See Full Document Text
Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India for the year ended
March 31, 2021 submitted to the Central Government in terms of
Section 36(2) of the Banking Regulation Act, 1949
REPORT ON TREND AND PROGRESS
OF BANKING IN INDIA 2020-21
RESERVE BANK OF INDIA© Reserve Bank of India 2021
All rights reserved. Reproduction is permitted provided an acknowledgement of the source is made.
Published by Dr. Snehal S. Herwadkar for the Reserve Bank of India, Mumbai 400 001 and designed and printed by her at
ACME Packs & Prints (I) Pvt. Ltd., A Wing, Gala No.73, Virwani Industrial Estate, Goregaon - East, Mumbai - 400 063.Contents
Sr. No. Particulars Page No.
Chapter I: Perspectives 1-7
Chapter II: Global Banking Developments 8-23
1. Introduction .................................................................................................... 8
2. Global Banking Policy Developments .............................................................. 10
3. Performance of the Global Banking Sector ...................................................... 16
4. World’s Largest Banks ..................................................................................... 21
5. Summing up ................................................................................................... 23
Chapter III: Policy Environment 24-45
1. Introduction ................................................................................................... 24
2. Monetary Policy and Liquidity Management .................................................... 25
3. Regulatory Policies ......................................................................................... 27
4. Supervisory Policies ........................................................................................ 37
5. New Institutional Developments ...................................................................... 38
6. Financial Markets ........................................................................................... 39
7. Foreign Exchange Policies ................................................................................ 39
8. Credit Delivery and Financial Inclusion ........................................................... 40
9. Consumer Protection ....................................................................................... 42
10. Payments and Settlement Systems .................................................................. 43
11. Overall Assessment ......................................................................................... 45
Chapter IV: Operations and Performance of Commercial Banks 46-97
1. Introduction .................................................................................................... 46
2. Balance Sheet Analysis .................................................................................... 46
3. Financial Performance ..................................................................................... 54
4. Soundness Indicators ...................................................................................... 57
5. Sectoral Bank Credit: Distribution and NPAs .................................................. 66
6. Performance of Banking Stocks ....................................................................... 72
7. Ownership Pattern in Commercial Banks ........................................................ 73
8. Corporate Governance .................................................................................... 74
9. Foreign Banks’ Operations in India and Overseas Operations of
Indian Banks ................................................................................................... 76
vSr. No. Particulars Page No.
10. Payment Systems and Scheduled Commercial Banks ..................................... 76
11. Consumer Protection ....................................................................................... 79
12. Financial Inclusion .......................................................................................... 81
13. Regional Rural Banks ...................................................................................... 89
14. Local Area Banks ............................................................................................ 93
15. Small Finance Banks ...................................................................................... 94
16. Payments Banks .............................................................................................. 95
17. Overall Assessment ......................................................................................... 96
Chapter V: Developments in Co-operative Banking 98-122
1. Introduction .................................................................................................... 98
2. Structure of the Co-operative Banking Sector ................................................. 98
3. Urban Co-operative Banks .............................................................................. 99
4. Rural Co-operatives ........................................................................................ 113
5. Overall Assessment ......................................................................................... 122
Chapter VI: Non-Banking Financial Institutions 123-162
1. Introduction .................................................................................................... 123
2. Non-Banking Financial Companies .................................................................. 125
3. All India Financial Institutions ........................................................................ 153
4. Primary Dealers .............................................................................................. 158
5. Overall Assessment ......................................................................................... 161
viList of Boxes
Sr. No. Particulars Page No.
II.1 Climate Change and Financial Stability: Assessment and Way Forward ........... 14
III.1 Report of the Committee to Review the Working of Asset
Reconstruction Companies .............................................................................. 33
III.2 Business Correspondent Survey ...................................................................... 41
III.3 Reserve Bank - Integrated Ombudsman Scheme, 2021 .................................. 43
IV.1 Slowdown in Credit Growth: Supply or Demand Driven?................................ 49
IV.2 Determinants of Priority Sector Lending ......................................................... 68
IV.3 Impact of COVID-19 Lockdown on Banking Stock Performance ...................... 72
IV.4 Financial Inclusion Index ................................................................................ 82
IV.5 Impact of Amalgamation of Regional Rural Banks ........................................... 89
V.1 Report of the Expert Committee on Primary (Urban) Co-operative Banks ...... 102
V.2 Impact of COVID-19 on Rural Co-operative Banks .......................................... 120
VI.1 Impact of COVID-19 on NBFCs-MFI ................................................................ 135
viiList of Tables
Sr. No. Particulars Page No.
III.1a Special Refinance Facility for AIFIs ................................................................. 27
III.1b Institution-wise Loan Availment by AIFIs ........................................................ 27
III.2 Resolution Framework for COVID-19 Stressed Borrowers .............................. 28
III.3 Risk Weights for New Housing Loans .............................................................. 31
III.4 Progress in Usage of CKYCR ............................................................................ 34
III.5 Risk Thresholds for PCA Framework for NBFCs ............................................ 38
III.6 Restructuring of MSME Advances .................................................................. 42
IV.1 Consolidated Balance Sheet of Scheduled Commercial Banks ........................ 47
IV.2 Bank Group-wise Maturity Profile of Select Liabilities/Assets .......................... 53
IV.3 Trends in Income and Expenditure of Scheduled Commercial Banks ............. 55
IV.4 Cost of Funds and Return on Funds ................................................................ 56
IV.5 Component-wise Capital Adequacy of SCBs .................................................... 57
IV.6 Public and Rights Issues by the Banking Sector .............................................. 58
IV.7 Resources Raised by Banks through Private Placements ................................. 58
IV.8 Movement in Non-Performing Assets ............................................................... 60
IV.9 Classification of Loan Assets by Bank Group .................................................. 61
IV.10 NPAs of SCBs Recovered through Various Channels ........................................ 62
IV.11 Details of Financial Assets Securitised by ARCs .............................................. 63
IV.12 Frauds in Various Banking Operations Based on the Date of Reporting ......... 64
IV.13 Frauds in Various Banking Operations Based on the Date of Occurrence ....... 64
IV.14 Enforcement Actions ....................................................................................... 65
IV.15 Sectoral Deployment of Gross Bank Credit .................................................... 67
IV.16 Priority Sector Lending by Banks .................................................................... 70
IV.17 Weighted Average Premium on Various Categories of PSLCs ........................... 70
IV.18 Sector-wise GNPAs of Banks ........................................................................... 71
IV.19 Operations of Foreign Banks in India .............................................................. 76
IV.20 Payment Systems Indicators ............................................................................ 77
IV.21 Number of ATMs ............................................................................................. 79
IV.22 Geographical Distribution of ATMs – Bank-Group wise................................... 79
IV.23 Nature of Complaints at BOs ........................................................................... 80
IV.24 Bank Group-wise Insured Deposits ................................................................ 81
viiiSr. No. Particulars Page No.
IV.25 Progress in Financial Inclusion Plan ................................................................ 85
IV.26 Tier-wise Break-up of Newly Opened Bank Branches by SCBs ........................ 86
IV.27 Credit Flow to the MSME Sector by SCBs ....................................................... 87
IV.28 Progress in MSME Financing through TReDS ................................................. 88
IV.29 Consolidated Balance Sheet of Regional Rural Banks ...................................... 91
IV.30 Purpose-wise Outstanding Advances by RRBs ................................................ 92
IV.31 Financial Performance of Regional Rural Banks .............................................. 92
IV.32 Profile of Local Area Banks ............................................................................. 93
IV.33 Financial Performance of Local Area Banks .................................................... 93
IV.34 Consolidated Balance Sheet of Small Finance Banks ...................................... 94
IV.35 Purpose-wise Outstanding Advances by Small Finance Banks .......................... 94
IV.36 Financial Performance of Small Finance Banks ............................................... 95
IV.37 Consolidated Balance Sheet of Payments Banks .............................................. 95
IV.38 Financial Performance of Payments Banks ...................................................... 96
IV.39 Select Financial Ratios of Payments Banks ...................................................... 96
IV.40 Remittances through Payments Banks ............................................................ 97
V.1 Tier-wise Distribution of Urban Co-operative Banks ....................................... 101
V.2 Balance Sheet of Urban Co-operative Banks ................................................... 103
V.3 Distribution of UCBs by size of Deposits and Advances................................... 105
V.4 Investments by Urban Co-operative Banks ...................................................... 106
V.5 Rating-wise Distribution of UCBs .................................................................... 107
V.6 CRAR-wise Distribution of UCBs ..................................................................... 108
V.7 Component-wise Capital Adequacy of UCBs .................................................... 108
V.8 Non-performing Assets of UCBs ...................................................................... 109
V.9 Financial Performance of Scheduled and Non-scheduled
Urban Co-operative Banks .............................................................................. 111
V.10 Select Profitability Indicators of UCBs ............................................................. 111
V.11 Composition of Credit to Priority Sectors by UCBs ......................................... 112
V.12 A Profile of Rural Co-operatives ...................................................................... 114
V.13 Liabilities and Assets of State Co-operative Banks .......................................... 115
V.14 Select Balance Sheet Indicators of Scheduled State Co-operative Banks ......... 116
V.15 Financial Performance of State Co-operative Banks ........................................ 116
ixSr. No. Particulars Page No.
V.16 Soundness Indicators of State Co-operative Banks ......................................... 117
V.17 Liabilities and Assets of District Central Co-operative Banks .......................... 118
V.18 Financial Performance of District Central Co-operative Banks ........................ 119
V.19 Soundness Indicators of District Central Co-operative Banks ......................... 120
VI.1 Classification of NBFCs by Activity .................................................................. 126
VI.2 Ownership Pattern of NBFCs ........................................................................... 127
VI.3 Abridged Balance Sheet of NBFCs ................................................................... 128
VI.4 Major Components of Liabilities and Assets of
NBFCs-ND-SI by Classification ........................................................................ 129
VI.5 Sectoral Credit Deployment by NBFCs ............................................................ 131
VI.6 Sources of Borrowings of NBFCs .................................................................... 137
VI.7 Financial Parameters of the NBFC Sector ........................................................ 143
VI.8 Expenses of NBFCs ........................................................................................ 144
VI.9 Ownership Pattern of HFCs ............................................................................. 150
VI.10 Consolidated Balance Sheet of HFCs .............................................................. 150
VI.11 Financial Ratios of HFCs ................................................................................. 152
VI.12 Financial Assistance Sanctioned and Disbursed by AIFIs ................................ 154
VI.13 AIFIs’ Balance Sheet ........................................................................................ 154
VI.14 Resources Mobilised by AIFIs in 2020-21........................................................ 155
VI.15 Resources Raised by AIFIs from the Money Market ........................................ 155
VI.16 Pattern of AIFIs’ Sources and Deployment of Funds ....................................... 155
VI.17 Financial Performance of AIFIs ........................................................................ 156
VI.18 AIFIs’ Select Financial Parameters ................................................................... 157
VI.19 Performance of PDs in the Primary Market ..................................................... 159
VI.20 Performance of SPDs in the G-secs Secondary Market .................................... 160
VI.21 Sources and Applications of SPDs’ Funds ....................................................... 160
VI.22 Financial Performance of SPDs ...................................................................... 160
VI.23 SPDs’ Financial Indicators .............................................................................. 161
xList of Charts
Sr. No. Particulars Page No.
II.1 Macroeconomic Background ........................................................................... 9
II.2 Monetary Policy Rates ..................................................................................... 9
II.3 Bank Credit to the Private Non-Financial Sector ............................................. 17
II.4 Asset Quality ................................................................................................... 18
II.5 Return on Assets ............................................................................................ 18
II.6 Capital Adequacy Ratios .................................................................................. 19
II.7 Leverage Ratio ................................................................................................. 20
II.8 Market-based Indicators of Bank Health ......................................................... 20
II.9 G-SIB Score of top 15 banks: 2020 versus 2014 ........................................... 21
II.10 Distribution of Top 100 Banks by Tier-I Capital .............................................. 22
II.11 Asset Quality and Capital Adequacy of the Top 100 banks .............................. 22
II.12 Soundness of Top 100 Banks .......................................................................... 23
III.1 Gold Loans vis-à-vis Personal Loans ............................................................... 29
III.2 Impact of CRR Cut .......................................................................................... 30
III.3 SLR in HTM as per cent of NDTL .................................................................... 30
IV.1 Select Aggregates of SCBs ............................................................................... 48
IV.2 Credit and Deposits: Households and Private Non-Financial Corporations .... 48
IV.3 Term Deposits of SCBs ................................................................................... 48
IV.4 Growth in CASA Deposits ............................................................................... 49
IV.5 Growth in Borrowings ..................................................................................... 49
IV.6 Growth in Advances ........................................................................................ 50
IV.7 Change in Credit Composition ........................................................................ 50
IV.8 Credit-GDP Ratio ............................................................................................ 51
IV.9 Credit -Deposit and Investment-Deposit Ratios ............................................... 51
IV.10 Investment Portfolio ........................................................................................ 52
IV.11 Gap between Proportion of Assets and Liabilities in
Various Maturity Buckets .............................................................................. 52
IV.12 International Liabilities and Assets of Indian Banks ........................................ 53
IV.13 Off-Balance Sheet Liabilities of Banks ............................................................. 54
IV.14 Profitability Ratios ........................................................................................... 54
IV.15 Lending Rate, Deposit Rate and NIM ............................................................... 55
IV.16 Impact of Provisioning on Profitability ............................................................. 56
xiSr. No. Particulars Page No.
IV.17 Distance from Regulatory Minimum ................................................................ 58
IV.18 Leverage and Liquidity .................................................................................... 59
IV.19 Asset Quality of Banks .................................................................................... 59
IV.20 Reduction in GNPAs ........................................................................................ 60
IV.21 Stress in Large Borrowal Accounts ................................................................. 61
IV.22 Stressed Asset Sales to ARCs .......................................................................... 63
IV.23 Bank-Group wise Frauds ................................................................................ 65
IV.24 Sectoral Growth and GNPA Ratios .................................................................. 66
IV.25 Restructured Standard Advances .................................................................... 68
IV.26 Credit to Priority Sectors – All SCBs ............................................................... 68
IV.27 Trading Volume of PSLCs ................................................................................ 70
IV.28 Exposure to Sensitive Sectors ......................................................................... 71
IV.29 Relative Performance of Bank Indices and NIFTY-50 Index ............................ 72
IV.30 Government’s Shareholding in PSBs ............................................................... 74
IV.31 Share of Independent Directors in PVBs ......................................................... 75
IV.32 CEO Pay vis-a-vis Average Employee Pay ........................................................ 75
IV.33 Components of CEO Remuneration ................................................................. 76
IV.34 Components of Payment Systems .................................................................... 77
IV.35 RBI – Digital Payments Index ........................................................................... 78
IV.36 Population Group-wise Distribution of Complaints and
Major Complaint Types ................................................................................... 80
IV.37 Progress in Financial Inclusion in Select Emerging and
Advanced Economies ...................................................................................... 82
IV.38 Gender-wise Share in Credit and Deposits ...................................................... 84
IV.39 PMJDY Accounts: Distribution and Average Balance ....................................... 85
IV.40 Bank and Population Group-wise Newly Opened Bank Branches by SCBs ...... 86
IV.41 SHGs – Average Loan Outstanding and Average Savings.................................. 87
IV.42 Regional Penetration of Banks ......................................................................... 88
V.1 Structure of Co-operative Banks ..................................................................... 99
V.2 Distribution of Co-operative Banks by Asset Size ........................................... 100
V.3 Number of UCBs ............................................................................................ 100
V.4 Consolidation Drive in UCBs ........................................................................... 100
xiiSr. No. Particulars Page No.
V.5 Balance Sheet Indicators : SCBs versus UCBs ................................................ 101
V.6 Asset Growth ................................................................................................... 103
V.7 Deposits and Advances: SCBs versus UCBs .................................................... 104
V.8 Credit-Deposit Ratio: UCBs versus SCBs ........................................................ 104
V.9 Distribution of UCBs by Asset Size .................................................................. 105
V.10 Distribution of UCBs by Deposits and Advances ............................................. 105
V.11 Investments by UCBs ...................................................................................... 106
V.12 Distribution of Number and Banking Business of UCBs-by
Rating Categories ............................................................................................ 107
V.13 Share of UCBs with CRAR less than 9 per cent ............................................... 108
V.14 NPA Ratio: UCBs versus SCBs ........................................................................ 109
V.15 Large Borrowal Accounts – Lending versus NPAs ............................................ 110
V.16 Stress in Large Borrowal Accounts ................................................................. 110
V.17 Profitability Indicators- SUCBs versus NSUCBs .............................................. 112
V.18 Priority Sector Lending ................................................................................... 112
V.19 Long-term versus Short-term Rural Co-operatives .......................................... 113
V.20 Comparison of Short-term Rural Co-operatives .............................................. 115
V.21 State Co-operative Banks’ Profits .................................................................... 117
V.22 Credit-Deposit Ratio ........................................................................................ 117
V.23 Share of Operating Expenses in Total Expenses ............................................. 118
V.24 DCCBs’ Profits ................................................................................................ 119
V.25 NPA ratio : StCBs versus DCCBs ..................................................................... 119
VI.1 Structure of NBFIs under the Reserve Bank’s Regulation ................................ 124
VI.2 NBFCs' Credit vis-à-vis SCBs' Credit and GDP ............................................... 125
VI.3 Registrations and Cancellations of Certificate of Registrations of NBFCs ......... 126
VI.4 Distribution of NBFCs' Credit .......................................................................... 128
VI.5 Classification-wise NBFCs: Select Indicators ................................................... 129
VI.6 Distribution of NBFC Credit ............................................................................ 130
VI.7 Classification-wise Sectoral Distribution of Credit........................................... 131
VI.8 NBFC Credit to Industry vis-a-vis Macro Indicators ....................................... 131
VI.9 MSME Credit by NBFCs ................................................................................. 132
VI.10 Incremental Credit to Commercial Real Estate: NBFCs and SCBs ................... 133
xiiiSr. No. Particulars Page No.
VI.11 Distribution of Retail Loans of NBFCs ............................................................. 133
VI.12 Vehicle Loans: NBFCs and SCBs .................................................................... 133
VI.13 Incremental Vehicle Loans: NBFCs and SCBs ................................................ 134
VI.14 Distribution of Advances against Gold: NBFCs and SCBs ............................... 134
VI.15 Micro-credit Loan Outstanding across Lenders ............................................... 134
VI.16 Disbursement Trend in the Microfinance Segment .......................................... 135
VI.17 NBFCs-MFI: Outstanding Loans and Number of Active Accounts ................... 137
VI.18 NBFCs’ Borrowings: Repayment in Time Buckets .......................................... 137
VI.19 NCD Private Placements of NBFCs .................................................................. 138
VI.20 Yield of NBFC Bonds : Spread over G-Sec of Corresponding Maturity ............ 138
VI.21 Box Plot of NCD Coupon Rates of NBFCs- Rating-wise .................................... 139
VI.22 Bank Lending to NBFCs: Group-wise .............................................................. 139
VI.23 Instruments of Banks’ Lending to NBFCs ........................................................ 140
VI.24 CP Issuances and Rates ................................................................................... 141
VI.25 Public Deposits with NBFCs- D ....................................................................... 141
VI.26 Distribution of Deposits with NBFCs-D ........................................................... 141
VI.27 Loan Sales and Securitisation of NBFCs-ND-SI ............................................... 142
VI.28 Structural Liquidity Statement of NBFCs ........................................................ 142
VI.29 Profitability Ratios of NBFCs ........................................................................... 144
VI.30 Profitability Indicators of NBFCs-ND-SI .......................................................... 144
VI.31 Asset Quality of NBFCs ................................................................................... 145
VI.32 Provision Coverage Ratio of NBFCs ................................................................. 145
VI.33 Classification of NBFCs' Assets ....................................................................... 145
VI.34 Performing Loans Overdue ............................................................................. 146
VI.35 NPAs of NBFCs-ND-SI ..................................................................................... 146
VI.36 Sectoral Distribution of NPAs of NBFCs .......................................................... 147
VI.37 Stressed Assets of NBFCs-ND-SI by Sector ..................................................... 147
VI.38 Gross and Net NPA Ratios of NBFCs- D ........................................................... 147
VI.39 Stress in Large Borrowal Accounts ................................................................. 148
VI.40 Capital Position of NBFC Sector ...................................................................... 148
VI.41 CRAR of NBFCs by Category .......................................................................... 148
xivSr. No. Particulars Page No.
VI.42 Exposure to Sensitive Sectors ......................................................................... 149
VI.43 Credit to Housing sector by HFCs and SCBs ................................................... 149
VI.44 Resources Mobilised by HFCs ......................................................................... 151
VI.45 Public Deposits with HFCs .............................................................................. 151
VI.46 Distribution of HFCs’ Public Deposits ............................................................ 152
VI.47 Financial Parameters of HFCs ......................................................................... 152
VI.48 HFCs: GNPA and NNPA Ratios ....................................................................... 153
VI.49 Weighted Average Cost and Maturity of Rupee Resources Raised by AIFIs ....... 156
VI.50 Long-term PLR Structure of Select AIFIs ......................................................... 156
VI.51 AIFIs’ Financial Ratios ..................................................................................... 157
VI.52 Select Financial Parameters of AIFIs ............................................................... 157
VI.53 AIFIs’ Net NPAs ............................................................................................... 158
VI.54 AIFIs’ Assets Classification .............................................................................. 158
VI.55 Average Rate of Underwriting Commission of PDs ........................................... 159
VI.56 Capital and Risk Weighted Asset Position of SPDs ........................................... 161
xvList of Appendix Tables
Sr. No. Particulars Page No.
IV.1 Indian Banking Sector at a Glance .................................................................. 163
IV.2 Off-Balance Sheet Exposure of Scheduled Commercial Banks in India ........... 164
IV.3 Kisan Credit Card Scheme: State-wise Progress ............................................. 165
IV.4 Bank Group-wise Lending to the Sensitive Sectors ......................................... 167
IV.5 Shareholding Pattern of Domestic Scheduled Commercial Banks ................... 168
IV.6 Overseas Operations of Indian Banks .............................................................. 171
IV.7 Branches and ATMs of Scheduled Commercial Banks .................................... 172
IV.8 Statement of Complaints Received at Banking Ombudsman Office ................. 175
IV.9 International Liabilities of Banks in India – By Type of Instruments ................ 179
IV.10 International Assets of Banks in India - By Type of Instruments ...................... 180
IV.11 Consolidated International Claims of Banks: Residual Maturity and Sector .... 181
IV.12 Consolidated International Claims of Banks on Countries other than India .... 182
IV.13 Progress of Microfinance Programmes ............................................................ 183
IV.14 Major Financial Indicators of Regional Rural Banks- State-wise ...................... 184
IV.15 RRBs- PSL Target and Achievement-2020-21 .................................................. 186
IV.16 Frauds in Various Banking Operations Based on Date of Reporting ................ 187
V.1 Select Financial Parameters of Scheduled UCBs ............................................. 190
V.2 Indicators of Financial Performance: Scheduled UCBs .................................... 192
V.3 Indicators of Financial Health of State Co-operative Banks ............................. 194
V.4 Indicators of Financial Health of District Central Co-operative Banks ............. 195
V.5 Primary Agricultural Credit Societies .............................................................. 196
V.6 Select Indicators of Primary Agricultural Credit Societies-State-wise .............. 197
V.7 Details of Members and Borrowers of Primary
Agricultural Credit Societies ............................................................................ 199
V.8 Liabilities and Assets of State Co-operative Agriculture and
Rural Development Banks ............................................................................... 200
V.9 Financial Performance of State Co-operative Agriculture and
Rural Development Banks ............................................................................... 201
V.10 Asset Quality of State Co-operative Agriculture and Rural Development Banks 202
V.11 Major Financial Indicators of State Co-operative Agriculture and
Rural Development Banks ............................................................................... 203
V.12 Liabilities and Assets of Primary Co-operative Agriculture and
Rural Development Banks ............................................................................... 204
xviSr. No. Particulars Page No.
V.13 Financial Performance of Primary Co-operative Agriculture and
Rural Development Banks ............................................................................... 205
V.14 Asset Quality of Primary Co-operative Agriculture and
Rural Development Banks ............................................................................... 206
V.15 Major Financial Indicators of Primary Co-operative Agriculture and
Rural Developments Banks – State-wise .......................................................... 207
VI.1 Consolidated Balance Sheet of NBFCs ............................................................. 208
VI.2 Consolidated Balance Sheet of NBFCs-ND-SI .................................................. 209
VI.3 Consolidated Balance Sheet of NBFCs-D ......................................................... 210
VI.4 Credit to Various Sectors by NBFCs ................................................................ 211
VI.5 Financial Performance of NBFCs-ND-SI .......................................................... 212
VI.6 Financial Performance of NBFCs - Deposit Taking .......................................... 213
VI.7 Financial Assistance Sanctioned and Disbursed by Financial Institutions ....... 214
VI.8 Financial Performance of Primary Dealers ...................................................... 218
VI.9 Select Financial Indicators of Primary Dealers ................................................ 220
xviiList of Select Abbreviations
ACB Audit Committee of the Board C-D Credit-Deposit
AD Authorised Dealer CDs Certificates of Deposits
ADSCR Average Debt Service Coverage CDS Credit Default Swap
Ratio
CEO Chief Executive Officer
AEs Advanced Economies
CEOBE Credit Equivalent of Off Balance-
AePS Aadhar Enabled Payment sheet Exposures
Services
CEPCs Consumer Education and
AIFIs All-India Financial Institutions Protection Cells
AIFs Alternative Investment Funds CET Common Equity Tier
ANBC Adjusted Net Bank Credit CIC Core Investment Company
API Application Programming CISBI Central Information System for
Interface Banking Infrastructure
AQR Asset Quality Review CKYCR Centralised KYC Registry
ARCs Asset Reconstruction Companies CMBs Cash Management Bills
ARR Alternative Reference Rate CoC Committee of Creditors
ATMs Automated Teller Machines CoFT Card-on-File Tokenisation
BCs Business Correspondents CPI Consumer Price Index
BCBS Basel Committee on Banking CPMI Committee on Payments and
Supervision Market Infrastructures
BFS Board for Financial Supervision CPs Commercial Papers
BIS Bank for International CPS Centralised Payment System
Settlements
CRAR Capital to Risk-Weighted Asset
BPLR Benchmark Prime Lending Rate Ratio
BO Banking Ombudsman CRR Cash Reserve Ratio
BR Banking Regulation CSF Cyber Security Framework
BSBDA Basic Saving Bank Deposit CUG Closed User Groups
Accounts
DBTs Direct Benefit Transfer
CAGR Compound Annual Growth Rate
DCCBs District Central Co-operative
CASA Current Account and Savings Banks
Account
DISCOMs Distribution Companies
CBDCs Central Bank Digital Currencies
DICGC Deposit Insurance and Credit
CCB Capital Conservation Buffer Guarantee Corporation
CC Cash Credit DIF Deposit Insurance Fund
CCPs Central Counterparties DFI Development Finance Institution
CCyB Countercyclical Capital Buffers DLT Distributed Ledger Technology
xviiiDPI Digital Payments Index G-secs Government securities
DSCR Debt Service Coverage Ratio G-SIBs Global Systemically Important
Banks
D-SIBs Domestic Systemically Important
Banks HDI Human Development Index
ECB External Commercial HFCs Housing Finance Companies
Borrowings
HNIs High Net-worth Individuals
ECL Expected Credit Loss
HPI Human Poverty Index
ECLGS Emergency Credit Line
HQLAs High Quality Liquid Assets
Guarantee Scheme
HTM Held to Maturity
EDPMS Export Data Processing and
Monitoring System IBA Intercontinental Benchmark
EMDEs Emerging Market and Administration
Developing Economies IBC Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code
EMEs Emerging Market Economies
IBORs Interbank Offered Rates
eNWRs electronic Negotiable Warehouse
IBPCs Inter-Bank Participation
Receipts
Certificates
ESG Environmental, Social and
ICAAP Internal Capital Adequacy
Governance
Assessment Process
ESOP Employees Stock Option Plans
ICC Investment and Credit Company
EXIM Bank Export Import Bank of India
ICE Intercontinental Exchange
FAS Financial Access Survey
ICT Information and Communication
FCA Financial Conduct Authority Technology
FCNR Foreign Currency Non-Resident
I-D Investment-Deposit
FDI Foreign Direct Investment
IFC International Finance
FDIC Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation
Corporation
IFRS International Financial Reporting
FEMA Foreign Exchange Management Standards
Act
IL&FS Infrastructure Leasing and
FI-Index Financial Inclusion Index Financial Services Ltd
FIP Financial Inclusion Plan IMF International Monetary Fund
FMI Financial Market Infrastructure IOS Integrated Ombudsman Scheme
FPO Follow-on Public Offer
IPO Initial Public Offer
FSB Financial Stability Board
IoT Internet of Things
GDP Gross Domestic Product
IRRBB Interest Rate Risk in the Banking
GNPA Gross Non-Performing Assets Book
GSAP Government Securities ISSB International Sustainability
Acquisition Programme Standards Board
xixIT Information Technology NBFC-IDF NBFC-Infrastructure Debt Fund
IWG Internal Working Group NBFC-IFC NBFC-Infrastructure Finance
Company
JLGs Joint Liability Groups
NBFC-MFI NBFC-Micro Finance Institution
KCC Kisan Credit Card
NBFC-ML NBFC Middle Layer
KYC Know Your Customer
NBFC-MGCs NBFC Mortgage Guarantee
LABs Local Area Banks
Companies
LAF Liquidity Adjustment Facility
NBFC-NOFHC NBFC-Non-Operative Financial
LCR Liquidity Coverage Ratio Holding Company
LEs Legal Entities NBFC-P2P NBFC–Peer to Peer Lending
Platform
LEX Large Exposures
NBFCs Non-Banking Financial
LIBOR London Interbank Offered Rate
Companies
LR Leverage Ratio
NBFCs-D Deposit-taking NBFCs
LTV Loan-to-Value
NBFCs-ND Non-Deposit taking NBFCs
MFIs Micro Finance Institutions
NBFCs-ND-SI Non-Deposit taking Systemically
MFIN Microfinance Institutions Important NBFCs
Network
NBFC-UL NBFC Upper Layer
MFs Mutual Funds NBFI Non-Bank Financial
MGC Mortgage Guarantee Company Intermediation
NBFIs Non-Banking Financial
MHP Minimum Holding Period
Institutions
MMFs Money Market Funds
NCCDs Non-Centrally Cleared
MPC Monetary Policy Committee
Derivatives
MRR Minimum Retention
NCDs Non-Convertible Debentures
Requirement
NCLT National Company Law Tribunal
MRTs Material Risk Takers
NDTL Net Demand and Time Liabilities
MSF Marginal Standing Facility
NEFT National Electronic Fund
MSMEs Micro, Small and Medium
Transfer
Enterprises
NETC National Electronic Toll
NABARD National Bank for Agriculture
Collection
and Rural Development
NGFS Network for Greening the
NABFID National Bank for Financing
Financial System
Infrastructure and Development
NHB National Housing Bank
NARCL National Asset Reconstruction
Company Limited NII Net Interest Income
NBFC-AA NBFC-Account Aggregator NIM Net Interest Margin
NBFC-BL NBFC Base Layer NOF Net Owned Funds
xxNNPA Net Non-Performing Asset PMAY Pradhan Mantri Awas Yojana
NPA Non-Performing Asset PMJDY Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan
Yojana
NPCI National Payments Corporation
of India PPI Producer Price Inflation
NPL Non-Performing Loans PPIs Prepaid Payment Instruments
NRC Nomination and Remuneration PSBs Public Sector Banks
Committee
PSL Priority Sector Lending
NRI Non-Resident Indian
PSLCs Priority Sector Lending
NSFE National Strategy for Financial Certificates
Education
PSPs Payment System Providers
NSFI National Strategy for Financial
PVBs Private Sector Banks
Inclusion
QE Quantitative Easing
NSFR Net Stable Funding Ratio
RBIH Reserve Bank Innovation Hub
NSUCBs Non-Scheduled UCBs
RB-IOS Reserve Bank – Integrated
NWRs Negotiable Warehouse Receipts
Ombudsman Scheme
OCC Office of the Comptroller of the
REs Regulated Entities
Currency
RF Resolution Framework
OD Overdraft
RIDF Rural Infrastructure
OEFs Open Ended Funds
Development Fund
OMOs Open Market Operations
RMCB Risk Management Committee of
OTC Over-The-Counter the Board
OTs Operation Twists RNBC Residuary Non-Banking
Companies
PACS Primary Agricultural Credit
Societies RoA Return on Assets
PAT Profit After Tax RoE Return on Equity
PBs Payments Banks RP Resolution Plan
PCA Prompt Corrective Action RRBs Regional Rural Banks
PCARDBs Primary Co-operative Agriculture RSA Restructured Advances
and Rural Development Banks
RTGS Real Time Gross Settlement
PCR Provision Coverage Ratio
RWAs Risk Weighted Assets
PDI Perpetual Debt Instruments
SAs Statutory Auditors
PDs Primary Dealers
SA-CCR Standardised Approach for
PIDF Payments Infrastructure measuring Counterparty Credit
Development Fund Risk exposure
PLR Prime Lending Rate SAF Supervisory Action Framework
xxiSAR Stressed Assets Ratio STC Simple, Transparent and
Comparable
SARFAESI Act Securitisation and
Reconstruction of Financial StCBs State Co-operative Banks
Assets and Enforcement of
SUCBs Scheduled UCBs
Security Interest Act
SWIFT Society for Worldwide Interbank
SCA Statutory Central Auditors
Financial Telecommunication
SCARDBs State Co-operative Agriculture
T-Bills Treasury Bills
and Rural Development Banks
TBTF Too-Big-To-Fail
SCBs Scheduled Commercial Banks
SDLs State Development Loans TC Trade Credit
SEBI Securities and Exchange Board TCFD Task Force on Climate-related
of India Financial Disclosures
SFBs Small Finance Banks TLAC Total Loss-Absorbing Capacity
SFG Sustainable Finance Group TLTRO Targeted Long-Term Repo
Operations
SHG – BLP Self-help Groups – Bank Linkage
Programme TReDS Trade Receivables Discounting
System
SHGs Self-help Groups
TREPS Triparty Repo Dealing and
SIDBI Small Industries Development
Bank of India Settlement
SLF Special Liquidity Facility UCBs Urban Co-operative Banks
SLR Statutory Liquidity Ratio UNDP United Nations Development
Programme
SLS Special Liquidity Scheme
UPI Unified Payments Interface
SLTRO Special Three-year Long-Term
Repo Operations USD U.S. dollar
SMA Special Mention Accounts VICS Vulnerability Index for Cyber
Security Framework
SMFs Small and Marginal Farmers
VINFRA Fraud Vulnerability Index
SPDs Standalone Primary Dealers
SPE Special Purpose Entity VRRR Variable Rate Reverse Repo
SPV Special Purpose Vehicle WAC Weighted Average Cost
SRs Security Receipts WAPs Weighted Average Premiums
SRO Self-Regulatory Organization WLAs White Label ATMs
SSBs Standard-Setting Bodies WTDs Whole Time Directors
xxiiI
PERSPECTIVES
Globally, as well as in India, the banking and non-banking sectors have weathered the COVID-19
disruptions well, supported by policy measures. As economic growth picks up and policy measures are rolled
back, the pandemic’s impact on banks’ balance sheets will be clearer. Climate change and technological
innovations pose medium-term challenges to the sector, which will need to be addressed through carefully
crafted strategies.
