SBI Ordered to Pay ₹25,000 for Sharing Customer’s Bank Details Without Consent


The State Bank of India (SBI) has been held accountable for a defect in service by the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Lakhimpur Kheri, for disclosing a customer's personal bank account information to his employer without that customer's permission.


According to the Commission, a bank cannot give a third party access to a customer's personal banking information without the customer's permission. According to the ruling, this kind of unapproved disclosure is against banking standards and constitutes a service defect.


The complainant, Pankaj Kumar Shukla, had a savings account with SBI’s Hargaon Branch in Sitapur. He was working with Govind Sugar Mill.


A labour dispute was pending before the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court. During the case, Govind Sugar Mill filed a counter affidavit containing details of Shukla’s savings account.


Shukla alleged that SBI had shared his bank account details with his employer without his consent. He also claimed that the account statement contained some incorrect entries, which were later corrected by the bank.


The complainant said that the unauthorized disclosure of his personal banking information and the incorrect entries caused him mental agony, physical hardship and financial loss. He approached the bank and sought an explanation and correction of the account details.


However, he was not satisfied with the bank’s explanation regarding the disclosure of his account information. He then filed a consumer complaint before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Lakhimpur Kheri.


In his complaint, Shukla sought compensation for deficiency in service, mental agony and litigation costs.

SBI contended that the complaint was unmaintainable and denied any service deficiencies. According to the bank, Shukla worked at Govind Sugar Mill, and his pay was credited to the employer's bank account.


SBI claims that the account statement was solely given to the employer in order to balance salary payments. According to the bank, the information was disclosed in compliance with banking procedures and at the employer's request.


Additionally, SBI asserted that the complainant's account included no inaccurate entries. The bank asked the Commission to reject the complaint and denied disclosing any private information without permission.


However, the Consumer Commission observed that Shukla’s savings account was his personal bank account. The bank had shared details of the account with his employer without obtaining his consent.


The Commission held that a bank cannot disclose a customer’s personal banking information to a third party without the customer’s permission.


It concluded that the unauthorized disclosure was a clear violation of banking norms and amounted to deficiency in service.


Accordingly, the Commission partly allowed the complaint and directed SBI to pay ₹20,000 as compensation for the mental agony and physical hardship caused to the complainant.


The Commission also directed the bank to pay 6% annual interest on the compensation amount from the date the complaint was filed until the amount is paid.


In addition, SBI was directed to pay ₹5,000 towards litigation costs. The complaint against the remaining opposite parties was dismissed.


The order draws attention to a significant problem with bank clients' privacy. Even if a company pays salaries into a customer's savings account, the account is still the customer's personal account.


The Commission's conclusions in this case state that an employer does not automatically have the right to access an employee's personal account information just because they deposit their salary into the employee's bank account.


The case also demonstrates the necessity for banks to exercise caution when answering consumer information requests. Customers may file a complaint with the relevant forum if personal banking information is disclosed without their consent or legal authority.

Share:

RBI imposes Monetary Penalty on this PSU Bank



Bank of Baroda(BOB) has been fined ₹63.60 lakh (Rupees sixty-three lakh sixty thousand only) by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) as follows:

the bank had collected interest, higher than the contracted rate of interest, in certain loan accounts.

the bank did not upload KYC records of certain customers onto Central KYC Records Registry (CKYCR) within the prescribed timeline.

Apart from Bank of Baroda, RBI has also imposed monetary penalty on GIC Housing Finance Limited.

In an order dated June 24, 2026, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) fined GIC Housing Finance Limited ₹3.10 lakh (Rupees Three lakh Ten thousand only) for failing to implement a system of periodic review of risk categorization of accounts, with such periodicity being at least once every six months.


Share:

Bank Ordered to Pay Rs 10 Lakh for Losing Customer’s Property Documents


After IDBI Bank failed to return a customer's original property documents, the District Consumer Commission in Kozhikode, Kerala, ordered the bank to compensate the customer with Rs 10 lakh. In 2017, a fire at a document storage facility destroyed papers, according to IDBI Bank. 


The commission noted that the borrower experienced severe hardship and that the loss of the original documents decreased the property's worth. A teacher and businessman who had taken out a Rs 33 lakh home loan from IDBI Bank in 2016 filed a case with the bench, which was made up of President Priya S and Member V. Balakrishnan. He had put the original title deeds to his properties, which included a villa and land, as security for the loan valued at around 1.3 crore.


