHT SUTRA 2026 (See 'Corp Brief') CPC - Injunction granted in respect of certain clothing brands which their owner explicitly admitted to being deceptively similar to existing brands & where defendent attempts to skirt its contractual obligations with the plaintiff by making microscopic variations in its brand: HC (See 'Legal Desk') Over 50,000 saplings planted Across 31 States on Hariyali Amavasya (See 'Corp Brief') FEMA - Appellants contravened provisions by failing to realise & repatriate export proceeds within prescribed period - penalties on directors upheld: SAFEMA (See 'Legal Desk') India reaffirms Commitment to Elephant Conservation on World Elephant Day 2026 (See 'Corp Brief') Competition Act - High win rate by itself, unsupported by evidence of coordinated bidding, bid rotation, or anti-competitive agreements, does not establish bid rigging u/s 3(3)(d) of the Act: CCI (See 'Legal Desk') Ministry of Textiles to Celebrate Women Weavers Through 'Srijan: Voices from the Loom' (See 'Corp Brief') IBC - It is impermissible for NCLT to examine merits of dispute while considering application for CIRP u/s 9 by operational creditor: SC (See 'Legal Desk') Bharat Pashudhan and NFDP expand Digital Access, Services and Support for Farmers (See 'Corp Brief') Companies Act - It cannot be expected that registering authority would, in every case, independently identify whether every newly registered company name is identical with or similar to existing company name: HC (See 'Legal Desk') PDUNASS inaugurates Joint EPFO-ITC-ILO Training Programme (See 'Corp Brief') Patents - Claims must be construed as a whole without dissection - product claims are exempt - Section 3(m) objections remain independent of novelty, inventive step & Section 3(k) computer-related evaluations: HC (See 'Legal Desk') IBC - Subsequent efforts to sell mortgaged property does not amount to waiver of financial creditors rights: NCLAT (See 'Legal Desk') Prevention and Healthy Lifestyles must Go Hand in Hand with Disease Treatment : Jadhav (See 'Corp Brief') Ministry of Textiles to organise IIHT SUTRA 2026 (See 'Corp Brief') A&C - Award is patently illegal and liable to be set aside if it ignores vital evidence, applies circular logic, or blocks party from presenting its case: HC (See 'Legal Desk') In a first, 'Vande Mataram' to be sung from ramparts of historic Red Fort (See 'Corp Brief') National Handloom Designers' Conclave showcases Design-Led Innovation (See 'Corp Brief') PBPT - Routing of funds through company to appellant squarely attracts Section 2(9)(A) of the Act as property stood in name of benamidar while consideration emanated from beneficial owner: SAFEMA Tribunal (See 'Legal Desk') PM-YASASVI Scheme implementation in Maharashtra reviewed Regularly: Govt (See 'Corp Brief') MoS calls for greater Private Sector Participation in Biotechnology Ecosystem (See 'Corp Brief') IBC - Right of Personal Guarantor to invoke insolvency provisions of Sec 94 of IBC is statutory right that cannot be extinguished merely because Financial Creditor has initiated recovery proceedings under SARFAESI: NCLT (See 'Legal Desk') Empowering Nari Shakti: 1 crore houses allotted to women (See 'Corp Brief') MoS dedicates to nation first-of-its-kind 'Eco-Educational Hub' (See 'Corp Brief') NI Act - Moratorium protects corporate debtor in respect of insolvency proceedings, but does not grant immunity to natural persons from criminal liability already incurred on account of cheque dishonour: HC (See 'Legal Desk') XI BRICS Culture Ministers' meeting concludes in Bhopal (See 'Corp Brief') A&C - If prima facie arbitration agreement exists and non-signatories have shown conduct aligning with contract, referral court should allow arbitrator to finalize list of parties based on detailed evidence: HC (See 'Legal Desk') Railways approves introduction of Daily Itarsi-Madan Mahal Passenger Service (See 'Corp Brief') A&C - Arbitral award is patently illegal if it is rendered in summary manner without allowing parties to lead evidence or be heard on critical pleadings: HC (See 'Legal Desk') Tete-a-tete around AI in banking sector often begins with algorithms (See CORP EINSICHT)

Significant Beneficial Ownership - A Step in the Right Direction?