I.1 Globally, the banking sector remained I.4 The Reserve Bank, in association with
resilient throughout the pandemic, aided by the Government, had to devise strategies to
extraordinary policy initiatives by central resolve two private sector banks (PVBs), a
banks and governments. Higher capital, better large urban co-operative bank (UCB) and a few
liquidity buffers and lower leverage allowed NBFCs since 2018. As a lender of the last resort,
them to cushion the shock of the pandemic. the endeavour of the Reserve Bank has been
Measures such as moratorium on payment of to contain spillover risks to maintain financial
loan installments, asset classification standstill, stability, protect depositors’ interest while also
restructuring of loans and restrictions on
ensuring that such solutions do not lead to moral
dividend payouts alleviated the stress, while
hazard, going forward.
helping banks to continue to provide credit to
I.5 The pandemic has brought about a shift in
productive sectors.
adoption of digital technology with multi-faceted
I.2 As vaccination drives gathered pace across
opportunities in the financial sector, while posing
jurisdictions and economic activity hesitantly
certain challenges of tackling cybersecurity/
started turning around, time-bound and smooth
frauds to all stakeholders including regulators
unwinding of regulatory forbearances assumed
and supervisors. Climate change has emerged as
importance from the viewpoint of financial
an overarching concern, enveloping all aspects of
stability. In India, most pandemic measures had
human life, including the financial sector.
a well specified sunset clause, and some have
run their course during the year. However, the I.6 Against this backdrop, this chapter
impact of these transient measures on banks’ presents a bird’s eye view of the challenges
financial health is not immediately clear and can faced by the banking and non-banking sectors
be fully fathomed only after passage of time. and offers a futuristic view about policy options
available to the regulator.
I.3 A fallout of the pandemic and the
slowdown in economic activity is that credit
Emerging from the Shadows of COVID-19
growth of scheduled commercial banks (SCBs)
remained subdued in 2020-21 but non-banking I.7 In the wake of the pandemic-related
financial companies (NBFCs) have stepped up lockdowns during 2020-21, supply chains froze,
to fill this space. In H1:2021-22, although credit and demand declined on economic agents trying
growth of SCBs has shown some uptick, concerns to conserve cash with a precautionary motive.
have emerged about NBFCs’ asset quality. This resulted in sharp decline in credit growth
1Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
even as deposits increased. The fall in yields within 180 days from the date of invocation, they
provided a silver lining, as banks booked profits have time till September 30, 2022 to achieve
on their trading accounts. Banking stocks were the operational parameters. On the other hand,
affected particularly adversely as markets priced resolutions under RF 2.0 for individuals, small
in future asset quality deterioration, affecting businesses and MSMEs could be invoked before
shareholders’ wealth and confidence. Although September 30, 2021 and the resolution plan
construction of a counterfactual is difficult, the had to be implemented within 90 days from the
benefit of hindsight indicates that the pandemic’s date of invocation. As support measures start
impact on the economy would have been much unwinding, some of these restructured accounts
sharper, had the Government and the Reserve might require higher provisioning by banks over
Bank not stepped in with timely initiatives. the coming quarters.
I.8 Data available for 2021-22 so far indicate I.11 With the expiry of the suspension
that banks’ gross as well as net non-performing on fresh proceedings under the Insolvency
assets have moderated while provision coverage and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) on March 24,
ratios (PCRs), capital buffers as well as 2021, creditors can again leverage on the IBC
profitability indicators have improved relative to mechanism for resolution of stressed assets.
pre-pandemic levels. A closer look at granular This is also expected to empower MSMEs—as
data, however, reveals a more nuanced picture. operational creditors—to recover their dues.
Credit growth is muted, indicative of pandemic
I.12 Through an amendment to the IBC Act,
scarring on aggregate demand as also risk
a pre-pack resolution window for MSMEs has
aversion of banks. Banks’ asset quality may get
been made available, which is a blend of formal
dented, going forward.
and informal mechanisms having debtor-in-
I.9 Most of the regulatory accommodations possession model as an option. Even before the
announced by the Reserve Bank, including corporate debtor’s admission application is filed,
deferment of implementation of net stable debtor and creditors can negotiate and arrive at a
funding ratio (NSFR), restrictions on dividend potential resolution plan. This has considerably
payouts by banks, deferment of implementation expedited and simplified the process up to
of the last tranche of capital conservation buffer admission in the National Company Law Tribunal
(CCB) have already expired. As the pandemic (NCLT).
situation is dynamic, the regulatory response
I.13 The setting up of the National Asset
will be calibrated in response to the evolving
Reconstruction Company Limited (NARCL), to
situation.
consolidate and take over the stressed debt from
banks, is a step forward for resolution of large
Resolution of Stressed Assets
value legacy assets. International experience,
I.10 During the two waves of COVID-19, the however, suggests that for the experiment to
Reserve Bank announced Resolution Frameworks succeed and to avoid perverse incentives, risks
(RF) 1.0 and 2.0 to provide relief to borrowers to banks’ balance sheets are clearly identified;
and lending institutions. While the restructuring transparent transfer pricing for sale of assets are
of large borrowal accounts under RF 1.0 could be ensured; and management of the new entity is
invoked by December 31, 2020 and implemented independent and professional.
2PERSPECTIVES
Recapitalisation Requirements after international fora to discuss potential areas that
COVID-19 need further research, methodological challenges,
and ways to circumvent data challenges. The
I.14 Based on the capital position as on
Reserve Bank has been actively assessing
September 30, 2021, all PSBs and PVBs
potential risks arising from sectors that account
maintained the capital conservation buffer (CCB)
for a large portion of direct and indirect fossil
well over 2.5 per cent. Going forward, however,
fuel consumption in India.
banks would need a higher capital cushion to deal
with challenges on account of the ongoing stress I.18 A ‘Sustainable Finance Group’ (SFG) was
set up in the Reserve Bank in May 2021 which co-
experienced by borrowers as well as to meet
ordinates with other national and international
the economy’s potential credit requirements.
agencies on issues relating to climate change.
Concerted strategies for timely capital infusion
The group would be instrumental in suggesting
need to be carried forward by the banks.
strategies and evolving a regulatory framework,
Climate Change including appropriate environmental, social
and governance (ESG) disclosures, which could
I.15 The assessment of the systemic impact
be prescribed for banks and other regulated
of climate change on the economy and financial
entities (REs) to propagate sustainable practices
stability is still evolving and so are the responses
and mitigate climate related risks in the Indian
of central banks and supervisors around the
context. Going forward, it will analyse India-
world.
specific themes on the systemic stability impact
I.16 While the value of green bonds issued of climate change and stress testing.
constitutes a small portion of the total bond
I.19 To assess the progress of REs in
issuance in India, it occupies the second spot
managing climate risk, the Reserve Bank is
in cumulative emerging market green bond
preparing a consultative discussion paper
issuance during 2012-2020, as per estimates of
covering, inter alia, (i) governance (ii) strategy
International Finance Corporation (IFC). In April
(iii) risk management and (iv) disclosure.
2021, the Reserve Bank joined the Network for
The discussion paper will sensitise REs to
Greening of Financial System (NGFS)—a group
incorporate climate-related and environmental
of central banks and supervisors willing to share
risks in their business strategies as also in their
best practices and contribute to the development governance and risk management frameworks.
of environment and climate risk management in In line with the international best practices,
the financial sector. The Reserve Bank has begun banks will be guided to adopt a forward-looking,
participating in the workstreams of the NGFS, comprehensive, and strategic approach to
which will equip its staff with the necessary skills climate-related risks.
and knowledge on climate related risks.
I.20 India has reiterated its commitment to
I.17 The Reserve Bank is actively engaged climate action at the United Nations Climate
in conducting research on areas such as green Change Conference (COP26) in November
finance and the impact of climate change on 2021 at Glasgow. In line with this resolve, and
various macroeconomic variables such as showcasing its solidarity with the NGFS, the
inflation and growth. It participates in various Reserve Bank published a statement to support
3Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
greening India’s financial system. Keeping in I.23 In contrast to the initiatives in some other
mind the national commitment, priorities and countries, India has embraced an approach
complexity of the Indian financial system, the where both the regulator and the market
Reserve Bank committed to (i) exploring how collaborated towards development of the open
climate change scenario analysis can be used to banking space. In India, under the guidance
identify vulnerabilities in the supervised entities’ of the Reserve Bank, the National Payments
balance sheets, business models and gaps in Corporation of India (NPCI) developed systems
their capabilities for measuring and managing such as unified payments interface (UPI) and
climate-related financial risks; (ii) integrating released its application programming interface
(API) for banks and third-party app providers
climate-related risks into financial stability
(TPAPs) to build upon. Market participants are
monitoring; and (iii) building awareness about
also driving innovation and many banks are
climate-related risks among regulated financial
releasing their own APIs and joining forces with
institutions and spreading knowledge about
FinTech companies. Moreover, with the launch
issues relating to climate change and methods to
of its regulatory sandbox and the Reserve Bank
deal with them accordingly.
Innovation Hub, the Reserve Bank has been
guiding new vistas of development in financial
Open Banking
intermediation.
I.21 Open banking frameworks allow
I.24 At the same time, the importance of
authorised third parties to access customers’
customer privacy and data protection cannot be
data, with the explicit consent of the latter.
overemphasised. Going forward, the challenge is
Benefits of the framework include convenient
to generate and sustain trust amongst customers
access to financial data and services to consumers
about safety and security of the system while also
and streamlining some costs for financial
nurturing innovation.
institutions. On the other hand, concerns about
data privacy and security, customer grievance
Digital Lending
redressal, cybersecurity and operational risks,
I.25 In the recent period, many digital
compliance and regulation risks need to be
platforms have emerged that offer hassle-free
carefully addressed to develop a safe and secure
loans to retail individuals, small traders, and
ecosystem.
other borrowers. Banks and NBFCs too, have
I.22 From the regulators’ perspective,
started lending directly through their own digital
introduction of open banking has a wide range
platforms or indirectly through an outsourced
of ramifications. In many jurisdictions, including
platform. Many large multi-national corporations
India, outsourcing arrangements by banks and
whose primary business is technology
other REs are covered under explicit regulations. (e-commerce, social media, payments enablers
Supervisors also have certain amount of oversight etc.), popularly known as BigTechs, have started
over third-party entities. If the relationships in lending either directly or in partnership with
the open banking extend beyond the existing regulated financial entities. Even enhancing the
supervisory and regulatory perimeters, the traditional entity-based regulatory approach with
enforcement of standards and prudential policies activity-based regulations may be inadequate to
may become difficult. ensure stability, a level playing field, competition,
4PERSPECTIVES
and customer protection. While use of digital (CBDC-R), or would it be for wholesale use
channels in financial services is a welcome move, (CBDC-W). Furthermore, in a country like India,
the potential downside risks embedded in such the decision about distribution architecture,
endeavours need to be addressed. i.e., whether CBDC would be issued directly
by the central bank or through commercial
I.26 Taking cognisance of the recent spurt
banks, needs to be carefully weighed. Gauging
in unfair digital lending practices, the Reserve
magnitude of issuance/ distribution will also
Bank had constituted a Working Group on
help in identifying the appropriate underlying
Digital Lending that has made recommendations
technology best suited to handle such operations.
to foster a safe digital lending ecosystem, such
as establishing a verification process for digital I.29 Given its dynamic impact on
lending apps by a nodal agency; setting up of a macroeconomic policy making, it is necessary
self-regulatory organisation (SRO); enactment to adopt basic models initially, and test
of a separate legislation to prevent illegal digital comprehensively so that they have minimal
lending activities; development of certain
impact on monetary policy and the banking
baseline technology standards and compliance
system. India’s progress in payment systems will
with those standards as a pre-condition for
provide a useful backbone to make a state-of-the-
offering digital lending solutions; and consent-
art CBDC available to its citizens and financial
based data collection with verifiable audit trails.
institutions.
Going forward, a balanced approach needs to
be followed so that the regulatory framework Payments Banks
supports innovation while ensuring data
I.30 Payments banks (PBs)—offering basic
security, privacy, confidentiality, and consumer
banking services to the underserved segments
protection.
of the society by leveraging technology—are
under constant pressure to innovate to maintain
Central Bank Digital Currency
competitiveness, especially against BigTech
I.27 In its basic form, a central bank digital
players. As a result, their operational costs and
currency (CBDC), provides a safe, robust, and
investment needs are higher than other segments
convenient alternative to physical cash. Depending
of the banking sector, affecting their profitability.
on various design choices, it can also assume
I.31 Given the higher incidence of frauds and
the complex form of a financial instrument. In
complaints about their operations, PBs need
comparison with existing forms of money, it
can offer benefits to users in terms of liquidity, to be vigilant on these fronts while addressing
scalability, acceptance, ease of transactions with customer complaints efficiently. They have a large
anonymity and faster settlement. Central banks network of business correspondents (BCs), who
across the globe are now deliberating on how facilitate wide geographical reach and financial
to implement CBDCs, moving ahead from their inclusion. This, however, necessitates close
initial exploratory forays. oversight to ensure continued public confidence
in digital transactions.
I.28 Certain crucial questions about design
elements of CBDC need to be navigated before I.32 Going forward, challenges facing them
its introduction, e.g., whether the CBDC would will include development of technologically
be general purpose and available for retail use sound and intuitive user interfaces that attract
5Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
and retain new clientele. On the other hand, the provisions for co-operative banks to raise capital
potential increase in the volume of customers at premium, as also take the recourse to public
necessitates diligence in terms of security and and private placement for raising capital.
timely resolution of glitches.
I.37 To give effect to the above, the Reserve
Bank sought comments on draft guidelines
Small Finance Banks
on issue and regulation of share capital and
I.33 The primary cashflows of small finance
securities of UCBs. The draft guidelines permit
banks (SFBs) were adversely affected during
UCBs to raise equity share capital as hitherto.
the first phase of the pandemic. Even before,
Additionally, they delineate guidelines pertaining
structural problems have beset the sector. Many
to the instruments for raising capital, suitably
SFBs have concentration risk on both sides of
revising them wherever warranted to ensure
their balance sheets. On the liabilities side,
congruity with the extant statutory provisions. The
they have low CASA/retail CASA deposits and
draft guidelines further provide the prudential
rely heavily on bulk deposits and term deposits
criteria based on which the UCBs can refund
from co-operative banks. On the assets side,
the value of share capital to their shareholders.
the share of unsecured microfinance loans is
However, the issues of raising capital at premium
disproportionately large. From the perspective of
and public issue / private placement of securities
sound risk management, SFBs need to diversify
issued by UCBs require further examination.
their assets as well as their liability profiles.
Amalgamation of District Central Co-operative
I.34 The governance culture in these banks
Banks (DCCBs) with State Co-operative Bank
needs improvement. High attrition levels,
(StCB)
especially at top ranks need to be addressed.
SFBs also need to strengthen their information I.38 With the provisions of the Banking
technology (IT) infrastructure for better customer Regulation (Amendment) Act, 2020 being
experience and for cyber security resilience. enlarged, rules governing the amalgamation
of DCCBs with their respective StCB are
Co-operative Banks
homogenized irrespective of the provisions
I.35 The co-operative banking sector in India in their State Co-operative Societies Acts. In
emerged relatively unscathed from the first wave exercise of these powers, the Reserve Bank
of the pandemic, although structural issues issued guidelines specifying requirements and
continue to mar the sector. indicative benchmarks/ conditions for the same
in May 2021.
Capital Related Issues
I.39 Statutorily, however, the state
I.36 Amendment to the Banking Regulation
governments have a vital role in rural short-term
Act, 1949 granted powers to the Reserve Bank
to regulate the issue of paid-up share capital and co-operative credit structure. The legal authority
securities by co-operative banks. The amendment to declare a co-operative society as central co-
enables co-operative banks to raise capital operative bank rests with the state government.
through instruments such as equity shares, The proposal of amalgamation of DCCBs with
preference shares, special shares, unsecured StCB needs to be initiated voluntarily by the
debentures, and bonds, with prior permission concerned state government. The Reserve Bank
of the Reserve Bank. It also has enabling typically seeks commitment from the concerned
6PERSPECTIVES
state governments for capital infusion in cases Micro Finance Institutions
where post amalgamation CRAR is likely to fall
I.41 Over the last decade, the share of NBFC-
below regulatory requirements. Given the fiscal
MFIs in the overall microfinance sector declined
constraints faced by many state governments,
to reach a little over 30 per cent at end-March
especially in the aftermath of the pandemic, their
2021. However, the extant customer protection
capacity to infuse capital as and when the need
measures applicable to NBFC-MFIs since 2011 are
arises, is severely limited.
not applicable to other lenders. In June 2021, the
Reserve Bank released a consultative document
NBFC Sector
to propose a uniform regulatory framework for
I.40 The pandemic posed significant
microfinance lenders under its regulation. The
challenges to the NBFC sector during the first
proposed framework envisages introduction
wave. Aided by various policy initiatives, NBFCs
of activity-based regulation in the microfinance
have emerged stronger, with reasonable balance
sector, protection of small borrowers from over-
sheet growth, increased credit intermediation,
indebtedness, enhancement of the customer
higher capital and lower delinquency ratio. The
protection measures, and enabling competitive
latest data on SMA, however, show that potential
forces to bring down interest rates by empowering
NPAs have increased significantly during 2021-
borrowers to make informed decisions.
22 so far. Recognising the increasing importance
I.42 In a nutshell, the Indian financial sector
of NBFCs in the financial ecosystem, the Reserve
Bank has implemented scale-based regulation to is standing at crossroads: while the immediate
enhance the regulatory oversight over the sector impact of the fallout of COVID-19 will dominate
effective October 2022. Furthermore, NBFCs the short-term, larger challenges relating to
need to be better equipped and focused on cyber climate change and technological innovations
fraud prevention as customers’ adoption of digital will need a carefully crafted strategy. The Reserve
lending gathers pace. Going forward, the sector Bank will endeavour to ensure a safe, sound
may have to grapple with higher delinquency as and competitive financial system through its
and when policy measures unwind. regulatory and supervisory initiatives.
7Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
II
GLOBAL BANKING DEVELOPMENTS
The financial sector remained largely resilient and robust during the pandemic on the back of strong policy
support. High capital buffers and lower leverage enabled global banks to provide credit and other critical
services to the real sector. The asset quality of the top 100 banks recorded marginal deterioration. Going
forward however, as policy support is phased out, banks need to remain vigilant to mitigate stress and emerge
stronger.
1. Introduction some form, while EMDEs have been compelled
to tighten monetary policy aggressively in the face
II.1 The global economy is recovering haltingly
of elevated inflation risks (Chart II.1b).
amidst renewed surges of the pandemic in some
jurisdictions. Taking note of some loss of pace II.2 Producer price inflation (PPI) is in
in the second half of 2021, the International double digits in the euro area and at 8.0 per
Monetary Fund (IMF) revised downwards its cent or more in Japan and the US. Producers
global growth forecast for the year to 5.9 per cent1, have started passing on price increases to the
citing supply chain bottlenecks and rising energy retail level, and as a consequence, CPI inflation
prices as downside risks. The macroeconomic
is rising rapidly across jurisdictions, reaching
outlook for advanced economies (AEs) and
6.8 per cent in the US in November 2021, the
emerging market and developing economies
highest level in nearly 40 years. In other AEs
(EMDEs) is diverging, reflecting differentials in
and EMDEs too, inflation is either above or
infections and vaccination (Chart II.1a). Going
testing tolerance thresholds. The jury is still out
forward, this gap could narrow with higher
on whether the inflationary pressures are going
vaccination rates. As on December 25, 2021
to be ‘temporary’ or ‘persistent’.
about 57.4 per cent of the world’s population
II.3 Some AEs, including New Zealand, South
had received at least one dose of the vaccine, of
which 48.3 per cent were fully vaccinated.2 The Korea and the UK, and some EMDEs namely
pace of the global recovery is also contingent on Brazil, Chile, Hungary, Mexico, Russia, Sri Lanka
policy support. While AEs provided substantial and Uruguay, have begun raising monetary policy
fiscal support in 2020 and intend to extend it rates to curb price pressures emerging from
beyond 2021, fiscal stimuli have either expired pent-up demand and supply chain bottlenecks
or scheduled to end shortly in EMDEs. Some colliding (Chart II.2a and b). Canada has halted
AEs have started monetary policy tapers3 in its quantitative easing programme (QE).
1 International Monetary Fund (2021). ‘World Economic Outlook: Recovery during a Pandemic- Health Concerns, Supply
Disruptions, and Price Pressures’ Washington, DC, October. Available at https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO,
2 Source: https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations#
3 On December 15, 2021, the US Federal Reserve decided to reduce the monthly pace of its net asset purchases by $20 billion for
Treasury securities and $10 billion for agency mortgage-backed securities.
8GLOBAL BANKING DEVELOPMENTS
Chart II.1: Macroeconomic Background
a: Global Growth and Trade b: Inflation and Advanced Economies’
Unemployment Rate
8
6
4
2
0
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Source: IMF
II.4 The outlook for 2022 remains uncertain from a variety of sources including the IMF, the
and slanted to the downside with the sporadic Bank for International Settlements (BIS) and
resurgence of infections from new variants of the the Financial Stability Board (FSB). Section 3
coronavirus outweighing the upsides. The IMF evaluates the performance of global banks in
projects global growth to slow down to 4.9 per terms of credit growth, asset quality, capital
cent and global trade volume to moderate to 6.7 buffers and leverage. The performance of the
per cent in 2022 from 9.7 per cent in 2021.
world’s top 100 largest banks ranked by their
II.5 The rest of this chapter presents the tier-I capital is covered in Section 4. Section 5
global banking developments during the period concludes the chapter with what lies ahead for
under review in section 2, drawing information the global banking sector.
Chart II.2: Monetary Policy Rates
a. Advance Economies b. Emerging and Developing Economies
Source: BIS
9
tnecreP
AES'Unemploymentrate,Percentof totallaborforce
AEs'Inflation, average consumerprices,Percent change
EMDEs'Inflation,average consumer prices,PercentchangeReport on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
2. Global Banking Policy Developments in place for implementing the countercyclical
capital buffer (CCyB)6. There have been eleven
II.6 Recognising the exceptional circum-
new adoptions in respect of the capital standards,
stances brought on by the pandemic, which
four new adoptions of the net stable funding
prompted many regulators and supervisors
ratio (NSFR)7, and seven adoptions pertaining
to use existing flexibilities in the framework to
to disclosure norms. In respect of Basel III
provide regulatory relief, the implementation
standards which have a deadline in future, there
dates of Basel III standards (finalised in
were new adaptors of ‘revised operational risk
December 2017), the revised Pillar 3 disclosure
framework’8 and revised standardised approach
requirements (finalised in December 2018), and
the revised market risk framework (finalised in for credit risk9.
January 2019) have been deferred by one year
II.9 As at end-September 2021, twenty-six
to January 1, 20234. They will now be phased
jurisdictions (except for Australia) have enforced
in over five years. Meanwhile, progress has been
the leverage ratio. As regards the systemically
made in the implementation of those Basel III
important banks, while all members that are
standards, for which agreed timelines continue
home jurisdictions for global systemically
to apply.
important banks (G-SIBs) have final rules in
II.7 The framework for other aspects of force, twenty-six members have implemented
financial reforms such as those pertaining to too- final rules for domestic systemically important
big-to-fail (TBTF), making derivatives markets banks (D-SIBs).
safer, and promoting resilient non-banking
II.10 As alluded earlier, four new jurisdictions
financial institutions (NBFIs) are in place and
adopted the NSFR under liquidity standards in
their implementation is underway. During the
the last year. In addition, twenty-two jurisdictions
pandemic, the focus has shifted to understanding
have enforced final rules pertaining to ‘monitoring
new sources of vulnerabilities5.
tools for intra-day liquidity management’10. A
Building Resilient Financial Institutions
majority of the members (ranging between 22 and
II.8 All 27 member jurisdictions have already 26) have either enforced final rules or published
implemented Basel standards viz., risk-based draft rules for the leverage ratio, the standardised
capital rules, liquidity coverage ratio (LCR), approach for measuring counterparty credit
and capital conservation buffers (CCoB) as at risk (SACCR), the supervisory framework for
end-May 2020. All jurisdictions have final rules measuring and controlling large exposures
4 In March 2020, the Group of Central Bank Governors and Heads of Supervision endorsed a set of measures to provide additional
operational capacity for banks and supervisors to respond to the financial stability priorities resulting from the impact of COVID19
on the global banking system.
5 FSB (2021). Implementation and Effects of the G20 Financial Regulatory Reforms. Available at https://www.fsb.org/wp-content/
uploads/P131120-1.pdf
6 Source: BIS (2021), Progress Report on Adoption of the Basel Regulatory Framework. Available at https://www.bis.org/bcbs/publ/
d525.htm.
7 Japan, Mexico, Switzerland and the UK.
8 Indonesia, Mexico and Russia.
9 Mexico.
10 China, Japan and Korea have not adopted the rules, while Canada has published the final rules but is yet to be implemented by
banks.
10GLOBAL BANKING DEVELOPMENTS
(LEX), monitoring tools for intra-day liquidity effective resolution regimes for insurers and
management, margin requirements for non- central counterparties (CCPs)19. Work is also
centrally cleared derivatives (NCCDs), a revised ongoing at the international level to enhance CCP
securitisation framework, capital requirements resilience, recovery and resolution, and to make
for equity investments in funds and the revised trade reporting truly effective; to strengthen
Pillar 3 disclosure requirements11. governance standards to reduce misconduct
risks; to address the decline in correspondent
II.11 There is, however, limited progress in
banking; to analyse implications of FinTech
the implementation of other Basel III standards
for financial stability, financial innovations,
for which deadlines have passed. These include
payments systems, cyber resilience and market
interest rate risk in the banking book (IRRBB)12;
fragmentation. Uncertainty remains around the
capital requirements for bank exposures to
resolvability of CCPs given their systemic role in
central counterparties13; total loss absorbing the financial system. Challenging and important
capacity (TLAC) holdings14; margin requirements ongoing work to assess the need for international
for non-centrally cleared derivatives15 and the policy on the use, composition and amount of CCP
revised Pillar 3 framework16. financial resources in recovery and resolution is
being urgently pursued20.