The commission found the bank guilty of unfair commercial practices and service deficiencies in its order of May 30. It ordered the bank to compensate the plaintiff with Rs 10 lakh. The commission observed that because the bank misplaced the original title documents while they were in its possession, the complainant's lawful ownership rights had been negatively impacted. 


It noted that it was a valid claim to seek damages for such carelessness. The complaint claims that the borrower made extra lump-sum payments in addition to routinely using his wife's account to make loan EMIs. He said that he made the decision to sell the mortgaged property and close the loan account,following the death of his wife, the co-borrower and salaried family member, in March 2020.


In June 2020, the complainant paid Rs 15.1 lakh to settle the outstanding loan balance. Nevertheless, the bank did not return the actual title deeds in spite of repeated requests.


He claimed that the bank gave various explanations at first, first stating that the documents were undergoing closure procedures, then claiming they were lost in floods, and finally acknowledging in November 2020 that the documents had been destroyed in a fire at the Stock Holding Corporation's storage facility in December 2017.


The complaint claimed that he suffered a significant financial loss as a result of the bank's dishonesty, carelessness, and reckless behavior. He said that because the original title deeds were no longer available, he lost a lucrative property sale, had to borrow money and pledge jewelry to return the buyer's advance, and saw a decline in the property's market value.


He also claimed that the bank neglected to take fundamental actions, such submitting a formal complaint or promptly notifying the public about the documents' loss. He claimed that the Banking Ombudsman's participation was the only reason the bank took action.


The Banking Ombudsman ordered the bank in 2021 to give certified copies of the documents, notify the public of their loss, and pay Rs 60,000 in compensation, which included Rs 10,000 for delay and Rs 50,000 for service inadequacy. Despite protesting that the amount was insufficient, the complaint accepted it. He then went to the Consumer Commission to demand compensation of Rs 35 lakh for unfair commercial practices, carelessness, and poor service.


Advocate A.M. Bhaskaran, representing the bank, refuted the claims of carelessness. He contended that the borrower and his spouse had signed a typical 20-year house loan contract and that there was no proof that it was meant to be a temporary arrangement.


The bank admitted that the documents were destroyed in the 2017 fire at Stock Holding Document Management Services Ltd., where many banks and government institutions store important records. However, it argued that the fire was an unforeseen incident beyond its control.


The bank also contended that the Banking Ombudsman had already decided the matter and awarded compensation of Rs 60,000, which the complainant accepted without filing an appeal. Therefore, according to the bank, the Ombudsman’s decision was final and the fresh complaint was not maintainable.


After considering the matter, the Consumer Commission ruled in favour of the complainant and directed IDBI Bank to pay Rs 10 lakh as compensation.

Share:

RBI imposes monetary penalty on this PSU Bank


Canara Bank has been fined ₹41.80 lakh (Rupees Forty One Lakh Eighty Thousand Only) by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) as follows:


Within the allotted time, the bank failed to upload some customers' KYC records to the Central KYC Records Registry (CKYCR).


Even though the last customer-induced transaction in certain accounts was less than a year old, the bank labeled those accounts as inoperative.


In a different update, Puran Associates Private Limited was fined ₹3.10 lakh (Rupees Three Lakh Ten Thousand only) by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) for failing to reclassify some accounts as "non-performing assets" during restructuring.

Share:

Allahabad highcourt fines Rs.50000 to bank for freezing customer account

 


If a customer's account credit exceeds their claimed income, Channel Banks will freeze their account. Consumers are becoming irate, and the Allahabad High Court heard one such case.


The Allahabad High Court's Lucknow Bench has expressed concern about banks blocking client accounts without good cause. According to the Court, a bank shouldn't act like an investigative body since it functions as a trustee.


Indian Overseas Bank was fined ₹50,000 by a Division Bench consisting of Justices Shekhar B. Saraf and Awadhesh Kumar Chaudhary. A customer's account was locked by the bank without good reason. The bank was mandated by the court to reimburse the account holder for this sum within four weeks.


The lawsuit concerns M/s S.A. Enterprises, a business that sells fish farming equipment. A petition was filed by the business against the bank. According to the suit, on January 16, 2026, RTGS credited ₹23 lakh to the company's account. 


