Yes. Refunds, cashbacks, sweep-in from partner banks or interest are permitted credits into your account even after March 15, 2024

Ans: Yes, since AIFs are considered under non-banking financial institutions.

Clarification: The PSL guidelines are activity and beneficiary specific and are not based on type of collateral. Therefore, bank loans given to individuals/ businesses for undertaking agriculture activities do not automatically become ineligible for priority sector classification, only on account of the fact that underlying asset is gold jewellery/ornament etc. It may, however, be noted that as per FIDD Circular dated February 7, 2019 and updated from time to time, it has been advised that banks may waive margin requirements for agricultural loans upto ₹1.6 lakh. Therefore, bank should have extended the loan based on scale of finance and assessment of credit requirement for undertaking the agriculture activity and not solely based on available collateral in the form of gold. Further, as applicable to all loans under PSL, banks should put in place proper internal controls and systems to ensure that the loans extended under priority sector are for approved purposes and the end use is continuously monitored.

Clarification: Bank loans up to ₹2 lakh to individuals solely engaged in allied activities without any accompanying land holding criteria are entitled for classification under SMF category of priority sector lending. Further, farmers availing loans under SMF (based on land holding) are also eligible for loans under allied activities upto ₹2 lakhs and the same can be also be classified under SMF category

Clarification: Bank should ensure proper documentation for classifying agricultural loans under PSL as approved by their board. Particularly while classifying loans under agriculture/SMF category, the bank should maintain details regarding location where the borrower is tilling the land, details of crop grown, hypothecation of crops, if any, sanction of loan based on scale of finance, record of field visit by bank officials to monitor end use of agricultural loans, etc. Some of the above aspects should be available with the bank in the absence of copy of land record/lease deed particularly in case of agriculture loans to landless labourers’, share croppers etc.

Clarification: As per extant guidelines, loans for Agriculture Infrastructure or loans for Food & Agro-processing activity are each subject to an aggregate sanctioned limit of ₹100 crore per borrower from the banking system. In case aggregate exposure across the banking industry exceeds the limit of ₹100 crore, then total exposure will cease to be classified under PSL category. The sanctioned limit of ₹100 crore has to be ascertained facility wise for a particular entity and is exclusive of the other borrowings of the entity for PSL / non-PSL purposes. However, it needs to be ensured that the bank has assessed and sanctioned separate limits for the specific purpose of Agriculture Infrastructure or Food & Agro Processing activities of the entity to qualify as PSL. Banks should take a declaration from the borrower regarding loan sanctioned by any other bank/s for the same activity and also independently seek confirmation from those banks. In the scenario, where new sanction by the bank leads to overall limit across banks to more than ₹100 crore, it needs to inform other banks too about the same. Accordingly, all other banks need to declassify the same from PSL.

Clarification: As per Annex-III of Master Directions on Priority Sector Lending (PSL) dated September 4, 2020, transportation is an eligible activity under indicative list of permissible activities under Food Processing Sector. However, while classifying any facility to transporters for purchasing Commercial Vehicles under “Food & Agro-processing” category, it needs to be ensured that the transporter is using the vehicle exclusively for transportation of food & agro-processed products or is a type of vehicle which is specifically used for “Food & Agro-processing” e.g. cold storage trucks, vans etc. If the commercial vehicle is also used for transportation of products other than those related to food & agro processing, the facility shall not be eligible for classification under ‘Food & Agro-processing’ category. In such cases, the same may be classified under MSME (Services), if it meets the conditions prescribed for the same in our Master Direction on PSL.

Clarification: While classifying any facility to transporters for purchasing Commercial Vehicles under “Agriculture Infrastructure” category, it needs to be ensured that the transporter/ sub-contractor is using the vehicle exclusively for activities that are ancillary to “Agriculture Infrastructure”. If the commercial vehicle is also used for transportation for purposes under non-agriculture infrastructure category, the facility shall not be eligible for classification under ‘Agriculture Infrastructure’. In such cases, the same may be classified under MSME (Services), if it meets the conditions prescribed for the same in our Master Direction on PSL.

Compromise settlement is not available to borrowers as a matter of right; rather it is a discretion to be exercised by the lenders based on their commercial judgement.

The prudential guidelines provide sufficient safeguards with regard to such settlements considered by the lenders:

• All such decisions are required to be taken by lenders as per their Board approved policies, instead of adopting an ad-hoc approach in each case;

• The circular further strengthens the regulatory guidance by mandating that all such cases of compromise settlement involving borrowers classified as fraud or wilful defaulter must be approved by the Board;

• Such settlements shall be without prejudice to the criminal proceeding underway or to be initiated, if under consideration of the lenders against such borrowers;

• As already mentioned, the extant penal provisions continue to remain applicable in such cases.

• Wherever recovery proceedings are pending before a judicial forum, any settlement arrived at with the borrower shall be subject to obtaining a consent decree from the concerned judicial authorities.

• The Boards of lenders have been entrusted with the oversight of the overall trends in approvals of all compromise settlements, including specifically the breakup of accounts classified as fraud, red-flagged, wilful defaulter and quick mortality accounts.

These guidelines will ensure greater transparency of the whole process.

The cross- border inward remittances into India under RDA is primarily on private account. The remitter and the beneficiary should be individuals barring a few exceptions. Remittances through Exchange Houses for financing of trade transactions are also permitted up to certain limit. This scheme is not used for cross-border outward remittances from India.