II.12 Almost all G-SIB home and key host
jurisdictions have in place comprehensive bank Too-big-to-fail (TBTF) reforms
resolution regimes that align with the FSB
II.13 In March 2021, the FSB examined the
Key Attributes17. Implementation of the Key
extent to which the TBTF reforms are working as
Attributes is still incomplete in some other FSB
intended21. Specifically, the evaluation focused
jurisdictions. State support for failing banks
on (i) whether the reforms are reducing systemic
has continued. Substantial work remains to and moral hazard risks associated with SIBs;
be done to operationalise resolution plans for and (ii) broader effects (positive or negative)
systemically important banks18 and implement of the reforms on the financial system. The
11 The adoption of securitisation framework is yet to commence in India, while the implementation of margin requirement for non-
centrally cleared derivatives (NCCDs) is in progress.
12 Australia, India, Mexico, Russia, South Africa, and Turkey are yet to issue rules and U.K. is yet to enforce the rules.
13 India issued final rules in 2016. Jurisdictions yet to do so include China, Indonesia, Mexico, Russia and Turkey.
14 China, India, Korea, South Africa and Turkey are yet to issue final guidelines.
15 Argentina, China, Indonesia, India, Mexico, Turkey and Russia are yet to issue final rules.
16 Australia, China, India and U.S. are yet to issue draft rules, while Indonesia, Mexico, U.K. have moved towards only partial
implementation.
17 FSB (2011), Key Attributes of Effective Resolution Regimes for Financial Institutions. Available at https://www.fsb.org/wp-
content/uploads/r_111104cc.pdf
18 The level of compliance with the BCBS Principles on risk data aggregation and risk reporting is still to be improved.
19 The powers most often lacking are bail-in and to impose a temporary stay on the exercise of early termination rights.
20 FSB (2021), “Glass half-full or still half-empty?” Available at https://www.fsb.org/wp-content/uploads/P071221.pdf
21 FSB (2021). ‘Evaluation of the effects of too-big-to-fail reforms’. Available at https://www.fsb.org/2021/03/evaluation-of-the-
effects-of-too-big-to-fail-reforms-final-report/.
11Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
social benefits of TBTF reforms are measured along six indicators, namely, (i) trade reporting
in terms of reduced probability and severity of requirements, (ii) interim capital requirements
the financial crisis, while the social costs of the for non-centrally cleared derivatives (NCCDs),
reforms are measured via increases in the cost (iii) platform trading, (iv) mandatory central
of bank credit. The evaluation found that too-big- clearing, (v) margin requirements for NCCDs,
to-fail (TBTF) reforms have made banks more and (vi) final capital requirements for
resilient and resolvable and have produced net NCCDs. Trade reporting requirements for
benefits to society. It also identified gaps to be OTC derivatives transactions and interim
addressed. As non-bank financial institutions capital requirements for non-centrally cleared
have gained market share, some risks have derivatives are in place in 23 FSB jurisdictions.
moved outside the banking system. There is Platform trading requirements are in force in 13
also scope for improving public disclosures of jurisdictions while 17 jurisdictions already have
information relating to resolution frameworks comprehensive standards for mandatory central
and funding mechanisms. clearing requirements. Fifteen jurisdictions have
rules in force for final capital requirement for
II.14 Cross border payments is another area
of focus that faces challenges of speed, cost, NCCDs. Sixteen jurisdictions have implemented
access and transparency. To address these the final rules for margin requirement for
challenges, a roadmap has been developed by NCCDs.
the FSB in coordination with the Committee on
Promoting Resilient Non-Bank Financial
Payments and Market Infrastructures (CPMI)
Intermediation (NBFI)
and other relevant international organisations
II.16 The implementation of non-bank
and standard-setting bodies22. As part of the
financial intermediation (NBFI) reforms is
roadmap, the FSB has proposed specific targets
underway but it is at an earlier stage than
to be achieved in terms of improvement across
other reforms25. The FSB and standard-setting
all four areas by the end of 2027 through the
bodies (SSBs) have extended implementation
actions taken under 19 building blocks23.
deadlines for certain reforms in order to provide
Making Derivatives Markets Safer24
additional capacity for firms and authorities to
II.15 Overall implementation of the G20’s respond to the pandemic shock. FSB together
over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives reforms is with other SSBs, is working to enhance the
well advanced, but there has been incremental resilience of the NBFI sector while preserving its
progress since October 2020 across FSB benefits, building on the lessons from the March
member jurisdictions. Progress is monitored 2020 market turmoil. Key work undertaken in
22 FSB (2020). Enhancing Cross-border Payments: Stage 3 roadmap. Available at https://www.fsb.org/wp-content/uploads/P131020-
1.pdf
23 FSB(2021), Targets for Addressing the Four Challenges of Cross-Border Payments. Available at https://www.fsb.org/wp-content/
uploads/P310521.pdf
24 FSB (2021), OTC Derivatives Market Reforms: Implementation progress in 2021. Available at https://www.fsb.org/wp-content/
uploads/P031221.pdf
25 Implementation of the FSB policy recommendations for securities financing transactions continues to face significant delays
in some jurisdictions. Work is underway to adopt standards and processes on global securities financing data collection and
aggregation. Also, Implementation of the FSB and IOSCO recommendations to address structural vulnerabilities from liquidity
and leverage in asset management activities is ongoing
12GLOBAL BANKING DEVELOPMENTS
this area includes policy proposals to enhance the US Federal Reserve and the Federal Deposit
the resilience of money market funds (MMFs); Insurance Corporation (FDIC) in a joint statement
addressing liquidity mismatches in open ended have encouraged supervised institutions to cease
funds (OEFs); examining the frameworks and entering into new contracts that use USD LIBOR
dynamics of margin calls in centrally cleared
as a reference rate as soon as practicable, but no
and non-centrally cleared derivatives.
later than December 31, 2021.
Phasing out of London Inter-bank Offered Rate Climate-Related Financial Disclosures
(LIBOR)
II.18 With increased frequency and intensity
II.17 Interest rate benchmarks play a key of natural disasters, global attention has now
role in global financial markets. In 2014, in shifted to climate change related risks to
response to cases of attempted manipulation financial stability26 (Box II.1). Traditional risk
and also declining liquidity in key interbank assessments are inadequate to capture these
unsecured funding markets, the FSB made uncertainties. The FSB’s 2015 Task Force on
recommendations to reform interbank offered Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD)
rates (IBORs), working in coordination with finalised its recommendations in 201727.
national authorities to set out a globally consistent These recommendations are being voluntarily
roadmap that encourages firms to stop the use implemented. The fourth status report on
of LIBOR and identify alternative benchmarks. adoption of the recommendations of the TCFD
In October 2020, the FSB published a global (October 14, 2021) indicated that disclosure of
transition roadmap, which sets out a timetable climate related financial information has steadily
of actions for financial and non-financial sector increased. However, significant progress is
firms to take in order to ensure a smooth still needed, as on an average only one in three
transition out of LIBOR by end-2021. In March of the companies reviewed disclosed climate-
2020, the UK Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) related information aligned with the TCFD
and Intercontinental Exchange (ICE) Benchmark recommendations28. The International Financial
Administration (IBA) have announced that the Reporting Standards (IFRS) Foundation is
one-week and two-month U.S. dollar (USD) LIBOR establishing an International Sustainability
settings will cease to be published immediately Standards Board (ISSB) to develop a baseline
after December 31, 2021. The publication of global sustainability reporting standard, built
overnight and one-, three-, six-, and 12-month from the TCFD framework and the work of
USD LIBOR settings will, however, be extended an alliance of sustainability standard setters.
till June 30, 2023 providing additional time to It also highlighted the need for improving the
wind down or renegotiate existing contracts. The level of disclosures for greater consistency and
Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), comparability. However, a shortage of data
26 BIS (2020). The green swan - Central banking and financial stability in the age of climate change. Available at https://www.
bis.org/publ/othp31.pdf
27 The aim of the TCFD was ‘to develop a set of voluntary, consistent disclosure recommendations for use by companies in providing
information to investors, lenders and insurance underwriters about their climate-related financial risks.’
28 FSB (2020), The Implications of Climate Change for Financial Stability. Available at https://www.fsb.org/wp-content/uploads/
P231120.pdf
13Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Box II.1: Climate Change and Financial Stability: Assessment and Way Forward
The FSB (2020) estimates that global economic losses published a roadmap focusing on four pillars: (i) firm level
from catastrophic weather events have doubled since the disclosures as the basis for the pricing and management
1990s going up to US$ 1.6 trillion over the last ten years. of climate-related financial risks at the level of individual
entities and market participants; (ii) data for diagnosis
Chart 1: Global Insured vis-à-vis Uninsured Losses of climate-related vulnerabilities; (iii) vulnerabilities
from Weather Related Natural Catastrophes
assessment and (iv) regulatory and supervisor practices
1800
and tools.
1600
1400 The analysis of climate related risks usually requires large
1200 amount of granular data. The Network for Greening the
1017
1000 Financial System (NGFS) provides a common starting
800 point for analysing climate risks through standardised
636
600 643 scenarios and related datasets on transition risk, physical
400 risk and economic impacts. A common problem is that the
601 data on firms’ exposure to physical and transition risks
200 394
140 236
0 74 lack consistency and granularity. Firms also lack capacity
1980-1989 1990-1999 2000-2009 2010-2019 to develop and disclose forward-looking assessment
of climate-related risks. Some of these data gaps are
Note: Losses measured in 2019 prices.
particularly acute in emerging market economies.
Source: FSB (2020).
To date, measurement of climate-related financial risks
Climate change and climate policies can potentially affect
by banks and supervisors has centred on mapping near-
the broader mandates of the central banks. Though a range
term transition risk drivers into counterparty and portfolio
of policy options are available to central banks to factor
exposures. Banks and supervisors have predominantly
climate-related risks into their operational frameworks,
focused on assessing credit risk, as they advance in
there is yet no consensus as to what adjustments would be
applying methods to translate climate-related exposures
optimal. Some of the policy options include:
into various financial risk categories (BIS, 2021).
(1) Credit operations: (a) adjust pricing to reflect
Going forward, there is a need for authorities to engage
counterparties’ climate-related lending; (b) adjust
with stakeholders, including formation of industry bodies
pricing to reflect the composition of pledged collateral;
that would lay down guidance and best practices for
(c) adjust counterparties’ eligibility.
industry to adopt. Central banks and supervisors could
(2) Collateral: (a) adjust haircuts; (b) negative screening;
foster formation of such industry bodies.
(c) positive screening; (d) align collateral pools with a
climate-related objective and References:
(3) Asset purchases: (a) Tilt purchases, (b) negative
FSB (2020), The Implications of Climate Change
screening (NGFS, 2021).
for Financial Stability. Available at https://www.fsb.
As per the FSB’s stocktake in July 2020, 24 out of 33 org/2020/11/the-implications-of-climate-change-for-
jurisdictions reported that they are currently attempting, financial-stability/
or are planning to measure in the future, climate-related
NGFS (2021), ‘Adapting central bank operations to a
risks in their overall framework of financial stability
hotter world Reviewing some options’. Available at https://
monitoring. Jurisdictions are using either a ‘top down’
www.ngfs.net/en/adapting-central-bank-operations-hotter-
assessment in which the magnitude of risks is estimated
world-reviewing-some-options
at a macro-level by the authorities themselves, or a more
involved ‘bottom-up’ estimate, which is calculated from BIS (2021), ‘Climate-related financial risks –
the financial institutions’ responses, based on a common measurement methodologies’. Available at https://www.
scenario/s specified by the authorities. The FSB also bis.org/bcbs/publ/d518.pdf
14
noilliB$SU
InsuredLosses UninsuredLossesGLOBAL BANKING DEVELOPMENTS
to measure financial institutions’ exposures Hong Kong. Thailand, China and UAE is working
to climate-related risks appears to be the towards building a prototype platform, called
major constraint and various international “mBridge”. This co-creation project explores
organisations and SSBs are working to address the capabilities of distributed ledger technology
them. (DLT) and studies the application of CBDC in
enhancing financial infrastructure to support
II.19 In October 2021, the FSB presented
multi-currency cross-border payments. The
to the G20 a comprehensive roadmap for
results of the phase 2 prototype, published in
addressing climate related financial risks for
April 2021, demonstrated the potential of using
firm-level disclosures. The roadmap provides the
digital currencies and DLT for delivering real-
raw material for the diagnosis of climate-related
time, cheaper and safer cross-border payments
vulnerabilities. The FSB also provided the G20
another report on ways to promote consistent, and settlements. The platform was able to
high-quality climate disclosures in line with the complete international transfers and foreign
recommendations of the TCFD. exchange operations in seconds, as opposed to
several days normally required, and operates
Role of Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC)
in a 24/7 basis. The cost of such operations to
and cross border transactions
users can also be reduced by up to half. The
II.20 Over the past decade, cross-border BIS has, however, warned that the benefits are
correspondent banking29 has withered, with contingent on meeting the “Hippocratic Oath for
the number of correspondent banks declining CBDC design”, as highlighted by the Group of
by about 20 per cent during 2011-1830. These central banks (2020).
banks withdrew more from countries where
Lessons learned from the Pandemic
governance and controls on illicit financing were
poor. The retreat of correspondent banks might II.22 Although the financial sector remained
hurt financial inclusion, raise the cost of cross- largely resilient and robust during the pandemic,
border payments or drive them underground. the FSB observed that banks were somewhat
hesitant to dip into their buffers, despite the
II.21 Several central banks are rapidly
flexibility embedded in the regulatory framework
moving towards developing central bank digital
and using the flexibility inherent in the expected
currencies (CBDCs)31. The design elements and
credit loss framework to extend credit.
policy decisions for CBDC are complex and
require to be resolved. Introduction of the CBDC II.23 Fiscal and monetary support measures
has a potential to enhance the efficiency of cross helped in reducing banks’ funding costs and
border payments and may provide an alternative lending rates. Prolonging support, however, risks
to correspondent banks, going forward. The BIS delaying the recognition of losses, increasing
Innovation Hub, along with the central banks of provisions and tightening lending standards to
29 FSB defines correspondent banking as the provision of banking services by one bank (the “correspondent bank”) to another bank
(the “respondent bank”).
30 Rice T, Peter G, and Boar C (2020): ‘On the global retreat of correspondent banks’, BIS Quarterly Review, March. Available at
https://www.bis.org/publ/qtrpdf/r_qt2003g.htm
31 BIS (2021): ‘Central bank digital currencies for cross-border payments’. Available at https://www.bis.org/publ/othp38.pdf .
15Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
preserve capital. Policymakers attempted to from the EMDEs. As current global regulatory
enhance banks’ lending capacity through a variety regimes offer little help to safeguard against such
of measures such as restrictions on dividends, shocks, policymakers of these countries will have
share buybacks and bonus payments. Banks’ to be watchful of their developments and devise
willingness to lend was incentivised by imparting mechanisms to ring-fence their economies from
flexibility in asset classification, restructuring, knee-jerk reactions.
direct fiscal transfers and loan guarantees,
3. Performance of the Global Banking
moratoriums on loan payments; prohibitions on
Sector
foreclosures, funding-for-lending schemes and
II.27 The COVID-19 pandemic was the first
moral suasion.
major test of the global financial system since
II.24 The costs and benefits of financial
the implementation of reforms following the
institutions relying heavily on third-party
global financial crisis of 2008. Higher capital,
service providers, including on a cross-border
better liquidity profiles and lower leverage in
basis, became evident during the pandemic.
large banks allowed them to cushion, rather than
While these dependencies reduce costs, they
amplify, the macroeconomic shock emanating
also add to operational risks. Cyber and data
from the pandemic. The banking system played
security related issues, in particular, need
an active role in ensuring availability of credit
special attention.
and other critical services to the real sector,
II.25 Some non-bank financial segments helped by extraordinary official support.
showed vulnerabilities during the pandemic
Bank Credit Growth32
from liquidity mismatches, leverage and
II.28 Bank credit to the private non-financial
interconnectedness. The FSB’s holistic review
sector contracted sharply in the quarter ending
laid a comprehensive and ambitious work plan
March 2020 with the onset of the pandemic,
programme and FSB focused on the specific
but revived subsequently, primarily led by the
issues such as money market funds (MMFs),
EMEs (Chart II.3a). Among the AEs, Korea
open-ended funds, margining practices, liquidity,
and Japan bucked the overall trend and their
and cross-border USD funding.
credit growth remained robust even after the
II.26 The current high level of corporates onset of the pandemic. Canada and UK are
and sovereigns’ debt overhang have systemic showing nascent signs of credit growth revival
implications for the EMDEs, especially for (Chart II.3b). A similar revival is taking root
the eventual policy exit from extraordinary across countries in the Euro Area, except in
accommodation. Going forward, this will Greece (Chart II.3c). In EMEs, bank credit is
restrict policy choices available to them while conditioned by country specific macroeconomic
accentuating trade-offs. The flight-for-safety and circumstances and demand side factors (Chart
dash-for-cash behaviour of USD funding markets II.3d). Going forward, bank credit growth is
propagated through actions of few investors and expected to accelerate as economies unlock and
dealers led to unprecedented capital outflow vaccinations are ramped up.
32 Data sourced from the Bank for International Settlements’ (BIS) Total Credit Statistics. Available at https://www.bis.org/statistics/
totcredit.htm .
16GLOBAL BANKING DEVELOPMENTS
Chart II.3: Bank Credit to the Private Non-Financial Sector
a: AEs and EMEs b. Select AEs
c: Select Euro Area countries d: Select EMEs
Source: Total Credit Statistics, Bank for International Settlements.
Asset Quality in other EMEs. The South African banking
system has started showing signs of distress
II.29 Gauged from the metric of asset quality,
(Chart II.4c). Going forward, as recognition
banks across AEs showed resilience through the
standstills are phased out, the accumulated
pandemic (Chart II.4a). Non-performing loans
capital buffers may help banks in facing
(NPL) ratios eased in the two peripheral economies
adversities.
of the Euro-zone, viz., Greece and Portugal mainly
Bank Profitability
due to institutional and government intervention
(Chart II.4b). Asset quality of EME banks was II.30 Bank profitability, measured by the
showing wide divergences even before the return on assets (RoA), generally declined in 2020
pandemic. Although Russia and India continue as banks’ interest income declined but deposit
to have the highest NPL ratios, their asset quality costs increased. In 2021, banks in Australia, the
did not deteriorate during the pandemic, as United Kingdom and Spain are showing signs of
17Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Chart II.4: Asset Quality
(NPL as per cent of total gross loans)
a: Select AEs b: Select Euro Area
Chart II.5: Return on Assets
a: Select AEs b: Select EMDEs
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
-0.5
-1.0
-1.5
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Q1
2021
Source: Financial Soundness Indicators, IMF and annual accounts of banks.
Note: RoA for India pertains to end-March.
18
tnecreP
5
4
3
2
1
0
-1
Australia Canada UnitedKingdom
UnitedStates Portugal Spain
tnecreP
1102 2102 3102 4102 5102 6102 7102 8102 91021Q 91022Q 91023Q 91024Q 02021Q 02022Q 02023Q 02024Q 12021Q 12022Q
c: Select EMDEs
Source: Financial Soundness Indicators, IMF.
improvement in profitability (Chart II.5a). The banks turned profitable in 2020 and continue to
narrative is less sanguine across EMEs. Indian clock in profits. (Chart II.5b).
Brazil China,P.R.:Mainland
India Indonesia
SouthAfrica
ThailandGLOBAL BANKING DEVELOPMENTS
Capital Adequacy Financial Market Indicators
II.31 There has been steady progress in
II.33 Financial markets witnessed a meltdown
the implementation of Basel III norms across
at the onset of the pandemic. In the first phase
jurisdictions, albeit at varying speeds. Banks
from late February to early March 2020,
across systemic AEs and EMEs remained
investors exhibited ‘flight to safety’ behaviour
adequately capitalised (Chart II.6a and b). The
as they sold riskier assets. In the second and
global banking system weathered the pandemic
more acute phase from mid-March onwards,
on the back of stronger capital and liquidity
their behaviour turned to ‘dash for cash’. In this
positions that were built up in the wake of the
phase investors sold risky as well as relatively
global financial crisis.
safe assets in an attempt to obtain cash or cash-
Leverage Ratio
like instruments. By late March, the stress
II.32 After showing substantial improvement eased considerably following speedy, sizeable
with the implementation of Basel III norms, the and sweeping interventions by authorities,
leverage ratio measured in terms of capital to and markets progressively returned to orderly
total asset ratio declined across jurisdictions
conditions.
in 2020, indicative of sharper fall in banks’
capital relative to assets. The moderation was II.34 Bank equity prices indices have largely
evident even in jurisdictions which traditionally recovered, but their levels remain less than pre-
have higher leverage ratios such as the US and COVID levels (Chart II.8a). Since June 2021,
Indonesia. A BIS survey of 47 large internationally Indian banks equity prices revived sharply,
active banks in July 2021, however, showed that while Chinese banks’ equity prices have started
leverage ratio33 was not a binding constraint on to drop mainly reflecting concern about its real
these banks. (Chart II.7). estate sector.
Chart II.6: Capital Adequacy Ratios
a: AEs b:EMEs
30
25
20
15
10
Source: Financial Soundness Indicators, IMF.
33 In the survey, the leverage ratio is defined as tier I capital to assets ratio, in line with the Basel III norms. However, since
comparable data on tier I capital for all jurisdictions is not available, data on a broader concept of capital to assets ratio is analyzed
in this sub-section.
19
tnecreP
1102 2102 3102 4102 5102 6102 7102 8102 91021Q 91022Q 91023Q 91024Q 02021Q 02022Q 02023Q 02024Q 12021Q 12022Q
Brazil China,P.R.:Mainland
India Indonesia
RussianFederation South Africa
ThailandReport on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Chart II.7 Leverage Ratio
(Capital to assets ratio in per cent)
a: AEs b: Euro Area
c: Leverage Ratio (Capital to Assets Ratio) in select EMDEs
Source: Financial Soundness Indicators, IMF.
Chart II.8: Market-based Indicators of Bank Health
a. Bank Equity Prices Indices b. 5-Year Bank Credit Default Swap Spread
140
120 100
80
60
40
20
0
Source : Datastream.
20
xednI
)001=9102,13rebmeceD(
9102-21-13 0202-20-92 0202-40-03 0202-60-03 0202-80-13 0202-01-13 0202-21-13 1202-20-82 1202-40-03 1202-60-03 1202-80-13 1202-01-13
ASIAEXJAPAN-DSBanks-PRICEINDEX
EMU-DSBanks-PRICEINDEX
EMERGINGMARKETS-DSBanks-PRICEINDEX
PIIGS-DSBanks-PRICE INDEX
US-DSBanks-PRICE INDEX EU-DSBanks -PRICEINDEX
,20rebmeceD(xednI
)001=9102
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
9102-21-20 0202-20-20 0202-40-20 0202-60-20 0202-80-20 0202-01-20 0202-21-20 1202-20-20 1202-40-20 1202-60-20 1202-80-20 1202-01-20
II.35 Credit Default Swap (CDS) spreads 2020 and showed higher volatility in March 2020
declined from December 2019 through February through June 2020. CDS spreads have generally
UK Europe
NorthAmerica China(Bankof China)
India(ICICI Bank) India(BankofIndia)GLOBAL BANKING DEVELOPMENTS
declined since then and were at pre-pandemic Global Systemically Important Banks (G-SIB)
levels. An increase in the CDS spreads is seen in
II.37 BIS data available since 2014 suggest
the recent period, however, implying rising risk
that the G-SIB buckets of top 15 global banks,
premiums (Chart II.8b).
except for three China-based banks, have either
shifted to become less risky or have remained
4. World’s Largest Banks
steady during the period (Chart II.9). Thus, the
II.36 During the pandemic, large banks regulatory push requiring G-SIBs to maintain
continued to provide market making functions, higher capital seems to have nudged them to
notwithstanding some evidence that few market reduce complexity, cross jurisdictional presence,
segments experienced illiquidity. Financial interconnectedness, size and substitutability of
market infrastructure (FMI), particularly central their operations.
counterparties (CCPs), functioned as intended34.
II.38 Bank resilience and market discipline
At the same time, large banks increased their were tested by the pandemic. Banks’ risk-based
support to trades and built up their securities capital and leverage ratios improved, including
holdings across an array of instruments. They those of SIBs. Most G-SIBs’ TLAC debt issuances
have continued to actively trade in derivatives, as to replace maturing ineligible debt were absorbed
evidenced by increases in both the notional and by the markets without difficulty. Profitability of
gross market values of derivatives positions from SIBs, particularly G-SIBs, have fallen relative to
end-2019 to mid-2020 (8.6 per cent and 33.6 per other banks as cross-border lending continued
cent, respectively)35. to expand.
Chart II.9: G-SIB Score of top 15 banks: 2020 versus 2014
Source: BIS
34 FSB (2021), Lessons Learnt from the COVID-19 Pandemic from a Financial Stability Perspective. Available at https://www.fsb.
org/wp-content/uploads/P281021-2.pdf
35 ISDA (2021), The Role of Financial Markets and Institutions in Supporting the Global Economy During the COVID-19 Pandemic.
Available at https://www.isda.org/a/zZzTE/The-Role-of-Financial-Markets-and-Institutions-in-Supporting-the-Global-Economy-
During-the-COVID-19-Pandemic.pdf
21Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Chart II.10: Distribution of Top 100 Banks by Tier-I Capital
a. Distribution of Top 100 Banks by Tier-I Capital b. Share of Country Groups in the Total Assets of Top
100 Global Banks
Source: Banker Database, Financial Times.
Top 100 Largest Banks36
II.39 Ranked by Tier-I capital, China (19), the II.40 There was a marginal deterioration in the
US (12) and Japan (7) had the largest number of asset quality of the top 100 banks. The number of
top 100 in December 2020 (Chart II.10a). While banks with non-performing loans (NPLs) in three
nearly 68 per cent of the total assets (in US dollar categories viz. greater than 5 per cent, between
terms) were held by banks in the AEs, nearly 29 2 to 3 per cent and 1 to 2 per cent increased
per cent of the total assets were held by banks in (Chart II.11a). However, the capital adequacy
China and the rest by the other EMDE countries of banks remained comfortable, with 69 of the
(Chart II.10b). banks having capital to risk weighted assets
Chart II.11: Asset Quality and Capital Adequacy of the Top 100 banks
a. Distribution by Non-Performing Ratio (NPL) Ratio b. Distribution of Banks by Capital to
Risk Weighted Assets (CRAR) Ratio
60
50 48
44
40 40 38
3030
30
24 24
20 16 16
1414
1010 9 10 7 6
3 2 4
0
NPL<1% 1%<=NPL 2%<=NPL 3%<=NPL NPL>=5%
<2% <3% <5%
Source: Banker Database, Financial Times
36 Data sourced from the Banker Database of the Financial Times.
22
sknaBforebmuN
80
69
70
60
474951
50
40
3029
30 25 22
1719 17
20 12
10 0 0 0 0 4 3 2 2
0
CRAR<10% 10%<= 12%<= 14%<= CRAR>=
CRAR<12% CRAR<14% CRAR<16% 16%
2017 2018 2019 2020
sknaBforebmuN
2017 2018 2019 2020GLOBAL BANKING DEVELOPMENTS
Chart II.12: Soundness of Top 100 Banks
a. Distribution of Banks by Leverage Ratio b. Distribution of Return on Assets (RoA)
(Capital to Assets Ratio)
40
35
363736
33
34343536
30
25
20 20201919
15
10 5 4 3 3 5 6 6 7 7
0
LR<4% 4%<= 6%<= 8%<= LR>=
LR<6% LR<8% LR<10% 10%
Source: Banker Database, Financial Times
(CRAR) ratios greater than 16 per cent in 2020, 5. Summing Up
up from 51 banks in 2019 (Chart II.11b).
II.42 With the gradual recovery of global
II.41 There was no significant change in economic activity and trade boosted by the
leverage ratios (capital to assets ratio), with easing of restrictions across jurisdictions, the
69 per cent of banks having leverage ratios in impact of pandemic on the global banking
the range of 4 to 8 per cent. Five banks, two sector is turning out to be muted, mainly due
in France and one each in Germany, Denmark, to asset quality standstills in many jurisdictions
and Japan, had leverage ratios below 4 per cent as well as continuation of strong policy support.
(Chart II.12a). There was marginal deterioration Going forward however, as policymakers phase
in the return on assets (RoA). While four out their support, stress on banking sectors
banks reported negative RoA, seventy-nine may come to the fore. The areas that are likely
banks posted RoA less than 1 per cent, and to be most impacted by the pandemic are asset
13 banks posted RoA between 1 to 2 per cent quality and profitability. High capital buffers
(Chart II.12b). have strengthened balance sheets of banks
following implementation of Basel III norms
which may help banks to manage stress and
emerge stronger.
23
sknaBforebmuN
90
79
80 73
70 64
60 56
50 39
40 32
30 22
20 13 10 1 1 1 4 3 2 3 1 1 1 1 0
0
RoA<0.0% 0.0%<=RoA<1.0% <= RoA 2.0% <= RoA RoA>=3.0%
1.0% <2.0% <3.0%
2017 2018 2019 2020
sknaBforebmuN
2017 2018 2019 2020Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
III
POLICY ENVIRONMENT
The coordinated policy response of the Reserve Bank and the Government in 2020-21 helped in mitigating
the impact of the pandemic on lives and livelihoods, kept financial markets and financial institutions
functioning and the lifeline of finance flowing. With some of the Reserve Bank’s measures reaching pre-set
sunset dates in 2021-22, liquidity has been wound down partly, while several regulatory measures have been
realigned to avoid extended forbearance and risks to financial stability. As the economy revives, renewed
focus may need to be placed on building up of adequate buffers and being vigilant of the evolving risks.
1. Introduction severe supply and logistics disruptions from
becoming binding constraints on economic and
III.1 The Indian economy is rebounding
financial activity.
strongly from the second wave of the pandemic
catalysed by a sharp decline in infections and III.2 Regulatory dispensations, and asset
the speed and scale of inoculations under which classification standstill including a temporary
more than half of the adult population has been moratorium, reoriented restructuring/ resolution
fully vaccinated. With containment being eased frameworks supplemented these efforts by
and workplaces filling up, real gross domestic limiting the loss of economic capital and easing
product (GDP) growth has surged to 13.7 per liquidity and solvency stress. The overarching
cent in the first half of 2021-22 and output goal has been to maintain the soundness of
has crossed pre-pandemic levels. Powered by the banking and financial system. These timely
a fiscal stimulus of the order of 8.7 per cent of policy interventions helped alleviate stress
GDP, liquidity infusions amounting to 8.7 per experienced by individuals, MSMEs, corporates
and lenders, and by keeping access to finance
cent of GDP (of which 5.9 per cent was utilised)
open on easy terms. In line with guidance from
and policy rate cuts of 115 basis points (bps),
global standard-setting bodies like the Basel
the Indian economy was digging out of arguably
Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS)
one of the deepest recessions in the world during
and the Financial Stability Board (FSB), some
the first wave of the pandemic and a hesitant
implementation timelines for regulatory capital
recovery was taking root in the second half of
and liquidity were deferred.