This transaction was viewed as suspicious by the bank, which froze the account. The bank said that the company had only reported an annual income of ₹5.76 lakh at the time the account was opened. The bank blocked the account as a result, invoking the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. The High Court pointed out that no cybercrime report was the reason the account was frozen.


The bank behaved as an investigative agency and took independent action. The Court made it quite plain that banks are not allowed to determine the source of cash on their own. An order from the Central Bureau of Investigation, the Police, or the Enforcement Directorate is required in order to freeze an account.


Additionally, the Court stated that the practice of freezing accounts without a valid justification is concerning. Such acts have the potential to halt corporate operations and harm account holders' reputations.

Share:

Bank Ignored Credit Card Closure Request, Ended Up Paying ₹3.21 Lakh – Know Reserve Bank of India Rules”


After a private bank neglected to promptly close a credit card, a credit card user was compensated with a substantial sum of Rs 3.21 lakh.


The user described how he attempted to close two credit cards in May of last year after the bank lowered the credit limit from Rs 1 lakh to Rs 10,000 in a widely shared Reddit post titled "Got Rs 3.21 lakh compensation from Kotak Mahindra Bank for not closing my credit card." The bank charged an annual fee rather than canceling the cards.


The user then filed a complaint with higher authorities. After bringing up the matter, the bank claimed that the cards had never been closed, which led to another round of unanswered emails. The user complained to the Banking Ombudsman because they were frustrated.


The bank’s officer called customer and said: “It’s your mistake. Closure requests are not accepted via email, you should have called”. But I had already submitted a written closure request. Sent follow-ups. Received no response from the bank.”


The user said the bank finally paid a compensation of Rs 3,21,000. But what are RBI guidelines regarding credit card closure? Let’s understand.


According to RBI guidelines, if a bank fails to close a credit card within 7 working days of a customer’s request (provided all dues are cleared), the issuer must pay a penalty of ₹500 per day of delay to the customer.


If a bank fails to follow the guidelines, customers can raise a complaint. The first step is to complain to the bank’s nodal officer. If no resolution is provided within 30 days, customers can approach the RBI Ombudsman.

Share:

RBI imposes Monetary Penalty on Bank of India(BOI)

 


Bank of India has been fined ₹1.85 lakh by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) for some currency chest violations. Bank of India's Kanpur Currency Chest was fined ₹1,85,300. 


After anomalies in the way currency remittances were handled were discovered, the action was taken. 


In the soiled note remittance procedure, the RBI noticed problems with counterfeit money, a scarcity of notes, and damaged notes. The central bank chose to penalize the bank financially in light of these infractions. 


Due to irregularities with a currency chest, Punjab National Bank (PNB) was fined ₹5.66 lakh by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) a few days ago.


A lack of notes found at a bank-run currency chest led to the imposition of the penalty.The management of the cash supply in the banking sector is largely dependent on currency chests. They support the RBI in ensuring that money flows freely throughout the nation.

Share:

Two banks based on Gujarat and Maharashtra were fined by the RBI for violation of rules


Two cooperative banks in Gujarat and Maharashtra were recently hit with financial fines by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) for breaking key banking regulations. Based on infractions of RBI regulations, these fines were levied following RBI inspections and hearings.


Saibaba Nagari Sahakari Bank Maryadit, situated in Sailu, Maharashtra, has been fined ₹50,000 by the RBI for breaking KYC (Know Your Customer) regulations. 


 The bank failed to upload certain customers' KYC information to the Central KYC Records Registry (CKYCR) in a timely manner. Additionally, the bank did not update some customers' KYC information on a regular basis as required by RBI regulations. 


RBI's actions is Based on the bank's financial statements as of March 31, 2024, RBI carried out an inspection. Following the identification of the problems, the RBI sent the bank a notice requesting an explanation for why a penalty should not be applied. 


Following an examination of the bank's written and verbal responses, the RBI determined that the penalty was appropriate because the bank had broken the guidelines.


Shree Kadi Nagarik Sahakari Bank Ltd., situated in Gujarat's Mehsana district, has also been hit with a far higher fine of ₹14.30 lakh by the RBI.


