ICICI Bank stands by CEO Kochhar in Videocon case
STRONG DEFENCE CEO didn’t need to recuse herself from credit panel: chairman
MUMBAI: ICICI Bank Ltd stepped up its defence of chief executive officer and managing director Chanda Kochhar, with board chairman MK Sharma saying that she did not need to recuse herself from the credit committee that sanctioned loans to the Videocon group as it was not an investor in Nupower Renewables.
Sharma was delivering a televised statement on Thursday, a day after the bank said that the board reposed faith in Kochhar.
News reports have raised questions about ICICI Bank’s loans to Videocon because its chairman Venugopal Dhoot supposedly had dealings with Nupower, founded by Kochhar’s husband Deepak Kochhar. Mint couldn’t independently ascertain the veracity of these allegations.
“The board does not see a conflict of interest in any manner since Videocon group is not an investor in Nupower Renewables,” said Sharma. “Hence, there was no need to recuse herself from this committee. As mentioned earlier, this committee had many independent directors and the committee was not chaired by her. Moreover, it was part of a consortium arrangement where the terms and conditions had already been agreed upon by the consortium.”
“When ICICI Bank sanctioned loan, Videocon group did not possess any shares of Nupower,” Dhoot said in a text message.
Sharma clarified that Kochhar “has been making all her disclosures in accordance with the regulatory guidelines under the Companies Act and the Banking Act”.
Proxy advisory firms are divided i n their views on whether these allegations raise ethical and governance questions, with some calling for an independent review.
“Quid pro quo transactions, if they have occurred, violate the fundamentals of ethical business practices. Having said so, these are currently just allegations. That the board has taken a position and provided stakeholders with their point of view is good practice. If the stakeholders are not yet convinced, then the board must consider getting an independent review or investigation done,” said Hetal Dalal, chief operating officer, Institutional Investor Advisory Services (IIAS). ICICI Prudential Life Insurance owns equity in IIAS.
“These are allegations. Does it mean that if someone is at a highranking position at a bank then their spouse or relative should not have a business of their own? And if they have a business, then all banking transactions should be examined bearing that in mind? Having said that, the board of the bank has verified these allegations—how independent is the examination one can speculate. The board has independent members, so we should assume it was a fair examination,” said JN Gupta, managing director, Stakeholders Empowerment Services.
But not everyone agrees. Shriram Subramanian, founder and managing director at Ingovern Research, said a board verification is not enough. “If the allegations are true, then the lack of disclosures of related party transactions is a big corporate governance lapse. There is a need for an independent thirdparty verification,” he said.
In his statement, Sharma said that ICICI Bank has replied to the questions of regulators “satisfactorily”, but declined to share any specifics. MUMBAI: The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has imposed a penalty of ₹58.9 crore on ICICI Bank Ltd, the country’s largest private sector lender, for failing to adhere to its directives regarding the sale of securities from the held-to-maturity, or HTM, portfolio.
“The RBI has i mposed through an order dated March 26, 2018, a monetary penalty of ₹589 million (or ₹58.9 crore) on ICICI Bank Ltd (the bank) for non-compliance with directions issued by RBI on direct sale of securities from its held-to-maturity portfolio and specified disclosure in this regard,” the central bank said on Thursday.
“This action is based on the 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,” the central bank’s statement added. Banks hold debt securities in three categories, including held-to-maturity, available-for-sale (AFS) and held-for-trading (HFT).
Securities acquired with the intention of being held till maturity are classified under HTM.
If the value of sales of securities from HTM category exceeds 5% of the HTM investments, banks are required to disclose in the audited annual financial statements the market value of the HTM investments and indicate the excess of book value over market value.