2020-21 when it was interrupted by the swift
and contagious onset of the second wave. In the III.3 With some of the Reserve Bank’s
event, the unprecedented policy response has measures reaching pre-set sunset dates,
mitigated the impact of the pandemic on lives and liquidity of the order of 2 per cent of GDP has
livelihoods, kept financial markets and financial been wound down, including special liquidity
institutions functioning and the lifeline of finance schemes for primary dealers (PDs), mutual
flowing amidst congenial monetary and financial funds (MFs) and non-bank financial companies
conditions. This averted financial meltdowns, (NBFCs) and large-scale purchases under the
limited scarring and job losses and prevented government securities acquisition programme
24POLICY ENVIRONMENT
(GSAP). The CRR reduction of 100 bps was 2. Monetary Policy and Liquidity
restored to the pre-pandemic level of 4.0 per Management
cent in two phases on March 27, 2021 and May
III.5 Complementing a 135 bps policy rate
22, 2021. Several pandemic-time regulatory
reduction during February 2019-February 2020
measures have been realigned to avoid extended
that took the cumulative policy rate reduction
regulatory forbearance and risks to financial
in the current easing cycle to 250 bps, the
stability. In 2021-22 so far, the Reserve Bank has
Reserve Bank employed the LAF corridor as a
engaged in rebalancing liquidity from passive
policy instrument, widening it asymmetrically
absorption under fixed rate reverse repo under by reducing the reverse repo rate cumulatively
its liquidity adjustment facility (LAF) to market by 155 bps to 3.35 per cent during March-May
based reverse repo auctions while ensuring 2020. Since May 2020, the policy rates have been
adequate liquidity in the system in consonance on hold and an accommodative monetary policy
with an accommodative monetary policy stance stance with forward guidance that this stance
to support growth. Concurrently, the Reserve will continue as long as necessary to revive and
Bank has ushered in major reforms, including sustain growth on a durable basis and continue
scale-based regulation of NBFCs and revised to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 on the
guidelines on securitisation. The draft guidelines economy, while ensuring that inflation remains
on review of credit default swaps (CDS) were within the target going forward, including in all
issued for public comments. its five meetings during the current financial year
were maintained.
III.4 Against this backdrop, this chapter
chronicles the monetary and liquidity measures III.6 In its April 2021 meeting, the monetary
in Section II. This is followed by an overview of policy committee (MPC) noted that COVID-19
the regulatory policy developments relating to situation could dampen the prospect of contact-
scheduled commercial banks (SCBs), credit co- intensive sectors, restrain growth impulses and
operatives and NBFCs during the period under delay the return to normalcy. As such continued
review (2020-21 and 2021-22 so far) in Section policy support was deemed necessary. In its
III. The role of supervision in enforcement of June 2021 policy, the MPC acknowledged that
regulatory policies and recent developments in rising international prices—especially of crude—
this arena are covered in Section IV. Some new along with logistic costs, had altered the near-
institutional developments have been covered in term inflation outlook. However, the growth
Section V. Policies relating to financial markets, outlook was impacted by the second wave of
foreign exchange, credit delivery and financial COVID-19, necessitating policy support from
inclusion, and initiatives related to consumer all sides–fiscal, monetary and sectoral. In its
protection are covered in Section VI, VII, VIII and August 2021 meeting, the MPC took the view
IX, respectively. The Reserve Bank’s initiatives that inflationary pressures during Q1:2021-22
for enhancing the scope and reach of payments were largely driven by adverse supply shocks,
ecosystem while ensuring a safe and secure which were deemed to be transitory in nature.
environment are set out in Section X. The chapter With a view to supporting the nascent and
concludes with an overall assessment in Section hesitant recovery, the MPC decided to keep the
XI. policy repo rate unchanged. In the October 2021
25Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
meeting, the MPC observed that the outlook for Bank emphasised that financial market stability
aggregate demand was progressively improving and the orderly evolution of the yield curve were
but was still below pre-COVID-19 levels and the public goods, the benefits of which accrue to all
recovery was uneven. The December 2021 MPC stakeholders in the economy.
meeting was held against the backdrop of rising
III.8 Targeted liquidity measures to alleviate
uncertainty amidst emergence of new COVID-19
sector specific stress formed an important
mutations. The MPC decided to keep policy
component of the Reserve Bank’s toolkit during
rates unchanged to nurture the slow pick-up in
the pandemic period. Targeted long-term repo
economic activity, till it becomes self-sustaining.
operations (TLTRO) were augmented with
III.7 In consonance with the accommodative the announcement of TLTRO 2.0 and ‘On tap
monetary stance, the Reserve Bank kept banking TLTROs’1. To reduce the cost of funds of banks
system liquidity in large surplus, with daily net
that had availed of LTRO and TLTRO, an option
absorption under the LAF averaging `4.96 lakh
was given to them in September and November
crore through 2020-21 and `6.69 lakh crore
2020 and again in December 2021 allowing a
during 2021-22 (up to December 22). The Reserve
reversal of transactions before maturity and
Bank injected `2.29 lakh crore in 2021-22 (up to
availing fresh funds at the reduced repo rate.
December 17) through open market operations
Accordingly, banks repaid `1,23,572 crore of
(OMOs), including G-SAP purchases, on top of
LTROs in September 2020 and cumulatively
`3.13 lakh crore through OMOs in 2020-21.
`39,782 crore of TLTROs by December 22, 2021.
During 2020-21, 19 auctions of simultaneous
III.9 In H1:2021-22, an on-tap liquidity
purchase and sale of government securities
window of `50,000 crore with tenors of up
– operation twists (OTs) – were conducted,
to three years at the repo rate was opened
including one asymmetric OT on March 10,
2021 having a liquidity impact (purchase of (available till March 31, 2022) to boost provision
`20,000 crore with sale of `15,000 crore). of immediate liquidity for ramping up COVID-19
During 2021-22 so far (up to December 22), the related healthcare infrastructure and services.
Reserve Bank conducted three special OMOs Furthermore, it was decided to conduct special
(operation twists) involving the simultaneous three-year long-term repo operations (SLTRO) of
purchase and sale of government securities `10,000 crore at the repo rate for small finance
of `40,000 crore (`10,000 crore on May 6 banks (SFBs) to support small businesses,
and `15,000 crore each on September 23 and micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs),
September 30) cumulatively. Providing forward and other unorganised sector entities. A separate
guidance to market participants, the Reserve liquidity window of `15,000 crore was provided
1 To mitigate the adverse effects of the pandemic outbreak on financial conditions, effective March 27, 2020, the Reserve Bank
conducted auctions of targeted term repos of up to three years tenor at a floating rate linked to the policy repo rate. Liquidity
availed under the scheme by banks had to be deployed in investment grade corporate bonds, commercial papers (CPs), and
non-convertible debentures (NCDs) over and above the outstanding level of their investments in these bonds. Further, starting
from April 17, 2020, in order to channel liquidity to small and mid-sized corporates, including NBFCs and MFIs, it was decided
to conduct TLTRO 2.0 at the policy repo rate for tenors up to three years. Furthermore, on October 9, 2020, it was decided to
conduct on tap TLTRO with tenors of up to three years and banks were required to deploy these funds in debt-instruments issued
by entities in specific sectors. The liquidity availed under the scheme could also be used to extend bank loans and advances to
these sectors.
26POLICY ENVIRONMENT
to alleviate stress in contact-intensive sectors meet sectoral credit requirements, the Reserve
(available till March 31, 2022) with tenors of up Bank provided additional liquidity support of
to three years at the repo rate. `66,000 crore for fresh lending during 2021-22
to AIFIs. This included a line of credit of `15,000
III.10 Amidst large surplus liquidity conditions,
crore to EXIM Bank for a period of 90 days to
the Reserve Bank on January 8, 2021 embarked
enable it to avail a US dollar swap facility in May
on steps to move towards normal liquidity
2020, which was not availed (Table III.1a and
management operations in a phased and
III.1b).
calibrated manner and accordingly conducted
five 14-day variable rate reverse repo (VRRR)
3. Regulatory Policies
auctions during January- March 2021. However,
to meet any additional/unforeseen demand for III.13 In sync with central banks, the world
liquidity and to provide flexibility to the banking over, the Reserve Bank had also announced a
system in their year-end liquidity management, moratorium on loans, special schemes for loan
two fine-tuning variable rate repo auctions of
`25,000 crore each were conducted on March 26
Table III.1a: Special Refinance Facility
and March 31, 2021 of 11-day and 5-day tenors,
for AIFIs
respectively. Furthermore, it was decided not to (` Crore)
conduct the 14-day VRRR auction on March 26, AIFIs SRF Facilities Announced in Total
2021 to ensure the availability of ample liquidity Apr-20 May-20 Aug-20 Apr-21 Jun-21
for managing year-end requirements. NABARD 25,000 - 5,000 25,000 - 55,000
NHB 10,000 - 5,000 10,000 - 25,000
III.11 The gradual normalisation of liquidity SIDBI 15,000 - - 15,000 16,000 46,000
EXIM Bank - 15,000 - - - 15,000
management operations in sync with the revised
Total 50,000 15,000 10,000 50,000 16,000 141,000
liquidity management framework instituted in
Source: RBI.
February 2020 was a key feature of liquidity Note: ‘-‘ nil/not applicable.
management during 2021-22. The surplus
liquidity was mopped up through the overnight Table III.1b: Institution-wise Loan Availment
fixed rate reverse repo and the VRRR auctions by AIFIs
(` crore)
of varying maturities under the LAF. Keeping
Loans Extended 2020-21 2021-22
in view the markets’ feedback and appetite for
SLF Loan SLF Loan
higher remuneration, the Reserve Bank enhanced
availed by disbursed availed by disbursed
AIFIs by AIFIs AIFIs by AIFIs
the size of the fortnightly VRRR auctions in
Cooperative banks 16,300 16,300 13,000 15,053
a phased manner. As a result, daily average
Regional Rural 6,700 6,700 7,000 8,066
absorption under fixed rate reverse repo window Banks
Microfinance 4,839 5,975 1,200 2,454
has come down considerably to `2.3 lakh crore
Institutions
in H2:2021-22 (up to December 22) compared to Small Finance 3,672 3,772 - 200
Banks
`4.6 lakh crore in H1:2021-22. MSMEs 6,755 10,484 10,800 11,232
Housing Finance 10,425 10,425 7,602 7,612
Refinancing Facilities for All India Financial Companies
Total 48,691 53,656 39,602 44,617
Institutions (AIFIs)
Notes: 1. Data as on December 17, 2021.
III.12 On the back of `75,000 crore provided to 2. ‘-‘ nil/not applicable.
AIFIs in 2020-21 as special refinance facilities to Source: Weekly report submitted by NHB, NABARD, and SIBDI.
27Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
restructuring, asset quality standstill, restrictions ratio; debt service coverage ratio (DSCR); and
on dividend pay-outs, zero risk weight on credit average debt service coverage ratio (ADSCR)
facilities covered by credit guarantee schemes for factoring into RPs implemented under the
backed by Government and increase in limit resolution framework. It had also recommended
on banks’ exposure to a group of connected sector-specific thresholds for these ratios to act
counterparties, most of which ran their course like floors or ceilings in respect of 26 sectors
in 2020-21 itself. while the lending institutions could take these
decisions in respect of other sectors.
III.A Regulatory Policies for SCBs
III.16 The implementation deadline of 180
Resolution Framework for Covid-19 Stressed
days was still operational when the second
Assets
wave of pandemic hit, obviating the need for a
III.14 A window for resolution of Covid-19
new restructuring scheme for large borrowers.
related stressed assets was announced on August
However, a need was felt for a framework
06, 2020, under the Prudential Framework for
specifically aimed at individuals and small
Resolution of Stressed Assets introduced a year
businesses. The Resolution Framework – 2.0
earlier. It enabled implementation of a resolution
was issued on May 5, 2021, with focus on these
plan (RP) in respect of eligible corporate
borrowers, which permitted implementation of
exposures without change in ownership, and
resolution plans without a downgrade in their
covered personal loans too, while classifying them
as standard but subject to certain conditions.
Table III.2: Resolution Framework for
Rescheduling of payments, conversion of any COVID-19 Stressed Borrowers
interest accrued into another credit facility, sale Features Resolution Framework 1.0 Resolution Framework 2.0
of the exposures to other entities, change in Introduced August 6, 2020 May 5, 2021
ownership and restructuring were allowed in the Aimed at Corporates, MSMEs and Individuals, small
personal loans borrowers and MSMEs
RP. Borrowers classified as standard and not in Prerequisites As on March 1, 2020 As on March 31, 2021
Asset should be standard Asset should be standard
default for more than 30 days with any lending Asset not in default for Should not have availed
more than 30 days of Resolution Framework
institution as on March 1, 2020 and continued to
Should be classified as – 1.0 or any previous
standard as on the date resolution frameworks
be classified as standard till the date of invocation,
of invocation for MSMEs
were eligible for resolution under the framework. Deadline for Dec. 31, 2020. RP must Sept 30, 2021. RP must
Invocation be implemented within be implemented within
The resolution framework was required to be 90 days from the date of 90 days from the date of
invocation for personal invocation.
invoked till December 31, 2020, and the RP had
loans and 180 days from
the date of invocation for
to be implemented within 90 days for personal
other eligible exposures
loans and 180 days for other eligible loans from Additional 10 per cent; 5 per cent for 10 per cent
Provisions MSMEs
the date of invocation.
Asset Asset continues to Asset continues to
Classification be standard upon be standard upon
III.15 The recommendations of the Expert implementation* implementation**
Ownership Not compulsory, necessary Not compulsory, necessary
Committee (Chairperson: Shri K. V. Kamath) change only if envisaged in the only if envisaged in the
resolution resolution
guided lending institutions while finalising RP
Notes: * if the asset slips into NPA during implementation, it can be
in respect of eligible borrowers. The Expert
upgraded to standard upon implementation.
Committee had recommended five financial ** if the asset slips into NPA after invocation or during
implementation, it can be upgraded to standard upon
parameters viz, total outside liability/adjusted implementation.
Source: RBI.
tangible net worth; total debt/EBIDTA; current
28POLICY ENVIRONMENT
asset classification (Table III.2). The facility
Chart III.1: Gold Loans vis-à-vis Personal Loans
could be invoked till September 30, 2021 while
16 100
the implementation had to be completed within
90 days from the date of invocation. While all 14 90
nt) nt)
personal loans qualified for invocation, an ce12 80 ce
r r
aggregate exposure limit of `50 crore as on pe pe
y, 10 70 y,
March 31, 2021 was set for small and individual
o- o-
y- y-
owned businesses as well as MSMEs. wth (8 60 wth (
o o
Gr6 50 Gr
Ex-gratia Payment of Difference between
Compound Interest and Simple Interest 4 40
III.17 On October 23, 2020, the Government 2 30
announced a scheme for individual and MSME
0 20
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct
borrowers, envisaging ex gratia repayment
PersonalLoans2021 PersonalLoans2020
of the difference between compound interest Gold Loan 2021(RHS) Gold Loan 2020(RHS)
and simple interest to borrowers. The scheme Source: RBI.
provided relief to these borrowers with aggregate
borrowing of up to `2 crore for the moratorium
especially of private sector banks (PVBs), to
period, i.e. March 1, 2020 to August 31, 2020.
absorb impending loan losses due to COVID-19
Subsequently, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, vide
and conserve capital to support credit growth.
its order dated March 23, 2021 directed the
The policy was reviewed for 2020-21 and banks
banks to reimburse the above difference to all
were advised to ensure that they continue to meet
borrowers.
the minimum regulatory capital requirements
Loan-to-Value Ratio for Loans against Gold after dividend payment. Bank boards were urged
Ornaments and Jewellery
to consider the current and projected capital
III.18 On August 6, 2020 the loan-to-value position of the banks vis-à-vis the applicable
ratio (LTV) for loans against gold ornaments capital requirements and the adequacy of
and jewellery for non-agricultural end-uses provisions, taking into account the economic
was increased from 75 per cent to 90 per cent. environment and the outlook for profitability
This temporary provision, applicable till March while considering dividend payouts.
31, 2021, was aimed at providing a cushion to
Maintenance of Cash Reserve Ratio (CRR)
households, entrepreneurs and small businesses
III.20 Based on a review of monetary and
against the economic impact of the pandemic.
liquidity conditions banks were advised that
Analysis suggests that the flagging personal loans
the CRR - which was reduced to 3 per cent of
segment in 2020-21 was buoyed by this measure
their net demand and time liabilities (NDTL)
(Chart III.1).
effective from the reporting fortnight beginning
Dividend Declaration by Banks
March 28, 2020 - was restored to 4 per cent in
III.19 The Reserve Bank had directed banks two phases, viz., 3.5 per cent of NDTL effective
not to make any dividend payment on their from the reporting fortnight beginning March 27,
equity shares from the profits pertaining to 2021 and 4 per cent effective from the reporting
2019-20. This helped in bolstering provisions, fortnight beginning May 22, 2021 (Chart III.2).
29Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Chart III.2: Impact of CRR Cut Chart III.3: SLR in HTM as per cent of NDTL
24
23
22
21
20
19
18
17
16
15
Source: Section 42 Returns of RBI. Source: OSMOS and Section 42 Returns of RBI.
Credit to MSME Entrepreneurs also decided that the enhanced HTM limit would
be restored to 19.5 per cent in a phased manner,
III.21 On February 5, 2021 banks were
beginning from the quarter ending June 30,
allowed to deduct the amount equivalent to
2023.
credit disbursed to new MSME borrowers up
to `25 lakh per borrower from their NDTL for Dipping in SLR for Marginal Standing Facility
calculation of CRR for the credit disbursed up (MSF) Maintenance - Extension of Relaxation
to the fortnight ending October 1, 2021 in order
III.23 Banks were allowed to avail of funds under
to incentivise incremental credit flow to MSMEs.
the MSF by dipping into SLR up to an additional
This exemption was further extended for credits
one per cent of their NDTL, i.e., cumulatively up
disbursed up to the fortnight ending December
to three per cent of NDTL. This facility, which
31, 2021.
was initially available till June 30, 2020 was later
Statutory Liquidity Ratio (SLR) holdings in Held
extended in phases till March 31, 2021 providing
to Maturity (HTM) category
comfort to banks on their liquidity requirements
III.22 The headroom available for banks for and also to enable them to meet their liquidity
further investment in SLR securities under the coverage ratio (LCR) requirements. A further
HTM category was getting exhausted by June extension of nine months, i.e., up to December
2020 (Chart III.3). Faced with a large government 31, 2021 was granted to banks to avail of this
borrowing programme, banks were permitted to facility. However, the normal dispensation is
exceed the HTM ceiling up to an overall limit of being restored and consequently, with effect
22 per cent of NDTL (instead of 19.5 per cent) from January 1, 2022, scheduled banks would
till March 31, 2023, provided such excess is be able to dip into the SLR up to two per cent
on account of SLR securities acquired between of NDTL instead of three per cent for borrowing
September 1, 2020 and March 31, 2022. It was under the MSF.
30
tnecreP
51-nuJ 51-tcO 61-beF 61-nuJ 61-tcO 71-beF 71-nuJ 71-tcO 81-beF 81-nuJ 81-tcO 91-beF 91-nuJ 91-tcO 02-beF 02-nuJ 02-tcO 12-beF 12-nuJ
Reserves
released
due to
reduction in
CRR
CRR raised to
3.5% from 3%
(March 27, 2021)
PSBs PVBs LimitPOLICY ENVIRONMENT
Deferment of last tranche of capital conservation
Table III.3: Risk Weights for New Housing
buffer (CCB) Loans
III.24 The last tranche of 0.625 per cent of Earlier Norms Revised Norms
Outstanding loan Loan to Value Risk Loan to Value Risk
the CCB was scheduled to be implemented by
Ratio Weight Ratio (%) Weight
March 31, 2020. In view of the ongoing stress (%) (%) (%)
Up to `30 lakh LTV≤ 80 35 LTV≤ 80 35
on account of COVID-19 on bank balance sheets,
80<LTV≤ 90 50 80<LTV≤ 90 50
its implementation was deferred till October 1, Above `30 lakh and LTV≤ 80 35 LTV≤ 80 35
2021. It has come into effect since then. up to `75 lakh 80<LTV≤ 90 50
Above `75 lakh LTV≤ 75 50 LTV≤ 80 35
Deferment in implementation of Net Stable 80<LTV≤ 90 50
Funding Ratio (NSFR) Source: RBI.
III.25 Similarly, in view of the ongoing stress
on account of COVID-19, the implementation revision in the risk weightage is intended to give
of NSFR guidelines was deferred till October 1,
a fillip to bank lending to the real estate sector.
2021 and has come into force since then.
Streamlining of Opening of Current Accounts by
Regulatory Retail Portfolio – Revised Limit for Banks
Risk Weight
III.28 On August 6, 2020 restrictions were
III.26 The exposures included in the regulatory placed on banks for opening and operating
retail portfolio of banks attract a risk weight of current accounts and cash credit (CC) /overdraft
75 per cent. One of the four qualifying criteria (OD) facilities for borrowers. This policy was
for claims to be recognized as regulatory retail aimed at streamlining the use of multiple
portfolio was a threshold of `5 crore of aggregate accounts by borrowers and containing diversion
retail exposure to one counterparty. In order of funds. The policy prohibited banks from
to reduce the cost of credit for this segment opening current accounts for customers who
consisting of individuals and small businesses have availed credit facilities in the form of CC/
(i.e. with turnover of up to `50 crore), and in OD from the banking system. All transactions of
such borrowers would be routed through the CC/
harmonisation with the Basel guidelines, this
OD account alone. In case of customers who have
threshold was raised to `7.5 crore for all fresh
not availed CC/OD facility from any bank, they
as well as incremental qualifying exposures so
may be allowed to open current accounts under
as to expand credit flow to small businesses
certain conditions.
including MSMEs through reducing the capital
requirement of banks on such loans. III.29 Considering the operational constraints
in implementation, the Reserve Bank eased
Rationalisation of Risk Weights for Individual
restrictions on borrowers with exposure to the
Housing Loans
banking system of less than `5 crore. This is,
III.27 As a countercyclical measure, it was however, subject to obtaining an undertaking
decided to rationalise the risk weights for from such borrowers that they will inform the
all new individual housing loans sanctioned bank(s) as and when the credit facilities availed
between October 16, 2020 and March 31, 2022, by them from the banking system crosses
irrespective of the amount (Table III.3). The the threshold. In respect of borrowers where
31Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
exposure of the banking system is `5 crore or Reserve Bank, however, specified that transfer
more, such borrower can maintain current of such loan exposures to ARCs will not absolve
accounts with any one of the banks with which it the transferor from fixing staff accountability as
has CC/OD facility, provided that the bank has at required under the extant instructions on frauds.
least 10 per cent of the exposure of the banking
III.31 Given the tremendous growth in number,
system to that borrower.
size and potential of ARCs for resolving stressed
Transfer of Loan Exposures
assets, a committee was constituted in April
III.30 On September 24, 2021, the Reserve 2021 to undertake a comprehensive review of
Bank harmonised the extant guidelines on the working of ARCs and recommend suitable
transfer of loan exposures to make it consistent measures to meet the growing requirements of
with the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) the financial sector (Box III.1).
mechanism and extant regulatory framework on
Securitisation of Standard Assets
resolution of stressed assets. Loans that are in
default are now permitted to be transferred to III.32 To develop a strong and robust
a wider universe of transferees. For loans that securitisation market, the Reserve Bank
are not in default, the guidelines allowed transfer simplified its structure and aligned existing
of loans through assignment, novation or loan guidelines with the Basel III guidelines on
participation contract. In case a loan in default is September 24, 2021. The directions permit only
transferred, a cooling period of at least one year traditional securitisations i.e., securities issued
was mandated before the lending institution can
by a special purpose entity (SPE) where the
again extend loan to the same borrower. In case
cash flows are from a pool of underlying loans
the loan in default is transferred to an entity not
acquired from a lender. Any transaction between
regulated by the Reserve Bank, cooling period is of
an originator and an SPE should be ‘strictly
three years. The requirement of minimum holding
on an arm’s length basis’. Furthermore, credit
period (MHP) for transfer of loans was simplified.
enhancement facilities may provide additional
A minimum retention requirement (MRR) of 10
financial support for securitisation.
per cent was prescribed for transfer of loans not
III.33 It has simplified the requirements
in default where the acquiring lender is unable to
of MHP and MRR. Listing of securitisation
perform due diligence at the individual loan level
notes, especially for residential mortgage-
for more than one-third of the portfolio. For price
backed securities, is required when securities
discovery of loans in default, Swiss challenge
are sold to 50 or more investors. Further
method has been made mandatory, where the
aggregate exposure of all lenders is `100 crore revisions include permission for single asset
or more, as well as in cases where transfer of securitisation, concessional capital regime in
loan exposures is undertaken as a resolution case of simple, transparent and comparable
plan under the Prudential Framework. Loan (STC) securitisations, simplified instructions
exposures classified as fraud were permitted to governing reset of credit enhancements and
be transferred to asset reconstruction companies capital requirements in line with the Basel III
(ARCs) along with responsibilities of continuous norms, which also factor in seniority, thickness
reporting, monitoring, filing of complaints with and maturity of the securitisation exposures held
law enforcement agencies and proceedings. The by lending institutions.
32POLICY ENVIRONMENT
Box III.1: Report of the Committee to Review the Working of Asset Reconstruction
Companies (ARCs)
The ARC framework is designed to allow originators to made binding on the remaining lenders and it must be
focus on lending, by removing sticky stressed financial implemented within 60 days of approval by majority of
assets from their books. Experience so far, however, shows lenders.
that ARCs’ performance has been lacklustre, both in
5. Given that additional funding to the stressed borrowers
terms of ensuring recovery and revival of businesses. The
is the key in reviving their businesses, ARCs should be
Reserve Bank had set up a Committee (Chairperson: Shri
allowed to use Securities and Exchange Board of India
Sudarshan Sen) to review the existing legal and regulatory
(SEBI) registered Alternative Investment Funds (AIFs)
framework applicable to them and to recommend
as an additional vehicle for facilitating restructuring/
measures to improve their efficacy. The Committee’s report
recovery of debt acquired by them.
was released on November 2, 2021 for public comments.
Key recommendations of the Committee are set out below: 6. For better value realization and enhancing the
effectiveness of ARCs in recovery, even the borrower’s
1. In order to incentivise lenders to sell NPAs at an early
equity may be allowed to be sold to ARCs.
stage of stress, it has recommended the amortisation
of loss on sale of stressed assets over a period of two 7. ARCs may be allowed to participate under IBC as a
years. resolution applicant either through their SR trust or
through the AIF sponsored by them.
2. To determine reserve price of financial assets worth
`500 crore and above, assessment by two valuers and 8. To give impetus to listing and trading of SRs, the
for assets between `100 crore and `500 crore by one list of eligible qualified buyers may be expanded to
valuer is recommended. include high net-worth individuals (HNIs), corporates,
NBFCs/HFCs, trusts, family offices, pension funds and
3. In order to enhance ARCs’ ability to acquire all related
distressed asset funds with suitable safeguards.
debt pertaining to a borrower, Reserve Bank may be
empowered to specify the entities from which ARCs 9. To balance the need of protecting the interest of SR
can acquire financial assets under Securitisation and investors along with distribution of risk among willing
Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement and sophisticated investors, the minimum investment
of Securities Interest (SARFAESI) Act, 2002. Further, in SRs by an ARC may be specified at 15 per cent of the
using these powers, the Reserve Bank may consider lenders’ investment in SRs or 2.5 per cent of the total
permitting ARCs to acquire financial assets from all the SRs issued, whichever is higher.
regulated entities and retail investors.
10. Considering the wider role envisaged for ARCs in the
4. For financial assets under consortium/multiple banking resolution of stressed assets, the minimum net owned
arrangements, if 66 per cent of lenders (by value) fund requirement for ARCs may be increased to `200
decide to accept an offer by an ARC, the same may be crore.
Review of Extant Ownership Guidelines and limits on shareholding of promoters in the
Corporate Structure for Indian Private Sector long run and dilution requirements, cap on
Banks holding of non-promoters, pledge of shares by
promoters during lock-in period, initial capital
III.34 An Internal Working Group (IWG) was
requirements, corporate structure – Non-
constituted by the Reserve Bank to review the
operative Financial Holding Company (NOFHC),
extant guidelines on ownership and corporate
listing requirements and harmonisation of
structure for Indian private sector banks. Out of
various licensing guidelines.
33 recommendations made by the IWG, Reserve
Extension of Centralised KYC Registry (CKYCR)
Bank has accepted 21 recommendations (some
to Legal Entities (LEs)
with partial modifications) and remaining 12
recommendations are under examination. The III.35 In terms of provisions of the Prevention
accepted major recommendations pertain to of Money Laundering (Maintenance of Records)
lock-in period for promoters’ initial shareholding, Rules, 2005 the Reserve Bank’s regulated entities
33Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
(REs) have been uploading know your customer for locker operation have been introduced. The
(KYC) data pertaining to all individual accounts, banks have been made liable to the extent of 100
opened on or after January 1, 2017, on the times the annual locker rent in case of negligence
CKYCR. Consequently, the use of this facility, or fraud committed by the bank employees
especially in terms of uploads by RBI-REs has leading to loss of contents of the locker.
grown in leaps and bounds (Table III.4).
III.B Regulatory Policies for Co-operative
III.36 As the CKYCR is now fully operational Banks
for individual customers, it has been extended
Dual Control of Co-operative Banks and
to KYC data pertaining to Legal Entities (LEs)
Amendment to the Banking Regulation (BR)
accounts opened on or after April 1, 2021 as well.
Act, 1949
Policy for Liquidity Management in RRBs
III.39 The Reserve Bank’s powers to regulate and
III.37 Earlier, Regional Rural Banks (RRBs) supervise co-operative banks were limited due to
had no access to the LAF/MSF window of the non-applicability of certain statutory provisions
Reserve Bank as well as the call/notice money of the Banking Regulation (BR) Act, 1949 on co-
market. On December 4, 2020 the Reserve Bank operative banks, which affected its ability to take
granted them access to these facilities, subject necessary and timely corrective actions in case
to meeting certain eligibility criteria, to facilitate of irregularities/weaknesses in functioning of
efficient liquidity management. these banks. The amendment to the Act, carried
out in 2020 sought to protect the interests of
Regulatory Framework for Safe Deposit Locker
depositors and strengthen co-operative banks by
Facility
improving governance framework and oversight
III.38 Comprehensive revised instructions were by the Reserve Bank, while enabling better
issued for the safe deposit locker facility offered by access to capital. The amendment came into
banks on August 18, 2021. Enhanced standards force for urban co-operative banks (UCBs) with
of safety and security of lockers, detailed retrospective effect from June 29, 2020 and for
procedure for discharge of locker contents by State Co-operative Banks (StCBs) and District
breaking it open under various circumstances Central Co-operative Banks (DCCBs) with effect
and alert facility through registered email / SMS from April 1, 2021.