The punishment was applied because of violation of RBI's contribution regulations, the bank gave funds to a trust in which a director's relative had a stake. 


 Additionally, the bank neglected to properly supervise the end-use of loans by failing to verify how some loan funds were used, which is a major violation of lending criteria. 


 The RBI's procedure is Similar to the last instance, the RBI examined the bank in light of its financial standing as of March 31, 2024. 


After hearing the bank's explanation and examining the written responses, the RBI determined that the infractions were legitimate and levied the fine.

Share:

RBI imposed penalty of Rs.63.60 lakh on PSU Bank


Union Bank of India was hit with a ₹63.60 lakh fine by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) for not meeting certain regulatory standards. The May 23, 2025, penalty order lists non-compliance with RBI's rules on collateral-free agricultural loans as well as violations of Section 26A of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949. 


The decision comes after the RBI examined Union Bank's financial situation as of March 31 in 2023 and 2024 as part of its regular inspections under the Statutory Inspections for Supervisory Evaluation (ISE) program. 


Two significant infractions were found during the inspections: 

Delay in Transfer of Depositor Education and Awareness Fund: 

The bank did not make the required timely transfer of eligible unclaimed funds to the Depositor Education and Awareness (DEA) Fund.


Based on these findings, the RBI issued a show-cause notice to the bank, asking it to explain why a penalty should not be imposed. After reviewing the bank’s written response and oral submissions during a hearing, the RBI concluded that the violations were valid and warranted financial penalties.


The RBI emphasized that the penalty is strictly related to regulatory compliance shortcomings and does not question the legality or validity of the bank’s agreements with its customers. It also noted that this action is without prejudice to any further actions that may be taken in the future.


This enforcement reflects RBI’s ongoing commitment to ensuring banks adhere strictly to rules, particularly those aimed at protecting depositors and supporting priority sectors like agriculture.

Share:

RBI imposed Rs 1.72 crore Penalty on PSU Bank

 


The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has fined the State Bank of India (SBI) Rs.1.72 crore (Rs.1,72,80,000) on April 29, 2025. The fine was for not following certain rules related to:

Giving loans and advances

  • Protecting customers from unauthorized electronic transactions
  • Proper procedures for opening current accounts

This penalty was imposed under RBI’s powers as per the Banking Regulation Act, 1949. RBI had carried out an inspection of SBI based on its financial position as of March 31, 2023. During this review, RBI found that SBI had not followed some of its rules. A notice was sent to SBI asking why it should not be penalized.

After reviewing SBI’s written and verbal responses, RBI decided that the following issues were valid:

  1. SBI gave a bridge loan to an organization based on money it expected to receive from the government (as subsidies or reimbursements).
  2. SBI delayed refunds for customers affected by unauthorized online transactions. In some cases, it did not credit accounts within 10 working days or compensate customers within 90 days.
  3. SBI opened or kept some current accounts in ways that did not follow the RBI’s rules.

RBI clarified that this action is about breaking regulatory rules. It does not mean the bank’s deals with customers are invalid. Also, this penalty does not stop RBI from taking other actions against the bank in the future.

What is a Bridge Loan?

bridge loan is a short-term loan used to “bridge the gap” between two financial events—typically between the need for immediate funds and the arrival of expected funds. A bridge loan helps someone get quick money now while waiting for larger funds to come in later. Example: A company is expecting a Rs.5 crore subsidy from the government, but needs Rs.1 crore now to keep operations going. It can take a bridge loan from a bank, and repay it once the subsidy arrives.

Share:

RBI imposed Penalty on 4 Major Banks

 


Four major banks, Bank of Baroda, IDBI Bank, Bank of Maharashtra, and ICICI Bank, have recently been hit with financial fines by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) for noncompliance with key regulatory requirements. Following RBI examinations of the banks' operational and financial operations for the fiscal years 2023 and 2024, these fines were imposed. These fines are intended to improve adherence to banking regulations and guarantee that banks conduct themselves in an open and accountable manner. The RBI underlined, however, that these measures are only connected to regulatory matters and have no bearing on the legality of agreements or transactions between banks and their clients.

Bank of Baroda(BoB)

For failing to observe RBI guidelines regarding customer service and deposit interest rates, Bank of Baroda was fined Rs.61.40 lakh. In violation of the regulations, the bank permitted an insurance company to provide non-cash incentives to its employees. Additionally, some frozen or dormant savings accounts did not get timely interest credits. 