Published: Jun 07, 2021

By Shankar Iyer, Direct Tax Leader, DAA Consulting

BENEFICIAL ownership implies ownership that ultimately enjoys the income from the asset and also controls the asset itself. In 2019, the Ministry of Corporate Affairs ('MCA') - the Indian corporate law authority - notified the rules ('Rules') for determining significant beneficial ownership/owner ('SBO') in Indian companies. Though the concept of beneficial ownership has existed in Indian corporate law for decades, it was essentially based on suo moto disclosure by registered shareholder that the beneficial interest in those shares was in fact held by someone else, i.e., other than the registered shareholder. Rules take this concept further and cast a requirement on companies to identify the SBO.

Rules prescribe that SBO in relation to a reporting company (RCo ), means an individual who (either on his own or together with other person(s)) possesses indirectly or together with direct holdings , at least ten per cent of shares, voting rights thereof, right to receive at least ten per cent of distributable dividend or right to exercise significant influence or control. Indirect holding of right or entitlement is crucial for determining SBO and without any indirect holding there is no SBO.

Indirect holding in RCo is contemplated in more ways than one mentioned in (i) to (iv). Direct holding in RCo, contemplated in (v), is optional and only in addition to such indirect holding.

Every individual who acquires SBO in RCo is required to disclose the same in prescribed form and manner to RCo. Once RCo receives such declaration from such individual, it is required to file a return in prescribed form and manner with the Registrar of Companies.

The Rules now cast an obligation on the company to take necessary steps to find out who is the SBO. This becomes relevant when certain individuals (including shareholders) may be acting in concert or in a layered structure with multiple corporate shareholdings in the group shareholding structure. In cases involving a member (not being an individual) holding at least ten per cent shares or voting rights or right to receive dividend thereof, the company (RCo) shall issue notice to such member seeking details of the SBO.

Amongst other things, Rules do not apply to (a) body corporate controlled by Government and (b) SEBI (Securities and Exchange Board of India) registered investment vehicles such as alternative investment funds, mutual funds, real estate investment trusts and infrastructure investment trusts.

Key issues

The Rules have moved the concept of beneficial ownership from being merely based on disclosure by concerned individual shareholder to ensuring the company takes necessary steps to identify SBO. However, in cases where individuals (including the shareholder member) are acting in concert without knowledge of the company i.e., they may not have made any specific disclosure of beneficial ownership/SBO, identifying SBO may be difficult. In such a specific situation, Rules do not prescribe any steps and it is yet to be seen what measures would the company take in order to identify SBO. Further ahead, in case the individuals are relatives, whether their shares would need to be clubbed to test for SBO is unclear. The exercise of significant influence (represented in (i) of above picture) becomes relevant here to determine SBO. What would constitute participation in financial and operating policy decisions of the company is not defined in Rules.

Certain shareholder categories such as private equity investors (not registered with SEBI nor regulated by RBI) often appoint their respective nominees on the board of directors of target companies acquired by them. They also have affirmative voting rights on matters of importance as defined in shareholders' agreement. How and to what extent would Rules for SBO apply to private equity structures is unclear.

Similarly, in a layered structure, the immediate member of the reporting company, holding at least ten percent thereof, is also a corporate entity which in turn is majorly held by another corporate entity and finally an individual holds majority in ultimate holding company in the chain. In this situation, such individual may need to be disclosed as SBO by the company although the effective proportionate share of such individual in reporting company may be well below the stated threshold of ten per cent.

Way forward

The Rules for determining SBO are certainly a step in the right direction to identify real owners of a company. While beneficial ownership was based on disclosure by shareholders, SBO is a step further and requires company to identify its SBO, especially in a layered structure. In case the company fails to take prescribed steps to identify SBO, it shall be punishable with a fine ranging from approx. USD 14,000 to approx. USD 70,000 and additional penalty for continuing offence. The challenges highlighted above, if clarified, would result in seamless implementation of the SBO governance norms and also ensure that the overburdened company courts are spared of frivolous litigation.

Shankar Iyer (Author) is a Chartered Accountant and a Direct tax professional with more than 13 years of consulting experience in the taxation and regulatory field, namely, corporate taxation, international taxation and mergers & acquisitions taxation and regulatory aspects. He specializes in Business advisory, Corporate taxation and regulatory (FEMA, SEBI, CCI) matters, Direct tax due diligences, Endowment planning, Profit repatriation / cash repatriation strategies and Streamlining Group structures.

TIOL CORP SEARCH

TIOL GROUP WEBSITES