Table III.4: Progress in Usage of CKYCR
(As at end March)
Mar-18 Mar-19 Mar-20 Mar-21
RBI regulated entities Upload 1,55,01,944 8,46,82,357 19,09,38,547 32,87,67,274
(62.5) (83.6) (89.4) (91.9)
Download 16,00,759 1,07,52,654 5,57,75,772 11,34,35,629
(53.1) (76.1) (89.2) (88.9)
Update 5,45,154 45,60,320 1,48,89,628 2,47,08,320
(81.1) (90.2) (92.2) (89.5)
Total (All regulators) Upload 2,48,04,036 10,13,40,205 21,36,23,723 35,76,55,517
Download 30,16,508 1,41,25,982 6,25,24,746 12,76,56,314
Update 6,72,235 50,56,616 1,61,41,539 2,76,08,769
Note: Figures in parentheses refer to percentage share in total.
Source: RBI.
34POLICY ENVIRONMENT
III.40 The amended Section 3 of the BR Act, and retention of authorised dealer (AD) -I licence
1949 makes the provisions of the Act inapplicable of the amalgamated bank. With these guidelines,
to Primary Agricultural Credit Societies (PACS) amalgamation process for UCBs is expected to
or co-operative societies whose primary object be smoother and faster. Similarly, Reserve Bank
and principal business is providing long-term on May 24, 2021 specified requirements and
finance for agricultural development, and do indicative benchmarks/ conditions for voluntary
not use words “bank”, “banker” or “banking” in amalgamation of DCCBs with StCBs.
its name and do not act as drawee of cheques.
III.C Regulatory Policies for Non-Bank
The amendment of Section 45 of the Act enabled
Financial Companies (NBFCs)
the Reserve Bank to reconstruct or amalgamate
Scale-Based Regulatory Framework
a bank, with or without implementing a
moratorium, with the approval of the Central III.42 The Reserve Bank came out with a
Government. The amendment also provides the scale-based regulation framework for NBFCs
Reserve Bank powers to supersede the Board of following the principle of proportionality on
Directors of a co-operative bank in consultation October 22, 2021. The framework is based on
with the state government concerned. The a four-layered structure – base layer (NBFC-BL),
amendment to Section 56 of the Act will help in middle layer (NBFC-ML), upper layer (NBFC-UL)
narrowing down the regulatory arbitrage between and top layer, with a progressive increase in the
commercial banks and co-operative banks. intensity of regulation. The base layer consists
of non-deposit taking NBFCs (NBFC-NDs) with
Amalgamation of Cooperative Banks
asset size below `1,000 crore and certain other
III.41 In the past, mergers and amalgamations
NBFCs engaged in specific activities. It aims
between UCBs had to be approved by both the
at increasing transparency by way of greater
Reserve Bank and the respective Registrar of Co-
disclosures and improved governance standards
operative Societies. Subsequent to the enactment
while not burdening them with higher level
of the Banking Regulation (Amendment) Act,
regulations. The middle layer mainly includes
2020, the Reserve Bank received greater all deposit taking NBFCs and non-deposit taking
powers for sanctioning the process. Master NBFCs with asset size of `1,000 crore and above
directions in this regard were issued on March and some specialised NBFCs. Through this
23, 2021 specifying the necessary conditions layer, the areas of arbitrage between banks and
for amalgamation, including, inter alia, NBFCs—that were detrimental to orderly growth
approval of the proposal by two-thirds of board and systemic stability—were reduced. The upper
members of the concerned UCB. The criterion layer will comprise of certain NBFCs specifically
for consideration of the proposal by the Reserve identified by the Reserve Bank based on a set of
Bank is based on whether the amalgamating parameters and scoring methodology and will
bank assures to protect deposits of the be subjected to enhanced regulatory rigour. The
amalgamated bank either through use of its own top layer of the pyramid has been proposed to
resources or through financial support from the remain empty unless the Reserve Bank takes a
state government. Incentives extended to the view that a specific NBFC lying in the upper layer
amalgamating bank include greater flexibility to poses systemic risk and needs to be subjected
close loss-making branches, open new branches to higher and bespoke regulatory/ supervisory
35Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
requirements. These guidelines would be effective papers (CPs)/ non-convertible debentures
from October 01, 2022. (NCDs) of residual maturity up to 90 days issued
by these institutions. The scheme permitted both
III.43 The framework prescribes Internal
primary and secondary market purchase of debt.
Capital Adequacy Assessment Process (ICAAP) to
NBFCs/HFCs were required to use the proceeds
be made proportionate to the scale and complexity
received under the SLS solely for extinguishing
of operations. Currently, capital to risk weighted
their existing liabilities. Under the SLS, `7,126
assets ratio (CRAR) requirement for NBFCs is 15
crores were disbursed, mainly via CPs, of which
per cent of risk weighted assets (RWAs), without
53 per cent went to NBFCs and the rest to HFCs.
any bifurcation such as Common Equity Tier
(CET) 1 or additional Tier I capital. In order to Aligning Regulatory Framework for HFCs with
enhance the quality of regulatory capital, NBFC- NBFCs
UL will have to maintain CET- 1 capital of at
III.45 Consequent to the transfer of regulation
least 9 per cent of RWAs. Further, large exposure
of HFCs from National Housing Bank (NHB)
framework has also been introduced for NBFC-
to the Reserve Bank with effect from August
UL. The extant credit concentration limits
9, 2019, a revised regulatory framework was
prescribed separately for lending and investments
issued on October 22, 2020, to ensure smooth
have been merged into a single exposure limit of
regulatory transition. The major changes in the
25 per cent for a single borrower and 40 per cent
regulatory framework were (a) clearly defining
for a group of borrowers in case of NBFC-ML
housing finance and principal business criteria
and NBFC-UL. These concentration limits will be
for HFCs; (b) strengthening the capital base by
determined with reference to the NBFC’s Tier 1
increasing the net owned funds requirement
capital instead of their owned fund. The extant from `10 crore to `20 crore; (c) restrictions on
NPA classification norm has also been changed
exposure to group companies engaged in real
to the overdue period of more than 90 days for estate business to address concerns related
all categories of NBFCs and a glide path has been to double lending and to ensure arm’s length
provided to NBFCs-BL to be achieved by March 31, relationship; (d) introduction of regulations on
2026. Also, with a view to stem financial stability liquidity risk management framework and a
concerns, a ceiling of `1 crore per borrower has liquidity coverage ratio (LCR); (e) guidelines on
been put on financing of subscription to initial securitisation; (f) guidelines on outsourcing of
public offer (IPO). Furthermore, an enhanced financial services to address risks emanating
governance framework for NBFCs in the middle from such activities; (g) regulatory guidance
and upper layers has been instituted. related to prudential aspects, particularly on
provisioning and regulatory capital for Ind-AS
Special Liquidity Scheme (SLS) for non-bank
implementing HFCs. Further work is underway
financial companies (NBFCs) / housing finance
for greater harmonisation to the extent possible.
companies (HFCs)
Lowering of Secured Debt Limit for NBFCs
III.44 In July 2020, the Government announced
under SARFAESI Act
an SLS of `30,000 crore to address short-term
liquidity concerns of NBFCs/HFCs. Under the III.46 On February 24, 2020, NBFCs with asset
scheme, a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) was size of `100 crore and above were permitted
set up to purchase investment grade commercial to take recourse to the SARFAESI Act for
36POLICY ENVIRONMENT
enforcement of security interest in secured corporate insolvency regime and its implications
debts of `50 lakh and above. Subsequently, the for the Indian banking system, compliance to
Government further reduced the secured debt instructions on Society for Worldwide Interbank
limit to `20 lakh and above on February 12, Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT) and data
2021. This is expected to improve the recoveries localization by banks.
of NBFCs from small businesses and micro and
Appointment of Auditors in Regulated Entities
small enterprises.
III.49 The Reserve Bank issued guidelines
Declaration of Dividend by NBFCs
for appointment of Statutory Central Auditors
III.47 Considering the increasing significance of (SCAs)/Statutory Auditors (SAs) of SCBs
NBFCs in the financial system and their inter- (excluding RRBs), UCBs and NBFCs (including
linkages with different segments, guidelines on HFCs) in April 2021. This was the first time
their dividend distribution were issued on June when such guidelines were prescribed for
24, 2021. The eligibility criteria for dividend UCBs and NBFCs. The objective is to put in
pay-out was linked to their capital adequacy and place ownership-neutral regulations, ensure
net NPA levels, and a ceiling on the maximum independence of auditors, avoid conflict of
dividend pay-out ratio was specified. interest in auditors’ appointments and improve
the quality and standards of audit in the REs.
4. Supervisory Policies The guidelines place greater responsibility on
the Board/Audit Committee of the Board/Local
III.48 The Reserve Bank endeavours to
Management Committee of REs, especially with
constantly improve the efficacy of its supervisory
respect to assessing and ensuring independence of
function, so that the resilience of the regulated
auditors, their appointment, fixing remuneration
entities can be enhanced. A calibrated supervisory
and performance review. These guidelines will
approach is followed to bring in required
modularity and scalability to better focus on also ensure that appointments are made in a
risky practices and institutions and to deploy timely, transparent and effective manner.
an appropriate range of tools and technology to Revised Prompt Corrective Action (PCA)
achieve our supervisory objectives. The Board Framework for SCBs
for Financial Supervision (BFS), constituted in
III.50 The Reserve Bank revised the Prompt
November 1994, acts as the integrated supervisor
Corrective Action (PCA) framework effective
for the financial system covering SCBs, AIFIs, Co-
January 1, 2022. In contrast to the earlier
operative banks and NBFCs. During July 2020
framework issued in April 2017, a negative
to November 2021, 16 meetings of the BFS were
return on assets (RoA) will no longer be a trigger
held in which issues such as initiatives to improve
to initiate PCA.
supervisory functions, measures to strengthen
off-site surveillance, on-site examination and skill III.51 Lakshmi Vilas Bank, which was under
development were discussed. The Board also PCA, was amalgamated with DBS Bank on
reviewed supervisory initiatives during COVID-19 November 27, 2020. Subsequent to capital
disruptions, enforcement policy for REs, infusion by the Government, the financial
revised norms on opening of current accounts parameters of IDBI Bank and UCO Bank
by banks, revisions to the PCA framework improved and they were taken out of the
for banks, new PCA framework for NBFCs, framework on March 10, 2021 and September
37Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
8, 2021, respectively. Similarly, Indian Overseas be an additional parameter to track, apart
Bank was taken out of the framework on from capital (adjusted net worth/aggregate risk
September 29, 2021. All these banks were weighted assets) and asset quality (Table III.5).
allowed to start normal banking operations The framework prescribes certain mandatory
subject to certain conditions and continuous and discretionary actions such as restrictions on
monitoring. Currently, only one public sector dividend distribution, requirement of promoters
bank, viz. Central Bank of India, remains under to infuse additional capital, reduction in leverage
PCA. and concentration of exposures, restriction
on branch expansion, capital expenditure,
Prompt Corrective Action (PCA) Framework for
borrowings and staff expansion, among others.
NBFCs
III.52 Given the growing size and
5. New Institutional Developments
interconnectedness of NBFCs with other
National Asset Reconstruction Company
segments of the financial system, the Reserve
Limited (NARCL)
Bank put in place a PCA framework for them on
December 14, 2021. The PCA framework, which III.54 Despite several efforts, a substantial stock
will strengthen the supervisory tools applicable of legacy NPAs continue to be on the balance
to NBFCs, will come into effect from October sheets of banks. As some large accounts are
1, 2022, based on the financials at end-March, fragmented across various lenders, aggregation
2022. This will be applicable to all deposit taking
of bad assets leads to significant delays. NARCL,
NBFCs (excluding government NBFCs); and (ii)
being incorporated by financial institutions only,
all non-deposit taking NBFCs in middle, upper
will have the ability to aggregate bad loans from
and top layers (excluding NBFCs not accepting
all members of the consortium. This would
public funds; government companies; primary
incentivise quicker resolution and help better
dealers; and HFCs).
value realisation. NARCL will initially acquire
III.53 For NBFCs-D and NBFCs-ND (excluding NPAs with total secured outstanding exposure of
core investment companies (CICs)), capital `500 crore and above, amounting to about `2
(CRAR and Tier I capital ratio) and asset quality lakh crore. Following extant guidelines, it will
(net NPA ratio) would be the key monitoring acquire these assets through 15 per cent upfront
parameters. In case of CICs, leverage would payment in cash and 85 per cent in SRs. The
Table III.5: Risk Thresholds for PCA Framework for NBFCs
Performance Indicator Regulatory minimum Threshold - I Threshold - II Threshold - III
(except for leverage)
CRAR* 15% ≥ 12% but less than 15% ≥ 9% but < 12% Below 9%
Tier - I Capital* 10% ≥ 8% but less than 10% ≥ 6% but less than 8% Below 6%
Net NPA Ratio** - >6% but ≤ 9% >9% but ≤12% Higher than 12%
Adjusted net-worth/aggregate 30% <30% but ≥24% <24% but ≥ 18% Below 18%
risk weighted assets***
Leverage ratio*** 2.5 times ≥2.5 times but <3 times ≥ 3 times but <3.5 times Greater than 3.5 times
Note: *: Pertain to NBFCs-D and NBFCs-ND
**: Pertain to CICs, NBFCs-D and NBFCs-ND
***: Pertain to CICs
Source: RBI.
38POLICY ENVIRONMENT
SRs issued will be guaranteed by the government markets, the Reserve Bank issued an advisory
to cover the difference between the face value of on July 8, 2021 encouraging banks and other
SRs and actual realisation from their resolution REs to cease entering into new contracts that
process for upto five years. An amount of `30,600 use LIBOR as a reference rate and instead adopt
crore has been earmarked for the purpose. any widely accepted Alternative Reference Rate
(ARR) as soon as practicable and in any event,
III.55 The NARCL has been incorporated
no later than December 31, 2021. Regulatory
under the Companies Act and has been granted
changes have been made to make provision for
ARC licence by the Reserve Bank. NARCL is
use of ARRs in export credit, foreign currency
capitalised through equity contributions from
non-resident (FCNR) (B) deposits, external
banks/financial institutions (FIs), and it will also
commercial borrowings (ECBs) and trade credit
raise debt as required. PSBs and government
(TC). To take into account differences in credit
owned FIs will hold a minimum of 51 per cent
and term premia between LIBOR and the ARRs,
stake and the rest will be with the private sector.
the all-in-cost ceiling has been revised upwards
National Bank for Financing Infrastructure and
by 100 bps for existing ECBs/TCs and by 50 bps
Development (NABFID)
for new ECBs/TCs. As the change in reference
III.56 Infrastructure financing gap is a rate from LIBOR is a “force majeure” event, it
persistent challenge. After facing stress on their has been clarified that changes in the terms of a
exposures to the sector, banks turned risk averse derivative contract on its account would not be
and moderated their lending to this sector. The treated as restructuring.
long gestation periods of infrastructure projects
Money Market Regulations – Review of
leading to asset liability mismatches was another
Guidelines
concern that served as a disincentive for lending.
In order to address this concern, the Government III.58 The regulations for money market
has paved the way for the establishment of a instruments were reviewed to bring in consistency
development finance institution (DFI) through across the markets and to expand its investor
enactment of National Bank for Financing base. RRBs have been allowed to participate in
Infrastructure and Development (NABFID) Act, the call, notice and term money markets and to
2021. Union Budget 2021-22 has budgeted issue Certificate of Deposits (CDs). Participants
`20,000 crores for it. NABFID has been entrusted have been allowed to set their own lending limits
with the task of co-ordinating with relevant in the call, notice and term money markets
stakeholders to facilitate long term infrastructure within extant prudential regulatory norms and
financing, including through development of debt CD issuers have been permitted to buy back CDs
and derivatives market. before maturity for greater flexibility in managing
short-term liquidity.
6. Financial Markets
7. Foreign Exchange Policies
London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR)
Transition - Review of Guidelines Relaxation in the period of parking of unutilised
ECB proceeds in term deposits
III.57 The planned LIBOR transition poses a
challenge for banks and the financial system. To III.59 Borrowers are permitted to park
ensure a smooth transition for REs and financial unutilised ECB proceeds in term deposits
39Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
with Authorised Dealer (AD) Category-I banks 2020, thus reducing the cost of compliance for
in India for a maximum period of 12 months. the reporting entities.
To provide relief to borrowers from COVID-19
related disruptions, a one-time relaxation was 8. Credit Delivery and Financial Inclusion
provided on April 07, 2021, allowing unutilised
III.62 In pursuit of the goal of sustainable
ECB proceeds drawn down on or before March
financial inclusion, the Reserve Bank has
1, 2020 to be parked in term deposits with AD encouraged banks to adopt a structured and
Category-I banks in India prospectively up to planned approach. The National Strategy for
March 1, 2022. Financial Inclusion (NSFI) 2019-24 is aimed at
accelerating the level of financial inclusion across
Export Data Processing and Monitoring System
the country in a holistic and systematic manner.
(EDPMS) Module for ‘Caution/De-caution Listing
In pursuance of the recommendations made in
of Exporters’ – Review
the NSFI, significant headway has been made
III.60 As part of automation of Export Data
on both the supply side and demand side of
Processing and Monitoring System (EDPMS),
financial inclusion. On the supply side, provision
the ‘Caution / De-caution Listing’ of exporters
of banking services to more than 99 per cent of
was automated in 2016. Accordingly, exporters
the targeted villages within their 5 km radius and
were caution-listed automatically if any shipping
sensitisation of more than 1.91 lakh Business
bill against them remained outstanding for more
Correspondents (BCs) through conduct of about
than 2 years in EDPMS and no extension was
32,000 programmes are the key achievements.
granted for realisation of export proceeds against
On the demand side, enhanced financial literacy
the outstanding shipping bill. Additionally, the
and consumer grievance redressal mechanisms
normal system of caution-listing’, based on
are focus areas of NSFI. Against this backdrop,
specific recommendations of AD banks before
several policy measures were initiated during
the expiry of two years, continued. In October
2020-21 and the current financial year so far to
2020, system-based automatic caution-listing
ensure last mile access to financially excluded
was discontinued. In order to make the system sections.
more exporter friendly and equitable, the Reserve
Business Correspondent (BC) Model
Bank will continue with caution-listing based on
the case-specific recommendations of AD banks. III.63 By end-March 2021, more than 95 per
cent of the banking outlets in rural areas were
Reporting Rationalisation
operated by BCs. Given their role in effective
III.61 Considering the latest technological delivery of financial services and furthering
advancements as well as recent rationalisation financial inclusion, a slew of initiatives viz. a BC
of various notifications under Foreign Exchange Certification Programme, a Train the Trainers
Management Act (FEMA), 1999 regulations, a Programme for sensitizing bank officials, and
comprehensive review of the extant reporting a BC Registry Portal for having a repository
requirements was undertaken. 67 returns were of details about BCs were introduced by the
reviewed with respect to their relevance, mode Reserve Bank. In order to assess the efficacy of
of filing, format and frequency and 17 returns these initiatives, a study was undertaken by the
were discontinued with effect from November 13, Reserve Bank (Box III.2).
40POLICY ENVIRONMENT
Box III.2: Business Correspondent Survey
A pan–India survey was conducted by the Reserve Bank in Progress in the BC certification was tepid in the north-
October 2020 to analyse the effectiveness of the initiatives eastern region due to lack of awareness.
in the BC sphere and identify areas of improvement. The
Awareness about the BC registry portal showed
survey covered 4,535 respondents (2,934 BCs and 1,601
improvement among bank officials and BCs.
bank officials), consisting of more than 60 per cent from
public sector banks (PSBs), followed by RRBs and PVBs. Owing to the Train the Trainers programme, majority
Of the BC respondents, 75 per cent were deployed through of the BCs were aware about the terms and conditions
corporate BCs and the remaining 25 per cent were directly of their agreement with their respective banks and
deployed by banks. The survey was administered through
grievance redressal process of banks.
27 regional offices of the Reserve Bank across 29 States
and 4 Union Territories covering all the regions of the Further sensitisation through Train the Trainers
country. The key findings of the survey are: programme has ensured frequent on-site visit by bank
officials.
Majority of the respondents, both from BCs and bank
officials, indicated an overall improvement in knowledge, Nearly 70 per cent of the BCs indicated that periodic
capabilities and expertise of BCs in response to the handholding exercises are being conducted either by
Reserve Bank’s initiatives. bank officials or by corporate BCs.
Increase in limits for bank lending against be applicable to the MFIs having a gross loan
Negotiable Warehouse Receipts (NWRs) / portfolio of upto `500 crore as on March 31,
electronic Negotiable Warehouse Receipts 2021. Under the scheme, SFBs are permitted
(eNWRs) to lend upto 10 per cent of their total PSL
portfolio as on March 31, 2021.
III.64 The priority sector lending (PSL) limit
for loans against NWRs/eNWRs was enhanced Resolution of COVID-19 related stress of MSMEs
from `50 lakh to `75 lakh per borrower to
III.66 A one-time restructuring of existing loans
ensure greater flow of credit to farmers against to MSMEs, which were in default but ‘standard’
hypothecation of agricultural produce and as on January 1, 2019, was permitted without an
to encourage use of NWRs/eNWRs issued by asset classification downgrade. The restructuring
regulated warehouses. The PSL limit backed by was required to be implemented by March 31,
warehouse receipts other than NWR/eNWR will 2020. The scheme was made available to MSMEs
continue to be `50 lakh per borrower. that qualify in terms of criteria such as a cap of
`25 crore on total borrowings from banks and
Small Finance Banks (SFBs) Lending to NBFC-
NBFCs and being GST-registered. Since then, the
MFIs as Priority Sector Lending
scheme has been extended thrice with the latest
III.65 In view of the pandemic challenges
restructuring applicable to MSME accounts
and to address the liquidity concerns of
that were in default but ‘standard’ as on March
smaller MFIs, fresh credit extended by SFBs
31, 2021. The restructuring of the borrower
to registered NBFC-MFIs and other MFIs accounts had to be invoked by September 30,
(societies, trusts etc.) was allowed to be 2021. Furthermore, it was decided to enhance
classified under priority sector lending (PSL), the cap on total borrowings from banks and
provided these institutions are members of NBFCs to `50 crore from `25 crore. The scheme
the Reserve Bank recognized self-regulatory helped relieve the stress of the MSME borrowers
organization (SRO). The above benefit will (Table III.6).
41Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Table III.6: Restructuring of MSME Advances
Circular Reference Parameters PSBs PVBs FBs SCBs
Under January 2019 circular No. of Accounts Restructured 651503 2602 - 654105
% of Eligible Accounts Restructured 44.87 2.51 - 42.04
Restructured Loan Amount (in ` Crore) 26190 2174 - 28364
% of Eligible Amount Restructured 22.3 10.2 - 20.5
Under February-2020 Circular No. of Accounts Restructured 142299 3543 - 145842
% of Eligible Accounts Restructured 11.2 1.18 - 9.29
Restructured Loan Amount (in ` Crore) 5860 1364 - 7224
% of Eligible Amount Restructured 5.9 3.6 - 5.3
Under August 2020 Circular No. of Accounts Restructured 377208 466552 1 843761
% of Eligible Accounts Restructured 9.31 6.07 10.0 7.19
Restructured Loan Amount (in ` Crore) 18232 11026.98 17.7 29277
% of Eligible Amount Restructured 4.4 6.4 8.2 5.0
Under May 2021 Circular No. of Accounts Restructured 466106 341668 447 808221
% of Eligible Accounts Restructured 11.33 3.49 1.66 5.80
Restructured Loan Amount (in ` Crore) 27856 23122 489 51467
% of Eligible Amount Restructured 8.49 8.31 1.00 7.86
Total No. of Accounts Restructured 1637116 814365 448 2451929
% of Eligible Accounts Restructured 15.04 4.55 1.66 8.51
Restructured Loan Amount (in ` Crore) 78138 37687 507 116332
% of Eligible Amount Restructured 8.14 7.42 1.03 7.67
Notes: 1. PVBs includes data pertaining to SFBs.
2. -: nil/negligible.
Source: As reported by banks.
9. Consumer Protection interest of 2 per cent over the repo rate in case
of a delay. The amendments to the Act came into
III.67 Improvement in customer service and
force from September 1, 2021.
customer grievance redressal mechanisms in
banks has been a major focus area of the Reserve Strengthening of Grievance Redressal
Bank in recent years. Mechanism in Banks
III.68 To give the depositors easy and time III.69 In order to strengthen the grievance
bound access to their deposits to the extent of
redressal mechanism in banks, a comprehensive
insurance cover, the Deposit Insurance and
framework, envisaging annual assessment of
Credit Guarantee Corporation (DICGC) Act,
customer service, was put in place on January
1961 was amended by the Parliament in August
27, 2021. The major features of the framework
2021 wherein DICGC will be liable to provide
are: (i) enhanced disclosures on customer
interim payment of deposit cover within 90 days
complaints by banks; (ii) monetary disincentive
of the date such liability arises. Further, DICGC
for banks in the form of recovery of cost of
was permitted to raise the deposit insurance
redressal of complaints beyond a threshold; and
premium up to the maximum limit of 0.15 per
(iii) intensive review of grievance redressal system
cent of total assessable deposits, subject to prior
of banks that fail to improve their mechanisms.
approval from the Reserve Bank. The DICGC
was given powers to defer or vary the repayment III.70 Under the framework, banks identified
period for the insured banks and charge penal as having persistent issues in grievance redressal
42POLICY ENVIRONMENT
would be subject to intensive review. Based on RBI Retail Direct Scheme
the review findings, a remedial action plan will
III.72 The Reserve Bank launched the ‘RBI
be formulated and formally communicated to the
Retail Direct’ Scheme on November 12, 2021
bank for implementation within a specific time
as a one-stop solution to facilitate investment in
frame. In case no improvement is observed in
Government securities by individual investors.
the grievance redressal mechanism within the
The scheme enables individuals to participate
prescribed time, the bank will be subjected to
in primary issuance of government securities
corrective actions through appropriate regulatory
(G-Secs) in the non-competitive segment and to
and supervisory measures.
buy/sell G-Secs in the secondary market on the
Integration of the Ombudsman Schemes NDS-OM platform.
III.71 The primary responsibility for customer
10. Payments and Settlement Systems
grievance redressal remains with the financial
service providers. Complaints which are not III.73 The Reserve Bank has over the years
resolved through this mechanism can be referred encouraged greater use of electronic payments to
to the Reserve Bank’s Ombudsman or Consumer achieve a “less-cash” society. The objective has
Education and Protection Cells (CEPCs). The been to provide payment systems that combine
erstwhile three ombudsman schemes were the attributes of safety, security, enhanced
integrated into a single Reserve Bank – Integrated convenience and accessibility by leveraging
Ombudsman Scheme (RB-IOS), 2021 with effect on technological solutions that enable faster
from November 12, 2021 and additional features processing. Affordability, interoperability,
were added for making the ombudsman structure customer awareness and protection have been
more customer friendly (Box III.3). the focus areas. Over the years, banks have been
Box III.3: Reserve Bank - Integrated Ombudsman Scheme, 2021
The Banking Ombudsman (BO) Scheme was launched be registered. Furthermore, the scope of the ombudsman
by the Reserve Bank in 1995 under Section 35A of the scheme has been expanded to include non-scheduled
Banking Regulation Act, 1949 as an alternate customer primary UCBs with a deposit size of `50 crore and above.
grievance redressal mechanism. The scheme, which was
The new mechanism makes dispute redressal simpler and
earlier restricted to banking services rendered by SCBs
more responsive to the customers. A ‘Centralised Receipt
and scheduled primary UCBs, was revised in 2002 to cover
and Processing Centre’ having a toll free number has been
RRBs and revamped further in 2006 to include several
set up at Chandigarh for receipt of complaints through
new areas of customer complaints. In 2018, Ombudsman
emails and physical modes. Importantly, the Scheme has
Scheme for NBFCs was introduced and a year later, an
defined ‘deficiency in service’ as the sole ground for filing a
Ombudsman Scheme was launched specially to redress complaint, with a specified list of exclusions. Adoption of
complaints related to digital transactions. ‘One Nation One Ombudsman’ approach, ensures that the
mechanism is jurisdiction neutral.
To strengthen the mechanism further, the Reserve Bank
consolidated the three existing schemes into an Integrated A Principal Nodal Officer of the rank of a General Manager
Ombudsman Scheme (IOS) on November 12, 2021, which in a Public Sector Bank or equivalent will be responsible
was inaugurated virtually by the Prime Minister in the for representing an RE and furnishing information about
presence of the Finance Minister and the Governor, Reserve complaints. The RE will not have the right to appeal in
Bank. Under the new scheme, it will no longer be necessary cases where an award is issued by the ombudsman against
to identify exact scheme under which the complaint is to it for not furnishing satisfactory and timely information.
43Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
the traditional gateway to payment services. subsidise deployment of payment acceptance
With fast paced technological changes, this infrastructure in Tier-3 to Tier-6 centres with
domain is no longer the monopoly of banks. a special focus on north-eastern states. The
Entities such as non-banks, including Fintechs, target of the PIDF is to help deploy 10 lakh
Techfins and Bigtechs are cooperating as well physical and 20 lakh digital acceptance devices
as competing with banks, either as technology every year in the target geography. The scheme
service providers or direct providers of digital was operationalised from January 01, 2021
payment services. The regulatory framework for a period of three years. In August 2021, the
has encouraged diversified participation in scheme was expanded to include beneficiaries of
the payments domain, while being mindful of the PM Street Vendor’s AtmaNirbhar Nidhi (PM
ensuring consumer convenience, safety, security SVANidhi Scheme) in Tier-1 and Tier-2 centres.
and systemic stability. As on November 30, 2021, the contribution to the
scheme was `614 crore and 77.16 lakh payment
Enhancements to PPIs
acceptance devices have been deployed.
III.74 On May 19, 2021, the Reserve Bank
Access for Non-banks to Centralised Payment
mandated PPI interoperability, increased the
Systems
maximum outstanding balance in PPIs to `2 lakh
and permitted cash withdrawal from full-KYC III.77 Direct access of non-banks to the
PPIs. These measures are expected to lead to Centralised Payment System (CPS) lowers the
optimum utilisation of acceptance infrastructure, overall risk in the payments eco-system. It also
seamless customer experience and encourage brings in advantages to non-banks like reduction
non-bank PPI issuers to convert their offerings in cost of payments, minimising dependence on
into full-KYC PPIs. banks, reducing the time taken for completing
payments and eliminating the uncertainty in
Card transactions in Contactless mode –
finality of the payments as the settlement is
Relaxation in Requirement of Additional Factor
carried out in central bank money. The risk of
of Authentication
failure or delay in execution of fund transfers is
III.75 In 2015, the Reserve Bank permitted also avoided when the transactions are directly
contactless transactions by using NFC-enabled initiated and processed by the non-bank entities.