IDBI Bank 

In 2023, these problems were discovered during an RBI examination. Following a personal hearing and an assessment of the bank's response, the RBI chose to issue the penalty after the bank was requested to explain its actions.

For violating the RBI's guidelines under the Interest Subvention Scheme, which offers farmers interest relief on short-term loans made through the Kisan Credit Card (KCC), IDBI Bank was fined Rs.31.80 lakh.


Bank of Maharashtra 


BoM received a fine of Rs.31.80 lakh for failing to fully comply with Know Your Customer (KYC) rules. The bank opened several deposit accounts using Aadhaar-based e-KYC through OTP, in a non-face-to-face manner, but did not meet all the regulatory requirements for such processes. This was identified during the RBI’s evaluation for the financial year ending March 31, 2024. The bank’s explanations and submissions were reviewed, and the penalty was imposed for deficiencies in following the KYC norms.


ICICI Bank 
ICICI Bank faced the highest penalty of Rs.97.80 lakh. The bank failed to report a cyber security incident to the RBI within the required time, did not implement an effective system for alerting suspicious account activity, and also failed to send credit card statements to certain customers—yet charged them late payment fees. These failures were considered serious breaches of customer service and operational transparency. After a detailed inspection and review of the bank’s responses, the RBI imposed the penalty.These penalties are aimed at reinforcing the importance of following regulatory standards. RBI emphasized that these fines are not judgments on the legal validity of customer transactions or contracts, but are strictly based on gaps in compliance. Penalties have been imposed in exercise of powers conferred on RBI under the provisions of Section 47A(1)(c) read with Sections 46(4)(i) and 51(1) of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949.

Share:

RBI imposes Penalty on this PSU Bank for irregularity in Savings Accounts

 


For not adhering to certain RBI regulations, Punjab & Sind Bank has been fined ₹68.20 lakh by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI). The penalty was imposed in accordance with Sections 47A(1)(c), 46(4)(i), and 51(1) of the Banking Regulation Act of 1949.


Based on the bank's financial status as of March 31, 2023, RBI carried out a Statutory Inspection for Supervisory Evaluation (ISE 2023) in 2023. 

 

The following areas showed non-compliance with RBI's instructions during the inspection: 

 Failure to disclose significant Exposures: In order to track significant common exposures across banks, the bank failed to disclose borrowers with non-fund-based exposure of ₹5 crore and above to the Central Repository of Information on Large Credits (CRILC). 


 Inconsistencies in Savings Bank Accounts: In violation of RBI regulations on financial inclusion, the bank permitted some holders of Basic Savings Bank Deposit Accounts (BSBDAs) to open additional BSBDAs.


After detecting these violations, RBI issued a show-cause notice to Punjab & Sind Bank, asking for an explanation. The bank submitted its reply, additional clarifications, and oral representations during a personal hearing. However, after reviewing the bank’s responses, RBI determined that the charges were valid, leading to the imposition of the penalty.

Share:

RBI imposes monetary penalty for non-compliance on Bank of India(BOI), Canara Bank and J&K Bank


Canara Bank, Bank of India, and Jammu & Kashmir Bank have all been hit with financial fines by the RBI for breaking regulatory guidelines. 


Canara Bank was fined ₹1.63 crore by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) for failing to follow its rules regarding priority sector lending, deposit interest rates, and financial inclusion.


 For not transferring qualified funds to the Depositor Education and Awareness Fund within the allotted time, Bank of India was fined ₹1 crore. 


For violating guidelines pertaining to loans and advances, financial inclusion, and Know Your Customer (KYC) standards, Jammu & Kashmir Bank was fined ₹3.31 crore.

Share:

RBI imposes Monetary Penalty on this PSU Bank


The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has imposed a monetary penalty of Rs 1.45 crore on Central Bank of India. This penalty has been imposed because the bank failed to comply with certain directions issued by the RBI. The central bank made this announcement on June 14.


According to an RBI press release, the Central Bank of India sanctioned a working capital demand loan to a Corporation against amounts receivable from the Government in the form of subsidies. This action was in violation of the RBI’s directions.


