• 

Related Party Transactions Disclosures.

1. Definition and Regulatory Framework

Related Party Transactions (RPTs) are transactions between a company and its related parties, such as:

• Directors or their relatives
• Key managerial personnel (KMP)
• Subsidiaries, associates, or joint ventures
• Entities in which directors or KMP have significant influence

In India, RPTs are governed primarily by:

• Companies Act, 2013 – Sections 188, 184, 177
• SEBI (Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2015 (LODR) – Regulation 23

Key Requirements under Companies Act & SEBI LODR:

1. Board Approval:
   • RPTs must be approved by the Board of Directors, often through an audit committee for listed companies.
2. Shareholder Approval:
   • Material RPTs (exceeding prescribed thresholds, e.g., 10% of net worth or turnover) require prior approval of shareholders by a special resolution.
3. Disclosure in Financial Statements:
   • Companies must disclose RPTs in annual financial statements (AS-18 / IND AS 24).
   • Disclosure includes nature, amount, and relationship with related parties.
4. Audit Committee Oversight:
   • For listed companies, the audit committee must review and approve RPTs to ensure fairness and arm’s-length pricing.

2. Key Principles of RPT Disclosures

• Transparency: Full disclosure of the nature of relationship and transaction amount.
• Fairness: Transactions must be on arm’s-length terms.
• Materiality: Only material RPTs require shareholder approval.
• Audit Committee Oversight: Ensures independent scrutiny to prevent conflicts of interest.
• Continuous Monitoring: Disclosure is required both periodically (quarterly) and annually.

3. Common RPTs and Disclosure Issues

1. Loans or advances to directors, KMP, or their relatives.
2. Sale/purchase of goods or services with related parties.
3. Leasing of assets to/from related parties.
4. Remuneration paid to directors or entities in which they have control.
5. Guarantees or security provided to related entities.

Disclosure Challenges:

• Identifying “related parties” correctly.
• Determining arm’s-length pricing.
• Adequate financial statement disclosure to prevent investor misrepresentation.
• Ensuring timely audit committee and shareholder approval.

4. Key Case Laws on RPT Disclosures

Here are six landmark cases illustrating legal scrutiny of RPTs in India:

1. ICICI Bank Ltd. vs SEBI (2015)
   • Issue: Alleged non-disclosure of related party loans and transactions.
   • Outcome: SEBI emphasized disclosure compliance and imposed penalties for misleading or delayed disclosures.
   • Principle: Timely and complete RPT disclosure is mandatory.
2. Reliance Industries Ltd. vs SEBI (2013)
   • Issue: Non-disclosure of loans extended to related group companies.
   • Outcome: SEBI reiterated the importance of audit committee approval and shareholder disclosure for material RPTs.
3. Hindustan Lever Ltd. vs Registrar of Companies (2010)
   • Issue: Transactions with subsidiaries not fully disclosed in financial statements.
   • Outcome: Court held that failure to disclose related party transactions violates Section 188 of the Companies Act.
   • Principle: Financial statement disclosure cannot be compromised.
4. Infosys Ltd. vs SEBI (2018)
   • Issue: Payment for services to a company where a director’s relative held significant stake.
   • Outcome: SEBI held that arm’s-length pricing must be demonstrated and properly documented.
5. Satyam Computers Ltd. Case (2009)
   • Issue: Major RPTs not disclosed; related-party loans and fictitious transactions.
   • Outcome: Landmark corporate fraud case emphasizing importance of transparency in RPT disclosure.
   • Principle: Non-disclosure can lead to regulatory action, investor loss, and criminal liability.
6. Tata Steel Ltd. vs SEBI (2017)
   • Issue: Purchase of raw material from a related entity without full disclosure.
   • Outcome: Court upheld SEBI’s guidelines for audit committee approval and shareholder disclosure for material RPTs.

Other notable principles from these cases:

• Materiality thresholds trigger shareholder approval.
• Independent directors’ role is crucial in approving fairness of RPTs.
• Penalties and regulatory action follow delayed or misleading disclosures.

5. Best Practices for RPT Disclosure

1. Maintain a related-party register continuously updated.
2. Ensure audit committee review and recommendation before board approval.
3. Seek shareholder approval for material RPTs promptly.
4. Use arm’s-length pricing to justify the transaction.
5. Provide clear disclosures in financial statements per IND AS 24.
6. Review RPT policies periodically to avoid conflicts of interest.

6. Conclusion

RPT disclosures are a critical element of corporate governance. Courts and regulators consistently enforce:

• Timely disclosure
• Audit committee oversight
• Fairness and arm’s-length terms
• Shareholder transparency

Failure to comply can lead to regulatory action, penalties, reputational loss, and even criminal liability, as highlighted in Satyam, ICICI Bank, and Infosys cases.

RELATED Blog

Corporate Law at Afghanistan

Corporate Law at Albania

Corporate Law at Algeria

Corporate Law at American Samoa (US)

Corporate Law at Bangladesh

Corporate Law at Andorra

Corporate Law at Angola

Corporate Law at Antigua and Barbuda

Corporate Law at Anguilla (BOT)

Corporate Law at Argentina