EMV Chip cards without the need for additional Keeping in mind these advantages, the Reserve
factor of authentication for values up to `2,000 Bank permitted authorised non-bank Payment
per transaction. Keeping the COVID-19 pandemic System Providers (PSPs), viz. PPI issuers, card
experience in view and given the sufficient networks and White Label ATM operators to
protection available to users, it was decided to participate in the CPS as direct members from
increase the per transaction limit to `5,000 with July 28, 2021.
effect from January 1, 2021.
Tokenisation: Card transactions
Operationalisation of Payments Infrastructure
III.78 The Reserve Bank had issued a
Development Fund Scheme
framework on card tokenisation services in
III.76 The Payments Infrastructure January 2019. While initially limited to mobile
Development Fund (PIDF) Scheme intends to phones and tablets, it was subsequently extended
44POLICY ENVIRONMENT
in August 2021 to cover other devices including 11. Overall Assessment
Internet of Things (IoT). In September 2021, the
III.80 The disruption in economic activity in
scope of this framework was further extended
the wake of the pandemic resulted in corporate
by permitting card networks and card issuers to
and household sector stress and weakening of
offer Card-on-File Tokenisation (CoFT) services.
demand conditions. Through concerted efforts,
Additionally, the Reserve Bank advised that from
the Reserve Bank and the Government managed
July 1, 2022, no entity in the card transaction /
to contain the risks to financial stability. As
payment chain, other than the card issuers and the economy revives, renewed focus may
/ or card networks, shall store the actual card need to be placed on building up of adequate
data; and any such data stored previously will buffers and being vigilant of the evolving risks.
be purged. The resolution framework was designed to
minimise the risk of adverse selection. Higher
Reserve Bank Innovation Hub
provisioning requirements and stringent
III.79 The Reserve Bank has set up Reserve
performance requirements for borrowers after
Bank Innovation Hub (RBIH) as a company
the implementation of the resolution plan are
under section 8 of the Companies Act, 2013.
expected to further dampen the impact of such
The wholly owned subsidiary of the Reserve
risks. The trade-off between short-term liquidity
Bank has an independent board comprising
and regulatory support to viable borrowers and
eminent members from industry and academia
medium-term macro-financial stability risks
to promote innovation across the financial
needs to be carefully balanced. Looking ahead, it
sector by leveraging on technology and creating
is important for the credit cycle to gain traction
an environment which would facilitate and
and support the ensuing economic recovery.
foster innovation. The role of the RBIH is to
This will require policy initiatives that ensure
bring convergence among various stakeholders
effective risk management and sound corporate
(viz., banking and financial sector, start-up
governance. The changing nature of banking—
ecosystem, regulators and academia) in the
especially the increasing use of technology—
financial innovation space. It would also develop
presents challenges as well as opportunities for
the required internal infrastructure to promote
an inclusive and sound banking sector and the
fintech research and facilitate continuous
regulatory and supervisory function needs to
engagement with innovators and start-ups.
keep pace.
45OPERATIONS AND PERFORMANCE
IV
OF COMMERCIAL BANKS
During 2020-21, scheduled commercial banks (SCBs) reported a discernible improvement in their asset
quality, capital buffers and profitability, notwithstanding the disruptions of the pandemic. While credit
offtake remained subdued, elevated deposit growth on the liabilities side was matched by growth in investments
on the assets side. Nonetheless, incipient stress remains in the form of higher restructured advances. Banks
would need to bolster their capital positions to absorb potential stress as well as to augment credit flow when
policy support is phased out.
1. Introduction to sectoral deployment of credit, performance of
banking stocks, ownership patterns, corporate
IV.1 During 2020-21, the banking sector
governance and compensation practices,
navigated the disruptions caused by the
foreign banks’ operations in India and overseas
pandemic and the economic downturn with
operations of Indian banks, developments in
resilience, cushioned by various policy
payments systems, consumer protection and
measures undertaken by the Reserve Bank
financial inclusion. Developments related to
and the Government. Asset quality improved,
regional rural banks (RRBs), local area banks
partly attributable to imposition of the asset
(LABs), small finance banks (SFBs) and
classification standstill. Public sector banks
payments banks (PBs) are analysed separately
(PSBs) reported net profits after a gap of five
in Sections 13 to 16. The chapter concludes by
years. More generally, the capital position of
bringing together major issues that emerge from
banks improved, aided by recapitalisation
the analysis and offers some perspectives on the
by the government as well as raising of funds
way forward.
from the market. Nonetheless, incipient stress
remains in the form of increased proportion
2. Balance Sheet Analysis
of restructured advances and the possibility
of higher slippages arising from sectors that IV.3 The consolidated balance sheet of
were relatively more exposed to the pandemic. scheduled commercial banks (SCBs) accelerated
Nevertheless, with the green shoots of recovery during 2020-21, notwithstanding the pandemic
re-emerging in H1:2021-22, banks are expected and the contraction in economic activity in the
to further shore up their financials. first half of the year. Deposit growth on the
liabilities side was matched by investments on
IV.2 Against this background, this chapter
the assets side; however, credit offtake remained
discusses the operations and performance
subdued (Table IV.1 and Chart IV.1). Supervisory
of the banking sector during 2020-21 and
data suggest that while nascent signs of recovery
H1:2021-22. Balance sheet developments are
are visible in credit growth, deposit growth has
analysed in Section 2, followed by an assessment
slowed down in 2021-22 so far.
of their financial performance and financial
soundness in Sections 3 and 4, respectively. IV.4 The share of PSBs in total advances as
Sections 5 to 12 address specific themes relating well as in deposits has been declining since
46OPERATIONS AND PERFORMANCE OF COMMERCIAL BANKS
Table IV.1: Consolidated Balance Sheet of Scheduled Commercial Banks
(At end-March)
(Amount in ` crore)
Item Public Sector Private Sector Foreign Small Finance Payments All
Banks Banks Banks Banks Banks SCBs
2020 2021 2020 2021 2020 2021 2020 2021 2020 2021 2020 2021
1. Capital 72,040 59,328 26,866 30,641 85,710 91,465 5,151 5,375 1,035 1,300 1,90,802 1,88,109
2. Reserves and Surplus 5,80,886 6,49,142 5,81,749 7,07,345 1,08,987 1,24,706 11,047 14,800 -461 -704 12,82,208 14,95,289
3. Deposits 90,48,420 99,00,766 41,59,044 48,00,646 6,84,239 7,77,173 82,488 1,09,472 855 2,543 1,39,75,045 1,55,90,600
3.1. Demand 5,71,383 6,84,451 5,47,521 6,82,095 2,17,825 2,37,412 2,381 3,964 8 19 13,39,118 16,07,941
Deposits
3.2. Savings Bank 30,41,902 34,62,923 11,72,739 14,56,019 70,007 87,032 10,284 22,198 847 2,524 42,95,779 50,30,696
Deposits
3.3. Term Deposits 54,35,134 57,53,392 24,38,784 26,62,532 3,96,408 4,52,729 69,823 83,310 - - 83,40,149 89,51,963
4. Borrowings 7,09,780 7,18,850 8,27,575 6,25,683 1,28,761 1,02,331 30,004 27,828 - 198 16,96,120 14,74,890
5. Other Liabilities and 3,71,706 4,03,292 2,36,890 2,66,732 2,57,381 1,68,893 4,057 6,076 216 737 8,70,250 8,45,729
Provisions
Total Liabilities/Assets 1,07,82,831 1,17,31,378 58,32,123 64,31,048 12,65,079 12,64,567 1,32,747 1,63,552 1,645 4,072 1,80,14,425 1,95,94,617
(59.9) (59.9) (32.4) (32.8) (7.0) (6.5) (0.7) (0.8) (0.0) (0.0) (100.0) (100.0)
1. Cash and balances 4,36,774 5,39,149 2,72,616 2,92,019 51,238 59,163 5,058 6,921 33 174 7,65,720 8,97,426
with RBI
2. Balances with banks 4,66,615 5,93,721 2,12,324 2,73,711 99,468 1,51,549 8,701 12,309 455 812 7,87,563 10,32,102
and money at call
and short-notice
3. Investments 29,40,636 34,00,895 12,93,031 15,12,480 4,31,277 4,73,418 24,203 30,660 694 2,413 46,89,842 54,19,866
3.1 In Government 24,09,182 27,89,985 10,66,313 12,57,222 3,84,102 4,30,779 20,748 27,142 694 2,412 38,81,039 45,07,541
Securities(a+b)
a) In India 23,71,783 27,52,716 10,57,074 12,36,747 3,62,540 3,90,195 20,748 27,142 694 2,412 38,12,839 44,09,212
b) Outside 37,399 37,270 9,240 20,476 21,562 40,584 - - - - 68,201 98,329
India
3.2 In Other 102 12 - - - - - - - - 102 12
Approved
Securities
3.3 In Non- 5,31,352 6,10,898 2,26,718 2,55,258 47,175 42,639 3,455 3,518 - 1 8,08,700 9,12,313
Approved
Securities
4. Loans and Advances 61,58,112 63,48,758 36,25,154 39,39,292 4,28,076 4,23,546 90,554 1,08,613 - 0.1 1,03,01,897 1,08,20,208
4.1 Bills purchased 1,60,977 1,45,894 1,25,111 1,19,295 59,273 60,380 37 124 - - 3,45,398 3,25,694
and discounted
4.2 Cash Credits, 24,16,408 24,91,776 9,70,317 10,11,497 2,07,717 1,75,337 6,872 8,861 - - 36,01,314 36,87,471
Overdrafts, etc.
4.3 Term Loans 35,80,727 37,11,087 25,29,726 28,08,501 1,61,085 1,87,828 83,646 99,628 - 0.1 63,55,184 68,07,043
5. Fixed Assets 1,06,507 1,06,826 38,268 39,713 4,129 4,457 1,671 1,676 200 222 1,50,775 1,52,894
6. Other Assets 6,74,187 7,42,030 3,90,729 3,73,832 2,50,891 1,52,434 2,559 3,373 263 452 13,18,629 12,72,121
Notes: 1. -: Nil/negligible.
2. Components may not add up to their respective totals due to rounding-off numbers to ` crore.
3. Detailed bank-wise data on annual accounts are collated and published in Statistical Tables Relating to Banks in India, available at
https://www.dbie.rbi.org.in.
4. Figures in parentheses are shares in total assets/ liabilities of different bank groups in all SCBs.
Source: Annual accounts of respective banks.
2010-11, while private sector banks (PVBs) have H1:2021-22, there was a moderation in deposit
been improving their share. growth with normalisation of economic activity
and rising inflation.
2.1 Liabilities
IV.5 During 2020-21, deposit mobilisation IV.6 For the last three years, private non-
by SCBs was the highest in seven years, mainly financial corporations have been net savers,
contributed by the low-cost current account and progressively increasing their deposits with SCBs
savings account (CASA) deposits (Chart IV.4). In while their credit offtake has remained anaemic.
47Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Chart IV.1: Select Aggregates of SCBs Chart IV.2: Credit and Deposits: Households and Private
Non-Financial Corporations
(At end-March)
Source: Annual accounts of banks. Source: Basic statistical returns I and II (annual), RBI.
Moreover, the household sector’s deposits—64 across interest rates shifted leftwards, with 5-6
per cent of the total as at end-March 2021—also per cent interest rate emerging as the modal
picked up pace (Chart IV.2). class (Chart IV.3b).
IV.7 With term deposit rates falling across the IV.8 Historically, PVBs have relied heavily on
board, their growth moderated during 2020-21 borrowings to supplement their deposits and
(Chart IV.3a). Correspondingly, their distribution fuel credit growth. On the other hand, PSBs
Chart IV.3: Term Deposits of SCBs
a. Term Deposits1 b: Distribution of Term Deposits
(At end-March)
Note: I= interest rate in per cent.
Source: Annual accounts of banks. Source: Annual accounts of banks.
1 For charts presenting bank-group wise growth rates, the following adjustments have been made: i) Following the recategorization
of IDBI Bank Ltd. w.e.f. January 21, 2019, it is excluded from PSB group and included in PVB group. The data on bank-group
wise growth rate from March 2019 to December 2019 is based on the adjusted bank-group totals; ii) Following amalgamation of
Lakshmi Vilas Bank with DBS Bank India, w.e.f. November 27, 2020, private and foreign bank-group wise growth rates are based
on adjusted bank-group totals.
48OPERATIONS AND PERFORMANCE OF COMMERCIAL BANKS
Chart IV.4: Growth in CASA Deposits Chart IV.5: Growth in Borrowings
(At end-March)
Source: Annual accounts of banks. Source: Annual accounts of banks.
leveraged their wide deposit base and availability accelerated over the first three quarters of the
of low-cost CASA deposits to fund their lending. year (Chart IV.5).
In 2020-21, borrowings of PVBs contracted for
2.2 Assets
the first time since 2016-17, while those of PSBs
accelerated after contracting for two consecutive IV.9 SCBs’ credit growth has decelerated over
years. Despite robust CASA deposit growth, PSBs previous two years, largely reflecting muted
raised higher resources through borrowings demand conditions and risk aversion (Box IV.1).
than the previous year as their credit growth Signs of recovery became visible in H1:2021-22.
Box IV.1: Slowdown in Credit Growth: Supply or Demand Driven?
Persistent anemic credit growth in recent years has led to a belongs to either the demand or supply equation (Maddala
vigorous debate amongst policymakers and analysts on the and Nelson, 1974).
underlying causes.
Using monthly data for the period April 2001-March 2020,
In the presence of asymmetric information, stickiness of the disequilibrium model is estimated for India. The
loan interest rates leads to delays in price adjustments. benchmark prime lending rate (BPLR) of State Bank of
In the interim, there can be disequilibrium whenever India is taken as a proxy for the market clearing interest
supply does not equal demand at the prevailing interest rate, while the logarithm of credit is taken as dependent
rate (Stiglitz and Weiss, 1981). The observed credit C is variable. The results suggest that the slowdown in credit
t
assumed to be the minimum of the estimated demand for is reflecting a scissors effect. Industrial activity (IIP) and
credit (Cd) and estimated supply for credit (Cs): investment (GFCF) constrained credit demand, while
t t
stressed balance sheets of banks2 limited credit supply
C = min (Cd, Cs)
t t t (Table 1). Hence, policies aimed at boosting aggregate
The disequilibrium model is estimated by using the demand need to be supplemented with strengthening bank
maximum likelihood method (MLE). The model facilitates balance sheets to reduce stress for a sustainable boost to
determination of probabilities with which each observation credit growth.
(Contd...)
2 Proxied by lagged values of stressed assets ratio (SAR) (GNPAs plus restructured standard advances as percentage of
gross advances).
49Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Table 1: Estimation Results
Explanatory variables/ Log Credit Log Credit Explanatory variables/ Log Credit Log Credit
Dependent variables (Model 1) (Model 2) Dependent variables (Model 1) (Model 2)
Credit Demand Credit Supply
Constant 0.1339*** (0.0114) 5.6117*** (0.036) Constant 0.0008 (0.0083) -2.5247*** (0.0063)
BPLR_lag 1 0.6222*** (0.0114) 2.8388*** (0.037) Time trend -0.00004 (0.00002) -0.0013*** (0.00005)
Time trend 0.0021 (0.0022) -0.0004 (0.001) SAR_lag1 -0.0006 (0.0009) -0.0062** (0.0029)
GFCF_lag 1 0.0253** (0.0129) CRAR_lag2 0.0006 (0.0011)
IIP_lag 1 0.1488*** (0.0014) Log_deposit_lag 2 1.4017*** (0.0124)
IIP_lag 2 0.0151 (0.019) Cost of Fund_lag 1 0.0009 (0.0009)
Sensex growth 0.0287 (0.0177) BPLR_lag 2 0.0008 (0.0009) -0.1051 (0.0807)
CPI Inflation_lag 1 0.9217*** (0.0003) AQR Dummy 0.0020 (0.0023) -0.0249*** (0.0077)
BPLR_lag 2 -0.5351*** (0.0114) -1.4109*** (0.0373) St. Dev. of demand equation error 1.1380*** (0.0005) 0.6042*** (0.0405)
AQR dummy 0.6648*** (0.0065) St. Dev. of supply equation error 0.0073*** (0.00001) 0.0256*** (0.0001)
GFC Dummy -0.2900*** (0.0002) Log-likelihood 1114.16 - 658.63
Note: 1. AQR: Asset Quality Review; GFC: Global Financial Crisis; IIP: Index of Industrial production; GFCF: Gross Fixed Capital Formation.
2. lag 1: lagged by one period; lag 2: lagged by two periods.
3. ***, **, and * indicate 1 per cent, 5 per cent and 10 per cent levels of significance, respectively.
4. Figures in parenthesis are standard errors.
References:
Maddalla, G. S., and F. Nelson. 1974. Maximum Likelihood Methods for Models of Markets in
Disequilibrium. Econometrica 42(6): 1013–1030.
Stiglitz, Joseph E.; Weiss, Andrew (1981). Credit Rationing in Markets with Imperfect Information”. The American Economic
Review. 71 (3): 393–410.
Verma, R (2021). Slowdown in Credit Flow in India: Supply or Demand Driven, mimeo.
IV.10 Credit growth of PVBs decelerated from IV.11 Within population groups, the relatively
Q4: 2019-20 till Q3:2020-21 as the pandemic higher credit growth to rural and semi-urban
took its toll. Since Q4:2020-21, however, PVBs’ areas after the outbreak of COVID-19 is a bright
credit showed signs of revival (Chart IV.6). spot (Chart IV.7). While PSBs remained the
Chart IV.6: Growth in Advances Chart IV.7: Change in Credit Composition
(At end-March)
Notes: All the centres are classified into following four population groups based
on their population in the reference Census: a) ‘Rural’ group includes
centres with population of less than 10,000. b) ‘Semi-urban’ group
includes centres with population of 10,000 and above but less than
1,00,000. c) ‘Urban’ group includes centres with population of 1,00,000
and above but less than ten lakhs d) ‘Metropolitan’ group includes all
centres with population of 10 lakhs and above.
Source: Quarterly Statistics on Deposits and Credit of Scheduled Source: Quarterly Statistics on Deposits and Credit of Scheduled Commercial
Commercial Banks. Banks.
50OPERATIONS AND PERFORMANCE OF COMMERCIAL BANKS
Chart IV.8: Credit-GDP Ratio
a. Credit-GDP Ratio and Credit-GDP Gap b. Country-wise Credit-GDP Ratio
Note: Includes credit from all sources.
Source: BIS.
major contributor of rural lending, given their 2.3 Maturity Profile of Assets and Liabilities
reach and accessibility, the share of PVBs has
IV.15 Mismatches in the maturity of assets and
also climbed up.
liabilities are intrinsic to banking business, but
IV.12 The credit-to-GDP ratio increased to a they have implications for liquidity, profitability
five-year high, narrowing the credit-GDP gap and risk exposures. During 2020-21, while the
(Chart IV.8a). India’s credit-to-GDP ratio is negative gap in the maturity bucket of up to one
still markedly lower than the G20 average
(Chart IV.8b). Chart IV.9: Credit -Deposit and Investment-
Deposit Ratios
IV.13 As the share of advances in total assets fell,
that of investments increased in an environment
of risk aversion and limited profitable lending
avenues. This resulted in a decline in the credit-
deposit (C-D) ratio and a corresponding elevation
in the investment-deposit (I-D) ratio, especially
in incremental terms (Chart IV.9).
IV.14 Central Government and State
Government securities were preferred by both
PSBs and PVBs during 2020-21, indicating their
preference for safer investments. Consequently,
the share of other debt securities in PSBs’ total
portfolio declined after increasing for three
Source: Annual accounts of banks.
consecutive years (Chart IV.10).
51Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Chart IV.10: Investment Portfolio
(At end-March)
a. PSBs b. PVBs
Source: OSMOS Supervisory Returns.
year moderated, the positive gap in the maturity PVBs relied more on borrowings with maturity
bucket of more than five years turned negative as between one and five years (Table IV.2).
banks attracted less short-term CASA deposits
2.4 International Liabilities and Assets
and more longer-term deposits (Chart IV.11).
IV.17 The total international liabilities of banks
IV.16 In the case of borrowings, PSBs and
located in India expanded in 2020-21 on the
PVBs displayed widely contrasting patterns. The
back of rupee denominated deposits and equities
share of short-term and long-term borrowings
held by non-resident Indians (NRIs) (Appendix
increased year-on-year in the case of PSBs, while
Table IV.9). The sizeable increase in international
assets, on the other hand, was led by their loans
and debt securities (Appendix Table IV.10).
Chart IV.11: Gap between Proportion of Assets and
Liabilities in Various Maturity Buckets However, international assets of banks in India
(including foreign banks) were only 42 per
cent compared to their international liabilities
(Chart IV.12a).
IV.18 During the period under review, the
share of claims of Indian banks (including their
domestic and foreign branches) shifted away
from non-financial private institutions and
favoured other banks (Appendix Table IV.11
and Chart IV.12b). The country-composition of
Notes: 1. Short-term is up to 1 year while long-term is more than 3 international claims remained stable, with the
years.
2. Assets consist of loans & advances and investments. share of the top five out of six countries against
Liabilities consist of deposits and borrowings.
3. Gap pertains to assets minus liabilities. which Indian banks held the highest share of
Source: Annual accounts of banks.
claims increasing further (Appendix Table IV.12).
52OPERATIONS AND PERFORMANCE OF COMMERCIAL BANKS
Table IV.2: Bank Group-wise Maturity Profile of Select Liabilities /Assets
(At end-March)
(Per cent)
Assets/Liabilities PSBs PVBs FBs SFBs PBs All SCBs
2020 2021 2020 2021 2020 2021 2020 2021 2020 2021 2020 2021
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
I. Deposits
a) Up to 1 year 40.4 36.2 38.1 34.3 63.9 62.4 59.6 53.6 10.0 13.0 40.9 37.0
b) Over 1 year and up to 3 years 22.8 21.9 28.1 28.9 28.3 30.8 37.5 42.1 90.0 87.0 24.8 24.7
c) Over 3 years and up to 5 years 10.2 11.3 8.5 9.2 7.7 6.7 0.7 1.7 - - 9.5 10.3
d) Over 5 years 26.6 30.6 25.3 27.7 0.0 0.0 2.2 2.6 - - 24.7 28.0
II. Borrowings
a) Up to 1 year 49.2 54.5 51.7 41.4 83.4 83.8 41.1 46.9 - 100.0 52.9 50.8
b) Over 1 year and up to 3 years 27.5 21.0 24.2 34.0 10.3 11.8 44.0 37.3 - - 24.9 26.2
c) Over 3 years and up to 5 years 13.0 12.8 11.3 13.9 2.2 2.0 11.3 13.8 - - 11.3 12.5
d) Over 5 years 10.2 11.7 12.8 10.6 4.2 2.4 3.6 2.1 - - 10.9 10.4
III. Loans and Advances
a) Up to 1 year 25.1 24.8 32.3 32.2 61.4 55.4 38.1 41.8 - 100.0 29.3 28.9
b) Over 1 year and up to 3 years 40.9 36.9 33.6 34.1 19.3 22.7 42.4 34.0 - - 37.4 35.3
c) Over 3 years and up to 5 years 10.9 14.9 12.7 12.8 7.1 9.1 9.0 11.0 - - 11.4 13.8
d) Over 5 years 23.1 23.5 21.4 20.9 12.1 12.8 10.4 13.2 - - 21.9 22.0
IV. Investments
a) Up to 1 year 23.7 23.7 54.2 50.6 83.4 85.1 59.0 58.1 100.0 97.4 37.8 36.8
b) Over 1 year and up to 3 years 13.1 16.6 15.1 20.7 11.0 10.3 26.3 25.4 - 1.9 13.5 17.3
c) Over 3 years and up to 5 years 10.6 13.2 6.8 6.5 2.0 2.2 3.1 2.9 - 0.4 8.7 10.3
d) Over 5 years 52.7 46.4 23.8 22.2 3.6 2.4 11.6 13.6 - 0.2 40.0 35.6
Notes: 1. - : Nil/Negligible.
2. The sum of components may not add up to 100 due to rounding off.
Source: Annual accounts of banks.
2.5 Off-Balance Sheet Operations
increased as their forward exchange contracts
IV.19 The size of contingent liabilities of all that include all admissible derivative products
SCBs relative to their total on-balance sheet increased by more than 40 per cent. For FBs,
exposures declined in 2020-21, after increasing while off-balance sheet exposures decreased,
in the previous year. For PSBs, however, the share they remained more than nine times their total
Chart IV.12: International Liabilities and Assets of Indian Banks
a. International Liabilities and Assets of Banks b. Consolidated claims of Indian Banks
(At end-March)
Source: Annual accounts of banks and DBIE.
53Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
3. Financial Performance
Chart IV.13: Off-Balance Sheet Liabilities of Banks
IV.20 The financial performance of SCBs in
2020-21 was marked by a discernible increase
in profitability as their income remained stable
but expenditure declined. This was in sharp
contrast with the past five years during which
PSBs incurred losses and profitability of PVBs
was declining (Chart IV.14).
IV.21 The total income of banks remained
stable, despite a marginal decline in its
largest component viz. interest income, in
an environment characterised by low credit
offtake and interest rates (Table IV.3). The fall
was cushioned by a sizeable increase in income
from investments. Income from trading also
Source: Annual accounts of banks.
accelerated, as banks booked profits on falling
G-Sec yields.
liabilities (Chart IV.13). The overall deceleration
IV.22 The contraction in SCBs’ expenditure
in banks’ contingent liabilities was on account
was led by a decline in the interest expended
of muted growth in their forward exchange
on deposits and borrowings on account of
contracts in line with subdued foreign exchange
moderation in interest rates and contraction
transactions (Appendix Table IV.2).
in total borrowings. Across bank groups,
Chart IV.14: Profitability Ratios
(At end-March)
a. Return on Assets b. Return on Equity
Note: i) Following the recategorization of IDBI Bank Ltd. w.e.f. January 21, 2019, it is excluded from PSB group and included in PVB group. The bank-
group wise data from March 2019 to December 2019 are adjusted accordingly; ii) Following the amalgamation of Lakshmi Vilas Bank with DBS Bank
India, w.e.f. November 27, 2020, private and foreign bank-group wise data are adjusted accordingly.
Source: Annual accounts of banks and DBIE, RBI.
54OPERATIONS AND PERFORMANCE OF COMMERCIAL BANKS
Table IV.3: Trends in Income and Expenditure of Scheduled Commercial Banks
(Amount in ` crore)
Item Public Sector Private Sector Foreign Small Finance Payments All
Banks Banks Banks Banks Banks SCBs
2019-20 2020-21 2019-20 2020-21 2019-20 2020-21 2019-20 2020-21 2019-20 2020-21 2019-20 2020-21
1. Income 8,34,320 8,31,882 5,46,347 5,45,833 83,223 82,081 19,219 22,500 55 1,004 14,83,164 14,83,301
(7.6) (-0.3) (17.0) (0.4) (19.1) (-4.3) (76.4) (17.1) - (1733.7) (12.1) (0.01)
a) Interest Income 7,16,203 7,07,092 4,49,006 4,51,617 66,673 63,888 16,948 19,523 46 101 12,48,876 12,42,222
(5.1) (-1.3) (14.1) (1.1) (20.0) (-7.2) (75.0) (15.2) - (120.1) (9.5) (-0.5)
b) Other Income 1,18,117 1,24,790 97,341 94,216 16,550 18,193 2,271 2,976 9 903 2,34,288 2,41,079
(26.0) (5.6) (32.6) (-2.9) (15.5) (7.6) (86.7) (31.1) - (9932.3) (28.2) (2.9)
2. Expenditure 8,60,335 8,00,064 5,27,236 4,76,357 67,043 63,116 17,251 20,462 389 1,304 14,72,253 13,61,303
(2.2) (-7.0) (20.0) (-9.1) (21.0) (-10.4) (75.7) (18.6) - (235.5) (9.3) (-7.5)
a) Interest Expended 4,68,005 4,31,627 2,58,038 2,32,555 28,810 21,769 7,928 9,122 14 55 7,62,794 6,95,128
(3.9) (-7.8) (11.6) (-9.3) (17.7) (-28.8) (74.8) (15.1) - (307.7) (7.3) (-8.9)
b) Operating Expenses 1,92,720 2,02,879 1,26,663 1,30,456 21,584 22,318 7,152 7,549 488 1,251 3,48,607 3,64,453
(10.1) (5.3) (15.9) (3.6) (15.4) (-0.3) (70.3) (5.6) - (156.6) (13.4) (4.5)
Of which : Wage Bill 1,15,839 1,23,378 47,357 50,274 7,878 7,888 3,811 4,302 264 398 1,75,149 1,86,239
(14.1) (6.5) (20.8) (6.9) (17.2) (-4.0) (79.2) (12.9) - (50.6) (17.1) (6.3)
c) Provision and 1,99,609 1,65,558 1,42,535 1,13,346 16,648 19,029 2,171 3,791 -112 -2 3,60,852 3,01,722
Contingencies (-7.7) (-17.1) (44.1) (-20.0) (36.2) (8.9) (100.8) (74.6) - (9.9) (-16.4)
3. Operating Profit 1,73,594 1,97,376 1,61,646 1,82,823 32,829 37,994 4,139 5,829 -446 -302 3,71,763 4,23,720
(16.0) (13.7) (27.8) (13.1) (22.8) (15.8) (91.4) (40.8) (21.9) (14.0)
4. Net Profit -26,015 31,818 19,111 69,477 16,180 18,965 1,968 2,038 -334 -300 10,911 1,21,998
(-30.8) (248.3) (11.5) (23.6) (81.9) (3.5) (1018.1)
5. Net Interest Income (NII) 2,48,198 2,75,465 1,90,968 2,19,063 37,863 42,119 9,020 10,401 32 45 4,86,082 5,47,094
(7.5) (11.0) (17.6) (15.0) (21.8) (10.0) (75.3) (15.3) - (40.7) (13.2) (12.6)
6. Net Interest Margin (NIM) 2.37 2.45 3.43 3.58 3.26 3.30 8.34 7.02 1.95 1.58 2.81 2.91
Notes: 1. Figures in parentheses refer to per cent variations over the previous year.
2. Following amalgamation of Lakshmi Vilas Bank with DBS Bank India, w.e.f. November 27, 2020, private and foreign bank-group wise growth
rates are based on adjusted bank-group totals.
3. Percentage variations could be slightly different as absolute numbers have been rounded off to ` crore.
4. NIM has been defined as NII as percentage of average assets.
Source: Annual accounts of respective banks.
the transmission of policy rate changes to earned by banks outpaced their interest
term deposit rates was highest for FBs expenses, and hence the net interest margin
(Chart IV.15 a). At the system level, interest (NIM) improved (Chart IV.15 b).