Additionally, the bank failed to credit the amount involved in unauthorized electronic transactions to the customer’s account within 10 working days from the date of notification by the customer. This also goes against the RBI’s guidelines.


Furthermore, the bank failed to resolve complaints and provide compensation to certain customers within 90 days from the date of receipt of such complaints. The RBI stated these reasons for imposing the penalty on the bank.


The RBI conducted a Statutory Inspection for Supervisory Evaluation of the bank with reference to its financial position as of March 31, 2022. Based on the findings of non-compliance with RBI directions and related correspondence, a notice was issued to the bank. The bank was given an opportunity to show cause as to why a penalty should not be imposed on it for its failure to comply with the directions.


After reviewing the bank’s reply to the notice, the RBI found that the charges against the bank were sustained, warranting the imposition of a monetary penalty.


It is important to note that the action taken by the RBI is based on deficiencies in regulatory compliance. The penalty is not intended to determine the validity of any transactions or agreements entered into by the bank with its customers.


The RBI emphasized that the imposition of the monetary penalty does not prejudice any other actions that may be initiated by the RBI against the bank.

Share:

RBI imposes Rs. 2.5 crore penalty on three banks


The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) imposed a monetary penalty on three private and public sector lenders on Friday. The central bank charged Jammu & Kashmir Bank with 
Rs.2.5 crore penalty, while the Bank of Maharashtra faced a fine of Rs.1.45 crore. Axis Bank received the least amount of penalty among them to the tune of Rs.30 lakh.


Jammu & Kashmir Bank:

RBI imposed a Rs.2.5 crore penalty on J&K Bank for non-compliance with certain directions issued by RBI on ‘Creation of a Central Repository of Large Common Exposures-Across Banks’, read with ‘Central Repository of Information on Large Credits (CRILC) – Revision in Reporting’, ‘Loans and Advances – Statutory and other Restrictions’ and ‘Time-bound implementation and strengthening of SWIFT-related operational controls’.

According to RBI's inspection, J&K Bank non-complied in --- (i) failed to ensure integrity and quality of data submitted to CRILC, (ii) extended term loans to a corporation (a) without undertaking due diligence on the viability and bankability of the projects to ensure that revenue streams from the projects are sufficient to take care of the debt servicing obligations and (b) failing to ensure that the repayment/servicing of said term loans were not made out of budgetary resources and (iii) created financial/non-financial messages in SWIFT without first ensuring that the underlying transactions have been duly reflected in the CBS.


Bank of Maharashtra:

This government-owned bank was imposed with Rs.1.45 crore penalty for non-compliance with certain directions issued by RBI on ‘Loans and Advances – Statutory and Other Restrictions’ and Advisory on ‘Man in the Middle (MiTM) Attacks in ATMs’ (the Advisory).

BoM committed non-compliance in the extent of --- (1) it sanctioned a term loan to a Corporation (i) in lieu of or to substitute budgetary resources envisaged for certain projects; (ii) without undertaking due diligence on the viability and bankability of the projects to ensure that revenue streams from the projects were sufficient to take care of the debt servicing obligations; and (iii) the repayment/servicing of which was made out of budgetary resources, and (2) it failed to implement required control measures for ATMs relating to end-to-end encryption of communication between the ATM terminal/PC and the ATM Switch, within the prescribed timeline.


Axis Bank:

Axis Bank, one of the leading private sector lenders, was penalised with Rs.30 lakh due to its non-compliance with certain provisions of the RBI directions on ‘Prudential Norms on Income Recognition, Asset Classification and Provisioning pertaining to Advances – Credit Card Accounts’.

As per RBI's inspection, Axis Bank had levied penal charges in certain accounts for late payment of credit card dues though the customers had paid the dues by the due date, through third party platforms.


Notably, before imposing the charges, RBI had sent notices to these three banks --- advising them to show cause as to why a penalty should not be imposed on them for failure to comply with the directions issued.


After considering the banks' reply to the notice, RBI came to the conclusion that the charge of non-compliance with the aforesaid RBI directions was substantiated and warranted the imposition of monetary penalty on these banks.

Share:

RBI imposes Rs 84.50 lakh penalty on this PSU Bank

 


RBI on Friday said it has imposed a penalty of Rs 84.50 lakh on Central Bank of India (the bank) for non-compliance with certain provisions of norms related to frauds classification and reporting. The Reserve Bank had conducted statutory inspection for supervisory evaluation of the bank with reference to its financial position as on March 31, 2021.