Chart IV.15: Lending Rate, Deposit Rate and NIM
a. Lending and Deposit Rates b. NIM
Notes: 1. WALR-Weighted average lending rates on outstanding rupee loans.
2. WADTDR- Weighted average domestic term deposit rates.
3. i) Following the recategorization of IDBI Bank Ltd. w.e.f. January 21, 2019, it is excluded from PSB group and included in PVB group. The
bank-group wise data for NIM from March 2019 to December 2019 are adjusted accordingly;
ii) Following the amalgamation of Lakshmi Vilas Bank with DBS Bank India, w.e.f. November 27, 2020, private and foreign bank-group wise
data for NIM are adjusted accordingly.
Source: Annual accounts of banks and RBI.
55Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Chart IV.16: Impact of Provisioning on Profitability
a. Provision Coverage Ratio b. Provisioning and Profitability
Note: Provision coverage ratio is not write-off adjusted.
Source: Off-site returns (domestic operations), RBI. Source: Annual accounts of banks.
IV.23 Banks were required to maintain during 2020-21 which helped in boosting banks’
additional provisions of at least 10 per cent on profitability (Chart IV.16).
moratorium amounts, which was allowed to be
IV.24 Profitability of banks, measured in terms
spread out across two quarters viz. Q4:2019-20
of spread between return on funds and cost of
and Q1:2020-21. Most banks, especially PVBs, funds, improved with the decline in the latter
frontloaded the required provisions in the March exceeding that in the former. The improvement
2020 quarter resulting in a higher provision was especially evident in PSBs, while niche banks
coverage ratio for the year. Combined with lower in the SFB and PB categories could not maintain
slippage, this muted the provision requirements their spreads (Table IV.4).
Table IV.4: Cost of Funds and Return on Funds
Bank Group/ Year Cost of Cost of Cost of Funds Return on Return on Return on Spread
Variable Deposits Borrowings Advances Investments Funds
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 (8-5)
PSBs 2019-20 5.0 4.6 4.9 8.2 6.9 7.8 2.8
2020-21 4.2 4.3 4.2 7.5 6.6 7.2 3.0
PVBs 2019-20 5.3 6.2 5.4 10.1 6.6 9.2 3.8
2020-21 4.3 5.5 4.5 9.1 6.2 8.3 3.9
FBs 2019-20 3.7 4.1 3.7 8.5 6.7 7.6 3.9
2020-21 2.4 3.4 2.5 7.1 6.1 6.5 4.0
SFBs 2019-20 8.2 9.8 8.7 19.9 7.5 17.3 8.7
2020-21 6.8 8.8 7.3 17.1 6.8 14.9 7.6
PBs 2019-20 1.6 - 1.6 - 3.5 3.5 1.9
2020-21 3.0 5.3 3.1 9.3 4.0 4.0 0.9
SCBs 2019-20 5.0 5.4 5.0 8.9 6.8 8.3 3.2
2020-21 4.2 4.9 4.2 8.1 6.4 7.6 3.3
Notes: 1. Cost of Deposits = Interest Paid on Deposits / Average of Current and Previous Years’ Deposits.
2. Cost of Borrowings = (Interest Expended - Interest on Deposits) /Average of Current and Previous Years’ Borrowings.
3. Cost of Funds = (Interest Expended) /Average of Current and Previous Years’ (Deposits + Borrowings).
4. Return on Advances = Interest Earned on Advances / Average of Current and Previous Years’ Advances.
5. Return on Investments = Interest Earned on Investments / Average of Current and Previous Years’ Investments.
6. Return on Funds = (Interest Earned on Advances + Interest Earned on Investments) /Average of Current and Previous Years’ (Advances +
Investments).
7. Following the amalgamation of Lakshmi Vilas Bank with DBS Bank India, w.e.f. November 27, 2020, private and foreign bank-group wise data
are adjusted accordingly.
Source: Calculated from balance sheets of respective banks.
56OPERATIONS AND PERFORMANCE OF COMMERCIAL BANKS
4. Soundness Indicators three in the previous year. The fatter right tails
for end-March 2021 distributions as compared
IV.25 During 2020-21, SCBs bolstered their
with those for 2019 imply that a bigger share of
capital positions, and also improved their asset
banks maintained higher CRAR and CET-1 ratio,
quality, liquidity and leverage ratios, despite
with the peak between 2.5 to 5 per cent over and
the pandemic. The number of banks under the
above the minimum (Chart IV.17)3. Although the
Reserve Banks’s prompt corrective action (PCA)
implementation of the last tranche of 0.625 per
framework reduced from four at end-March
cent of capital conservation buffer (CCB) was
2020 to one at end-September 2021, reflecting
deferred till October 1, 2021, banks proactively
bank-level as well as overall improvement in
raised more capital to be in readiness for the
SCBs’ soundness indicators.
imminent transition.
4.1 Capital Adequacy
IV.28 Resource mobilisation by banks through
IV.26 The capital to risk-weighted assets ratio public and rights issues increased sharply in
(CRAR) of SCBs has improved sequentially every 2020-21, reflecting the follow-on public offer
quarter from end-March 2020 to reach 16.6 per (FPO) of equity capital by a PVB to meet its
cent at end-September 2021 (Table IV.5). This capital requirements (Table IV.6).
was essentially driven by a rise in core capital
IV.29 In September 2020, the Parliament
across bank groups, attributable to higher approved ₹20,000 crore capital infusion for PSBs
retained earnings, recapitalisation of PSBs by which was fully disbursed by April 1, 2021. Since
the government and raising of capital from the 2014, the government has infused ₹3.43 lakh
market. A slowdown in the accumulation of risk crore in PSBs. In the Union Budget of 2021-22,
weighted assets (RWAs) of both PSBs and FBs the government has proposed to infuse another
helped to boost their capital ratios. tranche of ₹20,000 crore into PSBs, which will
help in augmenting their capital.
IV.27 The number of banks breaching the
regulatory minimum requirement of CRAR IV.30 The resources raised by PSBs
(including capital conservation buffer) (10.875 through private placement almost doubled during
per cent) declined to one during 2020-21 from 2020-21. In 2021-22 so far, both PSBs and PVBs
Table IV.5: Component-wise Capital Adequacy of SCBs
(At end-March)
(Amount in ` crore)
PSBs PVBs FBs SCBs
2020 2021 2020 2021 2020 2021 2020 2021
1. Capital Funds 6,99,872 7,93,971 6,54,772 7,72,389 1,88,665 2,04,433 15,56,686 17,90,330
i) Tier I Capital 5,65,830 6,49,082 5,80,718 7,01,622 1,72,887 1,86,369 13,30,816 15,54,796
ii) Tier II Capital 1,34,042 1,44,889 74,054 70,767 15,777 18,064 2,25,870 2,35,535
2. Risk Weighted Assets 54,46,253 56,56,060 39,56,956 41,92,303 10,65,889 10,49,878 1,05,35,311 1,09,86,622
3. CRAR (1 as % of 2) 12.9 14.0 16.5 18.4 17.7 19.5 14.8 16.3
Of which: Tier I 10.4 11.5 14.7 16.7 16.2 17.8 12.6 14.2
Tier II 2.5 2.6 1.9 1.7 1.5 1.7 2.1 2.1
Source: Off-site returns, RBI.
3 Skewness in the distribution of banks overachieving their CRAR and CET-1 targets progressively declined from 0.65 and 1.01 in
2018-19, to 0.23 and 0.52 in 2019-20 and (-)1.48 and (-) 0.35 in 2020-21, respectively.
57Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Chart IV.17: Distance from Regulatory Minimum
a. CRAR b. CET-1
Note: Data pertain to PSBs and PVBs.
Source: Off-site returns, RBI.
have resorted to this route for raising capital IV.32 The liquidity coverage ratio (LCR) -
(Table IV.7). designed to help banks withstand liquidity
pressures in the short-term - requires banks
4.2 Leverage and Liquidity
to maintain high quality liquid assets (HQLAs)
IV.31 The leverage ratio (LR), calculated as to meet 30 days’ net outgo under stressed
the ratio of tier-1 capital to total exposures, conditions. In March 2020, banks were allowed
constrains the build-up of leverage by banks. to avail funds under the marginal standing
Despite regulatory moderation in October 2019 facility by dipping into the statutory liquidity
ratio (SLR) by up to an additional one per cent
requiring banks to maintain 4 and 3.5 per cent
of their net demand and time liabilities (NDTL)
ratios for domestic systemically important banks
for three months. This dispensation was
and other banks, respectively as compared to
progressively extended up to December 31, 2021
4.5 per cent earlier, the LR of SCBs rose for the
to enable banks to meet their LCR requirements
second consecutive year during 2020-21. While
and provide comfort on their liquidity needs
the improvement was spread across all bank
and will expire thereafter. Additionally, the
groups, it was led by a sharp improvement in the
LCR requirement for SCBs was brought down
tier-1 capital of PVBs (Chart IV.18 a).
from 100 per cent to 80 per cent in April 2020
Table IV.6: Public and Rights Issues by the Table IV.7: Resources Raised by Banks through
Banking Sector Private Placements
(Amount in ` crore) (Amount in ` crore)
Year PSBs PVBs Total Grand 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22
Total (up to November)
Equity Debt Equity Debt Equity Debt
No. of Amount No. of Amount No. of Amount
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8= (6+7) Issues Raised Issues Raised Issues Raised
2019-20 - - 410 - 410 - 410
2020-21 - - 15,000 - 15,000 - 15,000 PSBs 20 29,573 36 58,697 16 32,567
2021-22* - - - - - - - PVBs 8 23,121 4 33,878 5 17,222
Note: 1. *: Up to November 2021. Note: Includes private placement of debt and qualified institutional
2. -: Nil/Negligible. placement. Data for 2021-22 are provisional.
Source: SEBI. Source: BSE, NSE and Merchant Bankers.
58OPERATIONS AND PERFORMANCE OF COMMERCIAL BANKS
Chart IV.18: Leverage and Liquidity
a. Leverage Ratio b. Liquidity Coverage Ratio
Source: Off-site returns (global operations), RBI.
and was gradually restored in two phases by end-March 2021. Provisional supervisory data
April 1, 2021. Notwithstanding the regulatory suggest a further moderation in the ratio to
relaxation, banks continued to maintain LCR 6.9 per cent by end-September 2021. During
above 100 per cent: the ratio increased from 2020-21, this improvement was driven by lower
145 per cent at end-March 2020 to 158.9 per slippages, partly due to the asset classification
cent by end-March 2021 and 160.9 per cent by standstill. With the decline in delinquent assets,
end-September 2021 (Chart IV.18 b). their provision requirements also dropped and
the net NPA ratio of PSBs and PVBs eased from
4.3 Non-Performing Assets
the previous year. On the contrary, FBs reported
IV.33 The moderation in GNPA ratios of banks
increasing accretions to NPAs and deteriorating
that began in 2019-20, continued during the
asset quality due to amalgamation of a troubled
period under review to reach 7.3 per cent by
PVB with an FB (Chart IV.19).
Chart IV.19: Asset Quality of Banks
a. GNPA Ratio b. Slippage Ratio
(At end-March)
Note: GNPA ratio is calculated using annual accounts of banks and off-site returns (global operations).
Source: Annual accounts of banks and off-site returns.
59Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Table IV.8: Movement in Non-Performing Assets
(Amount in ` crore)
Item PSBs PVBs FBs SFBs All SCBs
Gross NPAs
Closing Balance for 2019-20 6,78,317 2,09,568 10,208 1,709 8,99,803
Opening Balance for 2020-21 5,46,590 2,05,335 10,208 1,709 7,63,842
Addition during the year 2020-21 2,78,711 1,03,625 12,840 5,470 4,00,646
Reduction during the year 2020-21 74,685 38,824 4,698 377 1,18,584
Written-off during the year 2020-21# 1,34,000 69,995 3,307 832 2,08,134
Closing Balance for 2020-21 6,16,616 2,00,141 15,044 5,971 8,37,771
Gross NPAs as per cent of Gross Advances*
2019-20 10.3 5.5 2.3 1.9 8.2
2020-21 9.1 4.9 3.6 5.4 7.3
Net NPAs
Closing Balance for 2019-20 2,30,918 55,683 2,005 765 2,89,370
Closing Balance for 2020-21 1,96,451 55,809 2,987 2,981 2,58,228
Net NPAs as per cent of Net Advances
2019-20 3.7 1.5 0.5 0.8 2.8
2020-21 3.1 1.4 0.7 2.7 2.4
Notes: 1. #: Includes prudential as well as actual write-offs.
2. Closing balance for 2019-20 and opening balance for 2020-21 do not match due to amalgamation of banks. The amalgamated banks’ GNPAs
are reported under ‘addition during the year’.
3. *: Calculated by taking gross NPAs from annual accounts of respective banks and gross advances from off-site returns (global operations).
Source: Annual accounts of banks and off-site returns (global operations), RBI.
IV.34 As observed since 2018, write-offs were IV.35 Consistent with the improvement in
the predominant recourse for lowering GNPAs asset quality, the proportion of standard assets
in 2020-21 (Table IV.8 and Chart IV.20). In the to total advances of SCBs increased in 2020-21,
case of FBs, the contribution of upgradation largely because of the improved performance
improved substantially, but it was not enough to of PVBs (Table IV.9). Within standard assets,
offset fresh slippages. the share of restructured standard advances
(RSA) increased from 0.4 per cent at end March
Chart IV.20: Reduction in GNPAs
(At end-March)
Note: Other reasons include upgradation to standard assets and actual recoveries.
Source: Annual accounts of banks.
60OPERATIONS AND PERFORMANCE OF COMMERCIAL BANKS
Table IV.9: Classification of Loan Assets by Bank Group
(Amount in ` crore)
Bank Group End-March Standard Assets Sub-Standard Assets Doubtful Assets Loss Assets
Amount Per cent* Amount Per cent* Amount Per cent* Amount Per cent*
PSBs 2020 53,27,903 89.2 1,32,530 2.2 4,04,724 6.8 1,07,163 1.8
2021 55,87,450 90.6 1,03,744 1.7 3,51,014 5.7 1,22,217 2.0
PVBs 2020 34,14,554 94.9 56,588 1.6 92,396 2.6 34,986 1.0
2021 37,57,240 95.3 65,363 1.7 90,228 2.3 31,350 0.8
FBs 2020 4,25,857 97.7 3,273 0.8 5,775 1.3 1,161 0.3
2021 4,10,418 97.6 3,648 0.9 5,566 1.3 986 0.2
SFBs** 2020 89,800 98.1 1,023 1.1 648 0.7 39 0.0
2021 1,05,619 94.6 4,965 4.4 841 0.8 165 0.1
All SCBs 2020 92,58,114 91.7 1,93,413 1.9 5,03,543 5.0 1,43,349 1.4
2021 98,60,726 92.7 1,77,720 1.7 4,47,648 4.2 1,54,717 1.5
Notes: 1. Constituent items may not add up to the total due to rounding off.
2. *: As per cent of gross advances.
3. **: Refers to scheduled SFBs.
Source: Off-site returns (domestic operations), RBI.
2020 to 0.8 per cent at end-March 2021, largely declined to 51 per cent at end-March 2021 from
representing the onetime restructuring scheme 54.2 per cent a year ago. Their contribution to
for standard advances announced by the total NPAs also declined in tandem from 75.4 per
Reserve Bank in August 2020. The RSA further cent to 66.2 per cent during the same period. The
increased to 1.8 per cent at end September special mention accounts-2 (SMA-2) ratio, which
2021 due to restructuring scheme 2.0 for retail
signals impending stress, has risen across bank
loans and MSMEs which does not entail an asset
groups since the outbreak of the pandemic. The
classification downgrade.
RSA ratio has also increased during the same
IV.36 The share of large borrowal accounts period, partly reflecting the impact of resolution
(exposure of ₹5 crore or more) in total advances framework (RF) 1.0 and 2.0 (Chart IV.21).
Chart IV.21: Stress in Large Borrowal Accounts
Notes: RSA: Restructured standard advances;
SMA-0, where principal or interest payment was not overdue for more than 30 days, but the account showed signs of incipient stress;
SMA-1, where principal or interest payment was overdue for 31-60 days;
SMA-2, where principal or interest payment was overdue for 61-90 days.
Source: Central Repository of Information on Large Credits (CRILC) database.
61Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
4.4 Recoveries alternative avenues, with asset sales declining as
a proportion to outstanding GNPAs across bank
IV.37 During 2020-21, all the recovery
groups. This was partly due to the worsening
channels, most notably Lok Adalats, witnessed
acquisition cost of ARCs as a proportion of
a sizeable decline in the cases referred for
book value of assets, reflecting higher haircuts
resolution (Table IV.10). Even though initiation
and lower realisable values in respect of their
of fresh insolvency proceedings under the
acquired assets (Chart IV.22).
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) of India
was suspended for a year till March 2021 and IV.39 The recovery of security receipts (SRs)
COVID-19 related debt was excluded from the issued by ARCs is a critical indicator of their
definition of default, it constituted one of the performance. Since 2018, the Reserve Bank has
major modes of recoveries in terms of amount been disincentivising banks from holding SRs
recovered. Allowing pre-pack resolution window
in excess of 10 per cent of the transaction value
for MSMEs is expected to assuage the mounting
of sale of stressed assets through increased
pressure of pending cases before NCLTs, reduce
provisions.5 Consequently, the share of SRs
haircuts and improve declining recovery rates4.
subscribed to by banks has decreased over
IV.38 Another important mode of asset the years, and their share hovered around 58
resolution for banks, especially PVBs, has been per cent in 2019-20 and 2020-216. The share
sale of NPAs to asset reconstruction companies of ARCs in SR holdings has declined over the
(ARCs) by taking haircuts. In recent years, years, with the investor base having gradually
however, the preference of banks has shifted to diversified with an increasing share of foreign
Table IV.10: NPAs of SCBs Recovered through Various Channels
(Amount in ` crore)
Recovery Channel 2019-20 2020-21 (P)
No. of cases Amount Amount Col. (4) as No. of cases Amount Amount Col. (8) as per
referred involved recovered* per cent of referred involved recovered* cent of Col. (7)
Col. (3)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Lok Adalats 59,86,790 67,801 4,211 6.2 19,49,249 28,084 1,119 4.0
DRTs 33,139 2,05,032 9,986 4.9 28,182 2,25,361 8,113 3.6
SARFAESI Act 1,05,523 1,96,582 34,283 17.4 57,331 67,510 27,686 41.0
IBC@ 1,986 2,24,935 1,04,117 46.3 537 1,35,139 27,311 20.2
Total 61,27,438 6,94,350 1,52,597 22.0 20,35,299 4,56,094 64,228 14.1
Notes: 1. P: Provisional.
2. *: Refers to the amount recovered during the given year, which could be with reference to the cases referred during the given year as well as
during the earlier years.
3. DRTs: Debt Recovery Tribunals.
4. @: Cases admitted by National Company Law Tribunals (NCLTs) under IBC.
5. The resolution plan of Essar Steel India Ltd. was approved in 2018-19. However, as apportionment among creditors was settled in 2019-20,
the recovery is reflected in the latter year data.
Source: Off-site returns, RBI and Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI).
4 Recovery rate is the amount recovered as a percentage of the amount involved.
5 To ensure that asset sales by banks result in actual sale, threshold for banks holding SRs backed by their sold assets for additional
provisioning was fixed at 50 per cent from April 1, 2017 and was subsequently reduced to 10 per cent from April 1, 2018.
6 As reported by ARCs for which data are available.
62OPERATIONS AND PERFORMANCE OF COMMERCIAL BANKS
Chart IV.22: Stressed Asset Sales to ARCs
a. Stressed Assets Acquired and Acquisition Cost b. Sale to ARCs
Source: Quarterly statements submitted by ARCs and off-site returns (domestic operations), RBI.
institutional investors and other qualified IV.41 In terms of area of operations, an
buyers (Table IV.11). overwhelming majority of cases reported during
2020-21 in terms of number and amount involved
4.5 Frauds in the Banking Sector
related to advances, while frauds concerning
IV.40 Apart from eroding customer confidence,
card or internet transactions made up 34.6 per
frauds present multiple challenges for the
cent of the number of cases.
financial system in the form of reputational
risk, operational risk and business risk. During IV.42 In 2020-21, there was a marked
2020-21, the reported number of cases of increase in frauds related to PVBs, both in
frauds declined (Table IV.12). In terms of terms of number as well as the amount involved.
amount involved, a bulk of these cases occurred During H1:2021-22, PVBs accounted for
earlier but were reported during the year more than half of the number of reported
2020-21 (Table IV.13). fraud cases (Chart IV.23a). In value terms,
Table IV.11: Details of Financial Assets Securitised by ARCs
(Amount in ` crore)
Item Mar-19 Mar-20 Mar-21
Reporting ARCs 18 23 21
1. Book Value of the Assets acquired from banks/FIs 1,86,770 2,95,097 3,19,838
Reporting ARCs 12 11 11
2. Amount of Security Receipts (SRs) issued 14,691 59,347 69,995
3. Security Receipts Subscribed to by:
a Selling Banks/ Financial Institutions 10,659 34,147 41,076
b Asset Reconstruction Companies (ARCs) 3,663 12,421 13,942
c FIIs 151 8,750 9,861
d Others (Qualified Institutional Buyers) 219 4,028 5,116
4. Amount of SRs completely redeemed 558 9,062 13,283
5. SRs Outstanding 13,087 39,618 42,266
Source: Quarterly statements submitted by ARCs.
63Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Table IV.12: Frauds in Various Banking Operations Based on the Date of Reporting
(Cases in number and amount in ` crore)
Area of Operation 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2020-21 (April-September) 2021-22 (April-September)
Number Amount Number Amount Number Amount Number of Amount Number of Amount
of frauds involved of frauds involved of frauds involved frauds involved frauds involved
Advances 3,603 64,539 4,608 1,81,942 3,501 1,37,023 1,669 63,529 1,802 35,060
Off-balance Sheet 33 5,538 34 2,445 23 535 14 439 10 612
Forex Transactions 13 695 8 54 4 129 1 0 1 0
Card/Internet 1,866 71 2,677 129 2,545 119 1,247 49 1,532 60
Deposits 593 148 530 616 504 434 245 149 208 362
Inter-Branch Accounts 3 0 2 0 2 0 2 0 0 0
Cash 274 56 371 63 329 39 132 22 245 51
Cheques/DDs, etc. 189 34 201 39 163 85 77 48 107 149
Clearing Accounts 24 209 22 7 14 4 4 1 9 1
Others 200 244 250 173 278 54 108 25 157 47
Total 6,798 71,534 8,703 1,85,468 7,363 1,38,422 3,499 64,261 4,071 36,342
Notes: 1. Refers to frauds of `1 lakh and above.
2. The figures reported by banks and financial institutions are subject to change based on revisions filed by them.
3. Frauds reported in a year could have occurred several years prior to year of reporting.
4. Amounts involved are as reported and do not reflect the amount of loss incurred. Depending on recoveries, the loss incurred gets reduced.
Further, the entire amount involved in loan accounts is not necessarily diverted.
Source: RBI.
however, the share of PSBs was higher, related cases pertained to PSBs, PVBs accounted
indicating predominance of high value frauds for a majority of card/ internet and cash-related
(Chart IV.23b). While the major share of loans- cases (Chart IV.23c).
Table IV.13: Frauds in Various Banking Operations Based on the Date of Occurrence
(Cases in number and amount in ` crore)
Area of operation Prior to 2018-19 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22 (April - September)
Number Amount Number Amount Number Amount Number Amount Number of Amount
of frauds involved of frauds involved of frauds involved of frauds involved frauds involved
Advances 8,752 3,33,362 2,129 40,516 1,525 31,074 903 13,373 205 237
Off-balance Sheet 71 5,817 19 2,927 5 371 5 12 0 0
Forex Transactions 11 597 5 145 7 135 3 1 0 0
Card/Internet 485 31 2,090 83 2,645 130 2,296 104 1,104 32
Deposits 475 606 550 163 438 338 306 421 66 32
Inter-Branch Accounts 3 0 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
Cash 95 40 275 64 381 37 336 45 132 21
Cheques/DDs, etc. 109 34 165 28 201 69 144 163 41 12
Clearing Accounts, etc. 17 9 26 206 13 2 9 3 4 0
Others 289 277 201 58 144 132 206 35 45 18
Total 10,307 3,40,773 5,463 44,191 5,359 32,290 4209 14,158 1,597 353
Notes: 1. Refers to frauds of `1 lakh and above.
2. The figures reported by banks and financial institutions are subject to change based on revisions filed by them.
3. Data based on ‘date of occurrence’ may change for a period of time as frauds reported late but having occurred earlier would get added.
4. Data in the table pertain to cases reported from 2018-19 till September 30, 2021.
Source: RBI.
64OPERATIONS AND PERFORMANCE OF COMMERCIAL BANKS
Chart IV.23: Bank-Group wise Frauds
a. Number of Frauds b. Amount involved
c. Bank-group and Area of Operation-wise Frauds
Source: RBI.
4.6 Enforcement Actions including frauds classification and reporting,
exposure norms and IRAC norms, interest rate
IV.43 In order to separate enforcement
on deposits and lending to MSMEs (Table IV.14).
action from the supervisory process and in
accordance with international best practices,
Table IV.14: Enforcement Actions
the Enforcement Department was created in
Regulated Entity April 2019 to April 2020 to
the Reserve Bank in 2017. The department March 2020 March 2021
is entrusted with ensuring uniformity and Instances Total Instances Total
of Penalty of Penalty
consistency in enforcement of regulations imposition (` crore) imposition (` crore)
of penalty of penalty
and engendering compliance in the regulated
Public Sector Banks 29 35.1 4 9.5
entities (REs). During 2020-21, the number of
Private Sector Bank 11 11.5 3 5.9
instances of imposition of penalty reduced, with Cooperative Banks 9 7.4 43 3.9
Foreign Banks 1 1.0 3 8.0
enforcement action being undertaken against 11 Payments Banks - - 1 1.0
Small Finance Banks - - - -
SCBs. Monetary penalties were imposed for non-
NBFCs 2 0.1 7 3.1
compliance with provisions or contravention of Total 52 55 61 31
certain directions issued by the Reserve Bank, Source: RBI.
65Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
5. Sectoral Bank Credit: Distribution and their medium-sized counterparts received
NPAs sharply higher credit flows, incentivised by
the Emergency Credit Line Guarantee Scheme
IV.44 Headline credit growth remained anaemic
(ECLGS)7. The higher NPAs of large industrial
during 2020-21, although sectorally some bright
borrowers at the end of March 2021 as compared
spots appeared: agriculture credit revived from
to better asset quality of medium enterprises
a sharp deceleration of the previous year; PVBs
may also be a driving factor. Within services,
increased their lending to the services sector;
credit growth to trade surpassed its pre-
and PSBs cushioned the deceleration in total
pandemic growth rate in 2020-21. Remarkably,
retail credit growth, albeit partly. On the other
its share in services sector credit also grew
hand, credit growth to services by PSBs and to
sharply in 2020-21. After the IL&FS event,
retail by PVBs slowed down amidst rising NPA
NBFCs—especially those with lower ratings—
ratios (Chart IV.24).
found raising resources from the market
IV.45 A drill down into the data reveals that difficult and turned to banks. SCBs’ credit to
although credit to large industries contracted, NBFCs grew in double digits during 2015-16 to
Chart IV.24: Sectoral Growth and GNPA Ratios
a. Agriculture b. Industry
c. Services d. Retail
Note: *: Credit growth rates are for September 2021 over September 2020, GNPA ratios are as at end-September 2021.
Source: Off-site returns (domestic operations), RBI.
7 Emergency Credit Line Guarantee Scheme was initiated by the Government of India in May 2020 to provide credit guarantee to
MSMEs upto `3 lakh crore. The scope of the scheme was subsequently enlarged to include other sectors identified by the Kamath
Committee.
66OPERATIONS AND PERFORMANCE OF COMMERCIAL BANKS
Table IV.15: Sectoral Deployment of Gross Bank Credit
(Amount in ` crore)
Sr. Item Outstanding as on Per cent variation (y-o-y)
No.
Mar-19 Mar-20 Mar-21 Sep-21 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22
(up to
September)*
1 Agriculture & Allied Activities 12,17,594 12,39,575 13,84,815 14,30,480 10.0 1.8 11.7 10.7
2 Industry, of which 32,93,638 32,52,801 32,53,636 32,34,613 5.2 -1.2 0.03 3.3
2.1 Micro & Small Industries 4,39,811 4,37,658 4,72,529 5,41,554 5.2 -0.5 8.0 16.8
2.2 Medium 1,23,843 1,12,367 1,87,599 2,06,151 -1.7 -9.3 67.0 47.0
2.3 Large 26,11,567 26,11,377 24,76,702 23,59,112 6.1 -0.01 -5.2 -3.4
3 Services, of which 26,02,287 27,54,823 27,45,324 27,24,810 25.1 5.9 -0.3 1.3
3.1 Trade 5,83,930 6,28,142 7,14,210 6,75,820 12.4 7.6 13.7 3.7
3.2 Commercial Real Estate 2,43,122 2,66,357 2,52,696 2,76,980 18.9 9.6 -5.1 8.7
3.3 Tourism, Hotels & Restaurants 56,194 60,039 62,722 61,027 7.9 6.8 4.5 -2.1
3.4 Computer Software 22,236 24,404 23,742 21,570 -0.3 9.8 -2.7 -4.4
3.5 Non-Banking Financial Companies 6,27,089 7,36,447 7,98,241 8,24,189 38.4 17.4 8.4 14.8
4 Retail Loans, of which 23,04,313 26,59,249 29,86,461 31,10,368 18.6 15.4 12.3 14.0
4.1 Housing Loans 12,04,362 13,96,444 15,61,913 15,99,395 19.5 15.9 11.8 11.2
4.2 Consumer Durables 9,195 11,154 21,569 28,409 -51.7 21.3 93.4 69.2
4.3 Credit Card Receivables 1,11,361 1,32,076 1,38,560 1,43,937 34.5 18.6 4.9 2.2
4.4 Vehicle/Auto Loans 2,69,677 2,89,366 3,29,522 3,61,849 12.9 7.3 13.9 21.2
4.5 Education Loans 76,233 79,056 78,823 82,433 1.8 3.7 -0.3 2.9
4.6 Advances against Fixed Deposits 77,135 80,753 74,013 72,718 -0.1 4.7 -8.3 1.7
(incl. FCNR (B), etc.)
4.7 Advances to Individuals against 9,339 5,619 5,619 6,092 46.3 -39.8 0 -12.7
Shares, Bonds, etc.