Examination of the reports revealed that the public sector lender had failed to report as fraud to RBI certain accounts within seven days of decision of Joint Lenders' Forum (JLF) to declare the accounts as fraud.


It had recovered SMS alert charges from its customers on flat basis rather than on actual usage basis.


The RBI had issued a notice to the bank advising it to show cause as to why penalty should not be imposed on it for failure to comply with the directions.


"After considering the bank's reply to the notice and oral submissions made during the personal hearing, RBI came to the conclusion that the charge of non-compliance with the aforesaid RBI directions was substantiated and warranted imposition of monetary penalty...," the central bank said.


RBI, however, added the penalty 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.

Share:

RBI imposes penalties on BoI and Federal Bank


Reserve Bank of India (RBI) on Friday said it has imposed a penalty of Rs 5.72 crore on Federal Bank for deficiencies in regulatory compliance.


A  penalty of Rs 70 lakh has also been imposed on Bank of India for non-compliance with certain provisions of Know Your Customer (KYC) norms and instructions on 'compliance function in banks' issued by RBI, it said in a statement.


About Federal Bank, RBI said the bank failed to ensure that no incentive (cash or non-cash) was paid to its staff engaged in insurance broking/corporate agency services by the insurance company, according to a separate statement.



RBI had carried out Statutory Inspection for Supervisory Evaluation (lSE) of the bank with reference to its financial position as on March 31, 2020.


In another statement, RBI said a fine of Rs 7.6 lakh has been imposed on Dhani Loans and Services Limited, Gurugram for non-compliance with KYC norms.


RBI said the penalities are 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 two banks and Dhani Loans and Services with their customers.

Share:

RBI slaps penalty of Rs 1.95 crore on this private bank


The Reserve Bank of India on Monday imposed a monetary penalty of Rs 1.95 crore on Standard Chartered Bank - India for failing to comply with guidelines issued for customer protection, cyber security, credit card operations and creation of central repository for large exposures.


The RBI conducted a statutory inspection of bank’s books and it’s inspection report revealed that that Standard Chartered had failed to credit the amount involved in the unauthorised electronic transactions back to customer accounts. The regulator’s inspection also revealed that the bank was not reporting cyber security incidents within the prescribed time period.


The RBI which conducted a statutory audit in the bank’s books found that the foreign lender was also non-compliant in authorising the direct sales agents to conduct KYC verification, and failed to ensure integrity and quality of data submitted in Central Repository of Information on Large Credits (CRILC).


“A notice was issued to the bank advising it to show cause as to why penalty should not be imposed on it for contravention of directions,@ the RBI said. “After considering the bank’s replies to the notice, oral submissions made during the personal hearing, and additional submissions made by the bank, RBI came to the conclusion that the charge of contravention was substantiated and warranted imposition of monetary penalty on the bank.

Share:

APY Penalties: 10 facts you must know before investing

For someone looking for a fixed pension during their retirement, the guaranteed pension scheme of the Government of India — Atal Pension Yojana (APY) — can be worth a look. The APY pension scheme is administered by the Pension Fund Regulatory and Development Authority (PFRDA) and is available to only those who are between 18 and 40 years of age. The other criteria to invest in APY is that one needs to have a savings account in a bank or a post office. APY pension scheme is a deferred pension scheme, i.e. one needs to keep contributing regularly till age 60 and, thereafter, a fixed amount of monthly pension will begin.

Here are a few lesser-known APY pension scheme details to know before you invest:

1. Frequency of contribution

In the initial years, the only option to pay APY contributions was on a monthly basis. However, the individual subscribers also have an option to make the contribution on a quarterly or half-yearly basis in addition to a monthly basis to get APY pension from age 60.

2. Guaranteed pension

The pension amount is a fixed amount that the subscriber is assured to receive from age of 60. However, the actual returns generated by the government may vary. As per the rules, if the accumulated corpus based on contributions earns a lower than estimated return on investment and is inadequate to provide the minimum guaranteed pension, the Central Government would fund such inadequacy. Alternatively, if the actual returns during the accumulation phase are higher than the assumed returns for minimum guaranteed pension, such excess will be passed on to the subscriber.

3. Tax benefit in APY

The amount of investment into APY qualifies for deduction under section 80CCD (1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 as APY has been notified a pension scheme by the government. The pension that one gets, however, forms a part of one’s total income and is taxed as per one’s tax rate.

4. APY chart – Contributions and corpus

In APY, there is a minimum guaranteed pension of Rs.1000 per month or Rs. 2000 per month or Rs. 3000 per month or Rs. 4000 per month or Rs. 5000 per month. As per the APY chart, these are the APY scheme benefits:
As per the APY calculator, for a minimum guaranteed pension of Rs. 1000 per month, the monthly contribution will be range between Rs 42 and Rs 264 for entry age of 18 to 39. The return of corpus to the nominees will be Rs 1.7 lakh, irrespective of the entry age.
Simiarly, the APY calculator shows that for a minimum guaranteed pension of Rs. 2000 per month, the monthly contribution will be range between Rs 84 and Rs 528 for entry age of 18 to 39. The return of corpus to the nominees will be Rs 3.4 lakh, irrespective of the entry age.
For a minimum guaranteed pension of Rs. 3000 per month, the monthly contribution will be range between Rs 126 and Rs 792 for entry age of 18 to 39. The return of corpus to the nominees will be Rs 5.1 lakh, irrespective of the entry age.
For a minimum guaranteed pension of Rs. 4000 per month, the monthly contribution will be range between Rs 168 and Rs 1054 for entry age of 18 to 39. The return of corpus to the nominees will be Rs 6.8 lakh, irrespective of the entry age.
For a minimum guaranteed pension of Rs. 5000 per month, the monthly contribution will be range between Rs 210 and Rs 1318 for entry age of 18 to 39. The return of corpus to the nominees will be Rs 8.5 lakh, irrespective of the entry age.
The NPS Trust website has the APY calculator to help one calculate the tentative pension and lump Sum amount to expect on maturity or 60 years of age based on regular contributions.

5. Discontinuation

In case one stops making a contribution towards APY, the discontinuation of payment of contribution will not deactivate the APY account immediately. As per the rules, the account will not be deactivated and closed till the account balance with self-contributions minus the Government co-contributions, if there is any, becomes zero due to deduction of account maintenance charges and fees.

6. Penalty

If one makes a delayed payment towards APY, there is a penalty levied for it. The penalty on delayed payment is Rs. 1 per month for the contribution of Rs 100, or part thereof, for each delayed monthly payment instead of different slabs in the past.

7. Renew APY account

In case of default in payment of contribution, one needs to regularise the APY account by paying the overdue amount along with the penalty amount. Once the account is regularised, the pension becomes guaranteed under the scheme.

8. Premature exit

Earlier, any premature exit from the APY scheme before the age of 60 was not allowed except in the event of the death of the subscriber or terminal disease. Subsequently, the rules were changed and one can exit APY voluntarily, subject to the following conditions:
  • The contributions made by the subscriber to APY, along with the net actual interest earned on the contributions will be made after deducting the account maintenance charges, and
  • If there is any co-contribution made by the government, it will not be returned along with interts earned on the contributions.

9. Government’s co-contribution

All those who had joined the APY before 31st March 2016 and are not members of any statutory social security scheme and who are not income taxpayers get a co-contribution from government into their APY account. The central government co-contributes 50 per cent of the total contribution made by the subscriber or Rs. 1000 per annum, whichever is lower for a period of 5 years, i.e., from Financial Year 2015-16 to 2019-20,

10. Premature death

In case of premature death of APY subscriber i.e. death before 60 years of age, the spouse of the subscriber has the option to continue contributing to APY account of the subscriber, for the remaining vesting period, till the original subscriber would have attained the age 60 years. In case of death of both subscriber and spouse, the entire pension corpus would be returned to the nominee.
Share:

  Useful links for Bankers
   * Latest DA Updates
   * How to recover Bad loans/NPA Acs
   * Latest 12th BPS Updates
   * Atal Pension Yojana (APY)
   * Tips while taking charge as Manager
   * Software used by Banks in India
   * Finacle Menus, Shortcuts & Commands
   * Balance Inquiry Number of all Banks
   * PSU & Private Banks Quarterly result
   * Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana (PMAY)

Contact Form

Name

Email *

Message *