4.8 Other Retail Loans 5,47,010 6,64,781 7,76,441 8,15,535 25.6 21.5 16.8 20.8
5 Gross Bank Credit 95,26,932 1,00,98,420 1,06,40,811 1,07,52,479 13.4 6.0 5.4 6.8
Note: 1. Figures in the table may not tally with the figures released by RBI in ‘Sectoral Deployment of Bank Credit’ every month due to difference in
coverage of banks.
2. Percentage variations are March over March.
3. The data pertain to SCBs.
4. *September 2021 over September 2020.
Source: Off-site returns (domestic operations), RBI.
2019-20 but decelerated in 2020-21 on a high and retail loans increased sharply in 2020-21,
base (Table IV.15). led by contact-intensive services (Chart IV.25).
IV.46 During 2020-21, retail loan portfolios 5.1 Priority Sector Credit
of banks outgrew their services sector lending,
IV.48 Priority sector lending (PSL) accelerated
aided by double digit acceleration in housing
in 2020-21, primarily driven by revival in credit
loans- the biggest component of retail loans.
to agriculture—especially Kisan Credit Card
Vehicle loans gained traction, reflecting
(KCC) loans—and micro and small enterprises
consumer interest after companies announced
(MSEs) by both PSBs and PVBs (Chart IV.26
substantial discounts on automobiles.
and Appendix Table IV.3).
IV.47 The RSA ratio of SCBs had been
decelerating for five consecutive years since IV.49 PSL, which is typically pro-
2015 on better asset quality recognition by cyclical, is also influenced by bank-specific
banks after the asset quality review (AQR). With characteristics such as asset quality of the
the restructuring scheme announced in August PSL vis-à-vis non-priority sector loans, size
2020 by the Reserve Bank in response to the of the lending bank and their branch network
pandemic, the RSA ratio, especially of services (Box IV.2).
67Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Chart IV.25: Restructured Standard Advances Chart IV.26: Credit to Priority Sectors – All SCBs
Source: Off-site returns (domestic operations), RBI. Source: RBI.
IV.50 During 2020-21, all bank groups Shortfalls were observed in certain sub-
managed to achieve the overall PSL targets. targets by PSBs (micro enterprises) and PVBs
Box IV.2: Determinants of Priority Sector Lending
Priority sector lending – aimed at meeting requirements changer as it allowed buying for shortfall and selling for
of sectors which are credit-starved but are socially overachievement of PSL targets without corresponding
significant began in India in 1969. SCBs8 are required transfer of loan, cash flows or risk.
to lend 40 per cent of their previous year’s adjusted net
Empirically, priority sector lending is found to depend
bank credit (ANBC) or credit equivalent of off balance-
on various bank-specific characteristics like the nature
sheet exposures (CEOBE), whichever is higher, to the
of ownership, size as well as performance (Kumar, Batra,
priority sector. Despite uniform regulatory requirements,
& Deisting, 2016). A fixed effect panel regression for the
banks have deviated from the regulatory target in some
period March 2005 till December 2020 with organic PSL
periods across banks and bank groups. Multiple avenues
are available to banks to meet regulatory obligations by banks as the dependent variable using quarterly bank-
in case of shortfall in direct lending, including Inter- wise data on 59 banks suggests that asset quality plays an
Bank Participation Certificates (IBPCs), securitisation important role in priority sector lending decisions: banks
of priority sector loans, depositing shortfalls in funds which face priority sector asset quality stress tended to
such as the Rural Infrastructure Development Fund lend less to it. GDP, which is a control for macro-economic
(RIDF) and other funds with NABARD, NHB, SIDBI and factors, and bank size9 – a bank-specific control variable
MUDRA Ltd. In 2016, trading in priority sector lending – have a positive relationship with PSL. A dummy for the
certificates (PSLCs) was introduced, which was a game March quarter was found to be positive and significant, as
(Contd...)
8 As of March 31, 2021, regional rural banks and small finance banks are required to lend 75 per cent to priority sector.
9 Bank size = Advances + Deposits.
68OPERATIONS AND PERFORMANCE OF COMMERCIAL BANKS
Table 1: Determinants of Priority Sector Lending banks tended to backload their PSL in the last quarter to
improve their annual average and achieve the regulatory
Variables Dependent Variables
target10. Branches to assets ratio, a proxy for banks’ reach,
Priority Priority Priority
Sector Sector Sector is also found to be significant11.
Advances Agricultural MSE
Advances Advances
For the sub-targets on lending to agriculture (18 per
Dependent Variable (-1) 0.477*** 0.564*** 0.746***
(0.111) (0.0947) (0.0313) cent) and micro and small enterprises (MSEs) (7.5 per
Priority GNPA Ratio -0.0161***
(0.00314) cent), similar models are estimated with rural and urban
Non-Priority GNPA Ratio 0.00495** 0.00492***
(0.00192) (0.00171) branches to assets ratio, respectively. The coefficients are
Agriculture GNPA Ratio -0.00606***
(0.000868) significant and positive. Banks with significant brick-and-
MSE GNPA Ratio -0.0154***
(0.00326) mortar presence in rural areas lend higher to priority
March Dummy 0.0351*** 0.0616*** 0.0461***
(0.0103) (0.0161) (0.0156) agriculture sector while those in urban areas specialise in
GDP 0.0568** 0.0979**
(0.0231) (0.0454) MSE lending.
Agricultural GDP 0.0896***
(0.0329)
CRAR 0.00230 0.00329 A positive and significant PSLC dummy for overall
(0.00332) (0.00231)
PSLC Dummy 0.0597*** 0.0443** -0.0204 PSL as well as sub-targets suggests that the introduction
(0.0217) (0.0167) (0.0225)
Bank Size 0.480*** 0.397*** 0.290*** of PSLCs has given banks an opportunity to profitably
(0.106) (0.0962) (0.0515)
Branches per Asset 0.00240*** trade in PSLCs while simultaneously fulfilling regulatory
(0.000542)
Rural Branches per Asset 0.00713*** targets.
(0.00173)
Urban Branches per Asset 0.00344***
(0.000623)
RoE 0.00
(0.000) References:
Constant -1.307*** -1.990*** -2.581***
(0.338) (0.495) (0.371) Kumar, M., Batra, N., & Deisting, F. (2016). Determinants
Observations 2,765 2,769 2,749
R-squared 0.970 0.938 0.948 Of Priority Sector Lending: Evidence From Bank Lending
Number of Banks 59 59 59
Patterns In India. The International Journal of Business
Notes: 1. Robust standard errors in parentheses
2. *** p<0.01, ** p<0.05, * p<0.1 and Finance Research.
(agriculture; small and marginal farmers significant growth was recorded in case of
(SMFs) and non-corporate individual farmers) PSLC-General and PSLC-Micro Enterprises
(Table IV.16). A phased increase in PSL targets (Chart IV.27).
for SMFs and weaker sections as per the revised
IV.52 The weighted average premiums
PSL guidelines issued in September 2020 is
(WAPs) for PSLCs increased year-on-year
expected to deepen credit penetration to these
by 11 to 44 basis points across categories in
sectors12.
2020-21, with PSLC-SMF and PSLC-A
IV.51 The total trading volume of PSLCs grew categories commanding significantly higher
by 26 per cent to ₹5,89,163 crores during premiums than PSLC-G and PSLC-ME. During
2020-21. Among the four PSLC categories, H1:2021-22, the WAP on PSLCs-ME increased
10 As per RBI norms, while computing priority sector target achievement, shortfall / excess lending for each quarter is monitored
separately. A simple average of all quarters is arrived at and considered for computation of overall shortfall / excess at the end of
the year.
11 Data for bank branches is taken from the Handbook of Statistics on the Indian Economy.
12 For SMFs, the sub-target will increase to 9 per cent by 2021-22, 9.5 per cent by 2022-23 and 10 per cent by 2023-24. Weaker
sections target will increase to 11 per cent by 2021-22, 11.5 per cent by 2022-23 and 12 per cent by 2023-24.
69Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Table IV.16: Priority Sector Lending by Banks
(As on March 31, 2021)
(Amount in ` crore)
Item Target/ Public Sector Banks Private Sector Banks Foreign Banks Small Finance Banks
sub-target
(per cent Amount Per cent Amount Per cent Amount Per cent Amount Per cent
of ANBC/ outstanding of ANBC/ outstanding of ANBC/ outstanding of ANBC/ outstanding of ANBC/
CEOBE) CEOBE CEOBE CEOBE CEOBE
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Total Priority Sector Advances 40/75* 24,16,750 41.06 14,33,674 40.62 1,99,969 41.02 59,055 86.00
of which
Total Agriculture 18.0 10,68,112 18.15 5,29,637 15.01 45,457 18.97 19,239 28.02
Small and marginal farmers 8.0 5,53,455 9.40 2,40,754 6.82 24,233 10.11 17,798 25.92
Non-corporate Individual Farmers# 12.14 7,69,173 13.07 3,64,026 10.31 29,187 12.18 20,422 29.74
Micro Enterprises 7.50 4,18,763 7.11 2,93,072 8.30 18,050 7.53 16,580 24.14
Weaker Sections 10.0 7,27,794 12.37 3,58,002 10.14 28,037 11.70 36,377 52.97
Notes: 1. Amount outstanding and achievement percentage are based on the average achievement of banks for four quarters of the financial year.
2. *: Total priority sector lending target for Small Finance Banks is 75 per cent.
3. #: Target for non-corporate farmers is based on the system-wide average of the last three years’ achievement. For FY 2020-21, the applicable
system wide average figure is 12.14 percent.
4. For foreign banks having less than 20 branches, only the total PSL target of 40 per cent is applicable.
Source: RBI.
sharply due to change in the definition of from 35 per cent in 2019-20 to 36 per cent in
MSMEs. The increase in WAP across other 2020-21, their share in total GNPAs increased
categories may be attributed to COVID-related markedly from 32.8 per cent to 40.5 per cent
stress (Table IV.17). during the same period, led by delinquencies
in agricultural and micro and small enterprises
IV.53 While the share of priority sector accounts
PSL (Table IV.18).
in total bank lending increased only marginally
5.2 Credit to Sensitive Sectors
Chart IV.27: Trading Volume of PSLCs
IV.54 Banks’ exposure to sensitive sectors
decelerated during 2020-21. Nevertheless,
it grew at a higher pace than overall credit
Table IV.17: Weighted Average Premium on
Various Categories of PSLCs
(Per cent)
PSLC 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2020-21 2021-22
Category (Apr- (Apr-
Sep) Sep)
PSLC-A 1.29 0.79 1.17 1.55 1.61 2.00
PSLC-ME 0.61 0.57 0.44 0.88 0.54 2.03
PSLC-SMF 1.54 1.15 1.58 1.74 1.87 2.38
PSLC-G 0.59 0.31 0.35 0.46 0.49 0.85
Source: RBI.
Source: RBI.
70OPERATIONS AND PERFORMANCE OF COMMERCIAL BANKS
Table IV.18: Sector-wise GNPAs of Banks
(At end-March)
(Amount in ` crore)
Bank Group Priority Sector Of which Non-priority Sector Total NPAs
Agriculture Micro and Small Others
Enterprises
Amt. Per cent# Amt. Per cent# Amt. Per cent# Amt. Per cent# Amt. Per cent# Amt. Per cent#
PSBs
2020 2,36,212 36.66 1,11,571 17.31 90,769 14.09 33,872 5.26 4,08,205 63.34 6,44,417 100.00
2021 2,58,228 44.76 1,15,281 19.98 1,01,786 17.64 41,161 7.13 3,18,747 55.24 5,76,974 100.00
PVBs
2020 36,219 19.69 14,462 7.86 16,111 8.76 5,646 3.07 1,47,751 80.31 1,83,970 100.00
2021 50,557 27.04 18,900 10.11 23,473 12.56 8,184 4.38 1,36,384 72.96 1,86,941 100.00
FBs
2020 1,692 16.57 376.07 3.68 1070.24 10.48 245.66 2.41 8,516 83.43 10,208 100.00
2021 1,802 17.67 328.97 3.23 1193.62 11.70 279.48 2.74 8,397 82.33 10,199 100.00
SFBs
2020 1,376 80.51 255.77 14.96 753.88 44.10 366.59 21.45 333 19.49 1,709 100.00
2021 4,974 83.31 1509.6 25.28 2049.4 34.32 1415.23 23.70 996 16.69 5,971 100.00
All SCBs
2020 2,75,499 32.79 1,26,664 15.07 1,08,704 12.94 40,131 4.78 5,64,806 67.21 8,40,305 100.00
2021 3,15,561 40.45 1,36,019 17.44 1,28,502 16.47 51,039 6.54 4,64,524 59.55 7,80,085 100.00
Notes: 1. Amt.: – Amount; Per cent: Per cent of total NPAs.
2. Constituent items may not add up to the total due to rounding off.
3. # Share in total NPAs.
Source: Off-site returns (domestic operations), RBI.
growth, led by the real estate sector, consecutive year (Chart IV.28 and Appendix
especially by PVBs and FBs. Banks’ capital Table IV.4).
market exposure contracted for the second
Chart IV.28: Exposure to Sensitive Sectors
a. Capital Market b. Real Estate
Source: Annual accounts of banks.
71Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
6. Performance of Banking Stocks
Chart IV.29: Relative Performance of Bank
Indices and NIFTY-50 Index
IV.55 After the outbreak of the COVID-19
pandemic, equity markets in India fell sharply,
tracking global cues. Banking sector stocks
were hit hard, reflecting investors’ concerns
about their financial health, although the impact
was not homogenous across banks and bank
groups. Subsequently, in response to the policy
measures initiated by the Reserve Bank and
the Government of India, stock prices revived
(Chart IV.29)
IV.56 Empirical evidence suggests that stock
prices of banks with weak balance sheets were
hammered down more by investors in the
pandemic shock (Box IV.3) Source: Bloomberg.
Box IV.3: Impact of COVID-19 Lockdown on Banking Stock Performance
Globally, the pandemic and lockdowns led to persistent and summed over the event window to obtain cumulative
underperformance of banking sector stocks vis-à-vis the abnormal stock return for a given bank ( ).
headline index. Market anxiety over potential liquidity risks
As expected, CARs for SCBs declined significantly
led to a sell-off in these stocks. Subsequently, however, as
following the announcement of the nation-wide lockdown
policy support measures were introduced, reversals also
(Chart 1). Moreover, the impact was felt across the board,
became evident (Acharya et al., 2021; Kunt et al., 2021).
irrespective of bank size and bank group (Chart 2).
In India, too, the imposition of a nation-wide lockdown
effective from March 24, 2020 onwards triggered investors’
Chart 1: Event Study Analysis –
anxiety about banking stocks. In order to unravel this
CARs around the Lockdown Event
phenomenon empirically, a two-step approach is adopted13.
In the first step, an event study model (MacKinlay, 1997;
Mathur et al., 2021) was employed to compute equation
(1), which is estimated over a period of 91 to 11 days prior
to the event day, i.e. imposition of lockdown.
(1)
where, is the daily stock market return for bank b on
day is the daily return on the NIFTY-50 index and
represents the error term. Abnormal stock market returns
(ARs) for each bank b over a window of (-1, +1) days14 are
then calculated as
Note: The solid line represents the average CAR for the banking sector around
(2) the lockdown event. The dotted lines represent the 95 per cent bootstrapped
confidence interval.
Source: RBI staff estimates.
where belongs to the event window. For comparison and
easier interpretation, the ARs were indexed to 0 for day (-1)
(Contd...)
13 Daily stock prices of 12 PSBs, 18 PVBs and NIFTY-50 index were sourced from Bloomberg.
14 High-frequency data and a tight window around the event ensures better accounting for anticipation effects and other confounding
factors.
72OPERATIONS AND PERFORMANCE OF COMMERCIAL BANKS
Table 1: Regression Results
Chart 2: CARs – Bank Group-wise and Bank Size-wise
Dependent Variable: CAR (-1, +1)
Categories Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Model 4 Model 5
Size 0.050 0.070 0.127 -0.101 0.117
(1.070) (0.976) (1.005) (0.997) (0.782)
Bank-Group Dummy 0.731 1.259 2.108 3.943 1.806
(2.625) (2.404) (2.667) (2.814) (1.931)
ROE - 0.100* - - -
(0.040)
CET-1 ratio - - 0.724* - -
(0.282)
GNPA ratio - - - -0.414* -
(0.181)
Slippage Ratio - - - - -1.180***
(annualized) (0.238)
Number of 30 30 30 30 30
Observations
Note: The smaller (larger) dots represent banks with asset size below (above) sample median. Adjusted R2 -0.07 0.11 0.09 0.08 0.43
Source: RBI staff estimates. BIC 206.30 203.07 203.64 204.19 189.76
Notes: 1. Figures in parenthesis represents standard errors
In the second step, a cross-sectional regression model 2. ***p < 0.001, **p < 0.01, *p < 0.5
(equation 3) is used to investigate the role of bank-level
findings highlight the importance of robust balance sheets
characteristics in explaining the CARs15:
of banks so as to withstand large macroeconomic shocks.
(3)
References
where the size of the bank (proxied by log of total assets)
Acharya, V. V., Engle III, R. F., & Steffen, S. (2021). Why
and a binary variable for bank group (0 for PVBs and 1
did bank stocks crash during COVID-19? (No. w28559).
for PSBs) are used as control variables. Balance sheet and
National Bureau of Economic Research.
financial variables such as profitability (RoE), asset quality
(GNPA ratio and slippage ratio) and capital adequacy Demirgüç-Kunt, A., Pedraza, A., & Ruiz-Ortega, C.
(CET-1 ratio), are represented by . The results from (2021). Banking sector performance during the covid-19
the regression analysis suggest that controlling for size crisis. Journal of Banking & Finance, 106305.
and ownership, banks which had stronger balance sheets
Mathur, A., Sengupta, R., & Pratap, B. (2021). Saved by
and financial positions – such as higher RoE and CET-1
the bell? Equity market responses to surprise Covid-19
ratio – in the pre-pandemic period suffered lower losses.
lockdowns and central bank interventions. (Forthcoming)
On the other hand, banks which entered the pandemic
with higher GNPA and slippage ratios were penalised by MacKinlay, A. C. (1997). Event Studies in Economics and
markets with sharper price corrections (Table 1). These Finance. Journal of Economic Literature, 35(1), 13–39.
7. Ownership Pattern in Commercial Banks from April 1, 202016. During H2:2020-21, the
government’s shareholding increased in Punjab
IV.57 Government ownership in Canara Bank, and Sind Bank due to recapitalisation17 and
Punjab National Bank, Indian Bank and Union decreased in Bank of Baroda, Canara Bank,
Bank of India increased substantially following Punjab National Bank and State Bank of
the amalgamation of ten PSBs into four, effective India, owing to capital raising through private
15 Bank-wise balance sheet data as at end December 2019 was taken from the RBI database.
16 Syndicate Bank merged with Canara Bank, Andhra Bank and Corporation Bank merged with Union Bank of India, United Bank
of India and Oriental Bank of Commerce merged with Punjab National Bank and Allahabad Bank merged with Indian Bank.
17 In September 2020, the Parliament approved supplementary demand for grants of `20,000 crore for recapitalisation in PSBs, of
which `5,500 crore was infused in Punjab and Sind Bank in November 2020.
73Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Chart IV.30: Government’s Shareholding in PSBs
Note: *: Merged entities
Source: Off-site returns (domestic operations), RBI.
placements (Chart IV.30). Furthermore, as at risk mitigation tools as they boost depositors’
end-September 2021, government shareholding confidence and also reinforce financial stability.
decreased in Bank of India, Bank of Following the discussion paper on ‘Governance in
Maharashtra, Canara Bank, Indian Bank, Commercial Banks in India’ issued in June 2020
Punjab National Bank and Union Bank of India and the feedback received thereon, the Reserve
on account of raising of fresh equity from the Bank issued an interim set of instructions
market. Capital infusions planned for PSBs addressing several operational subjects on April
during 2021-22 are expected to change their 26, 2021.
ownership pattern further18. 8.1 Composition of Boards
IV.58 During the year, one private sector bank, IV.60 Apart from ensuring competency,
Lakshmi Vilas Bank Limited, amalgamated with diversity and meeting the fit-and-proper
a foreign bank, DBS Bank India Limited, with criterion, appointment of independent directors
effect from November 27, 2020. With this, 21 goes a long way in ensuring board effectiveness.
PVBs were operational in India as at end-March Most PVBs in India have achieved this in
2021. In terms of foreign investments, non- varying degrees, with the dominant presence of
residents’ shareholding was well within the limits independent directors on their boards as well as
of 74 per cent for PVBs including Local Area in their key supervisory committees, including
Banks (LABS) and Small Finance Banks (SFBs) the Audit Committee of the Board (ACB), Risk
and 20 per cent for PSBs (Appendix Table IV.5). Management Committee of the Board (RMCB)
and Nomination and Remuneration Committee
8. Corporate Governance (NRC) (Chart IV.31).
IV.59 Effective governance and balanced IV.61 It is also necessary to limit the presence
compensation practices in banks are important of management on the board and key supervisory
18 In the Union Budget 2021-22, the government proposed to infuse `20,000 crore into PSBs.
74OPERATIONS AND PERFORMANCE OF COMMERCIAL BANKS
times in the case of SFBs and 67 times in the
Chart IV.31: Share of Independent Directors in PVBs
(At end-March 2021) case of PVBs. The corresponding multiple was
low for FBs as the remuneration received by
employees is relatively high. The variation across
bank groups remained consistent through
2018-19 and 2019-20 (Chart IV.32).
IV.63 Revised guidelines on compensation21
require that the compensation of CEOs / Whole
Time Directors (WTDs) / Material Risk Takers
(MRTs) must be adjusted for all types of risk, their
outcomes and time horizons. Moreover, the mix
Note: The whiskers of the boxplots are indicative of maximum and of cash, equity and other forms of payment must
minimum share of independent directors on the board. The coloured
box shows distance between first quantile and third quantile. be consistent with risk alignment, wherein the
Horizontal line in each box shows the median while ‘X’ shows the
mean. The points outside box represent outliers. variable pay component should be in the range
Source: RBI.
of 50 to 75 per cent of the total pay, a minimum
committees to ensure functional independence.
Chart IV.32: CEO Pay vis-a-vis Average Employee Pay
Ensuring that the Chair of the board is not a (At end-March 2020)
member of these committees helps minimise
role conflicts. The share of PVBs where the Chair
is not a member of an ACB increased to 47 per
cent at end-March 2021 from 35 per cent a year
ago. However, the share remained unchanged at
29 per cent in the case of RMCBs19.
8.2 Executive Compensation
IV.62 The compensation paid to a bank Chief
Executive Officer (CEO) in comparison to a
representative bank employee varies greatly
across different bank groups. For PSBs, on
an average, CEOs earn 3 times the typical
employee20, while the same was as high as 75 Source: RBI.
19 The data presented here precedes the issuance of RBI Circular dated April 26, 2021 on Corporate Governance.
20 Average employee pay has been calculated as a ratio of total staff costs to total employee strength.
21 On November 4, 2019, the Reserve Bank revised its guidelines on compensation, aligning them to the Financial Stability Board
norms. The new guidelines became effective from April 1, 2020.
75Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Table IV.19: Operations of Foreign Banks
Chart IV.33: Components of CEO Remuneration
in India
(During 2019-20)
Foreign banks operating Foreign banks having
through branches representative offices
No. of Banks Branches
Mar-16 46 325 39
Mar-17 44 295 39
Mar-18 45 286 40
Mar-19 45# 299* 37
Mar-20 46# 308* 37
Mar-21 45# 874* 36
Notes: 1. #: Includes two foreign banks, namely SBM Bank (India)
Limited and DBS Bank India Limited which are operating
through Wholly Owned Subsidiary (WOS) mode.
Note: Data in the chart precedes the applicability of the revised 2. *: Includes branches of SBM Bank (India) Limited and DBS
guidelines. Employee Stock Option Plans (ESOPs) are now a part of Bank India Limited (including branches of amalgamated
the variable pay under the revised compensation guidelines. It has entity i.e. Lakshmi Vilas Bank as on March 2021) operating
also been clarified on August 30, 2021 that, in respect of the share- through WOS mode
linked instruments including ESOPs granted after the accounting Source: RBI.
period ending March 31, 2021, the fair value of such instruments
should be recognised as an expense, beginning with the accounting
period for which the approval has been granted. 10. Payment Systems and Scheduled
Source: RBI.
Commercial Banks
IV.65 The payment systems landscape in India
of 60 per cent of which should be under deferral
is undergoing transformation due to rapid
arrangements. The cash component of variable
technological advancements and innovations,
pay is also capped between 33 to 50 per cent22
complemented by supportive regulatory policies.
under the revised guidelines (Chart IV.33).
The Reserve Bank’s Payment and Settlement
Systems: Vision 2019-2021 envisaged payment
9. Foreign Banks’ Operations in India and
systems that are not just safe and secure, but are
Overseas Operations of Indian Banks
also efficient, fast and affordable. In addition,
IV.64 During 2020-21, the number of FBs
there has been a greater thrust by the government
operating in the country reduced as compared
for rapid adoption of digital payment services by
to a year ago23, however, total branches of FBs
all segments of the society.
increased due to amalgamation of Lakshmi
IV.66 Digital modes of payments have grown
Vilas Bank with DBS Bank, with effect from,
by leaps and bounds over the last few years. As
November 27, 2020 (Table IV.19). On the other
a result, conventional paper-based instruments
hand, PSBs have been reducing their overseas
such as cheques and demand drafts now
presence for the last three and a half years to
constitute a negligible share (Chart IV.34).
achieve greater cost efficiency. PVBs also shut
down their less profitable operations abroad IV.67 The growth in volume of total payments
during the year (Appendix Table IV.6). decelerated to 26.7 per cent during 2020-21
22 In case the variable pay is up to 200 per cent of the fixed pay, a minimum of 50 per cent of the variable pay and in case the variable
pay is above 200 per cent, a minimum of 67 per cent of the variable pay should be via non-cash instruments.
23 Westpac Banking Corporation was excluded from the Second Schedule to the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 vide notification
DOR.IBD.No.99/23.13.138/2020-21 dated July 18, 2020.
76OPERATIONS AND PERFORMANCE OF COMMERCIAL BANKS
Chart IV.34: Components of Payment Systems
a. Payment Systems (Volume) b. Payment Systems (Value)
Notes: 1. Digital modes of payments include RTGS and retail digital payments.
2. Retail digital payments include NEFT, IMPS, UPI, NACH, BHIM Aadhaar Pay, AePS fund transfer, NETC, card payments and prepaid
payment instruments.
Source: RBI.
from 43.7 per cent a year ago. In terms of of transactions via RTGS and paper-based
value, total payments contracted for the second instruments (Table IV.20).
consecutive year, mainly due to decline in value
Table IV.20: Payment Systems Indicators
Item Volume (Lakh) Value (` Crore)
2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
1. Large Value Credit Transfers – RTGS 1,366 1,507 1,592 13,56,88,187 13,11,56,475 10,55,99,849
2. Credit Transfers 1,18,481 2,06,297 3,17,868 2,60,90,471 2,85,56,593 3,35,04,226
2.1 AePS (Fund Transfers) 11 10 11 501 469 623
2.2 APBS 14,949 16,747 14,373 86,226 99,048 1,11,001
2.3 ECS Cr 54 18 - 13,235 5,146 -
2.4 IMPS 17,529 25,792 32,783 15,90,257 23,37,541 29,41,500
2.5 NACH Cr 8,834 11,100 16,465 7,29,673 10,37,079 12,16,535
2.6 NEFT 23,189 27,445 30,928 2,27,93,608 2,29,45,580 2,51,30,910
2.7 UPI 53,915 1,25,186 2,23,307 8,76,971 21,31,730 41,03,658
3. Debit Transfers and Direct Debits 4,914 6,027 10,457 5,24,556 6,05,939 8,65,520
3.1 BHIM Aadhaar Pay 68 91 161 815 1,303 2,580
3.2 ECS Dr 9 1 - 1,260 39 -
3.3 NACH Dr 4,830 5,842 9,646 5,22,461 6,04,397 8,62,027
3.4 NETC (linked to bank account) 6 93 650 20 200 913
4. Card Payments 61,769 72,384 57,787 11,96,888 14,34,813 12,91,799
4.1 Credit Cards 17,626 21,773 17,641 6,03,413 7,30,894 6,30,414
4.2 Debit Cards 44,143 50,611 40,146 5,93,475 7,03,920 6,61,385
5. Prepaid Payment Instruments 46,072 53,811 49,743 2,13,323 2,15,558 1,97,696
6. Paper-based Instruments 11,238 10,414 6,704 82,46,065 78,24,822 56,27,108
Total - Retail Payments (2+3+4+5+6) 2,42,473 3,48,933 4,42,557 3,62,71,304 3,86,37,726 4,14,86,348
Total Digital Payments (1+2+3+4+5) 2,32,602 3,40,026 4,37,445 16,37,13,425 16,19,69,379 14,14,59,089
Total Payments (1+2+3+4+5+6) 2,43,839 3,50,440 4,44,149 17,19,59,490 16,97,94,201 14,70,86,197
Notes: 1. RTGS system includes customer and inter-bank transactions only.
2. The figures for cards are for transactions at point of sale (POS) terminals only, which include online transactions.
3. Figures in the columns might not add up to the total due to rounding off of numbers.
4. -: nil
Source: RBI.
77Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
10.1 Digital Payments
Chart IV.35: RBI – Digital Payments Index
IV.68 In recent years, the Reserve Bank has
been encouraging wider adoption of digital
modes of payments and strengthening of the
required infrastructure. The pandemic provided
a fillip to the faster adoption of retail digital
payments. 24x7x365 availability of Centralised
Payment Systems (CPS) i.e., National Electronic
Funds Transfer (NEFT) and Real Time Gross
Settlement (RTGS), with effect from December
2019 and December 2020, respectively, reduced
risks and enhanced efficiency of the entire
payments ecosystem. Subsidies provided
through the Payment Infrastructure Development
Fund (PIDF), operationalised in January 2021,
Source: RBI.
have helped to develop infrastructure in Tier-3
to Tier-6 centres and north-eastern states and
Bank launched a composite Digital Payments
are expected to give a boost, going forward.
Index (DPI) in January 2021, comprising five
Granting non-bank Payment System Providers
broad parameters (weights indicated in brackets)
(PSPs)24 direct access to the CPS will widen the
– (i) payment enablers (25 per cent); (ii) payment
reach of digital financial services to all segments
infrastructure – demand-side factors (10 per
of users.
cent); (iii) payment infrastructure – supply-side
IV.69 RTGS, which facilitates high value
factors (15 per cent); (iv) payment performance
transactions on real time basis, dominates the
(45 per cent); and (v) consumer centricity (5 per
digital payments space in value terms. On the
cent). The index is computed semi-annually, with
other hand, Unified Payments Interface (UPI)
March 2018 as the base period (Chart IV.35).
from the retail segment has a majority share
10.2 ATMs
in transaction volume. The robust growth in
transactions using innovative payment systems IV.70 During 2020-21, the total number of
such as National Electronic Toll Collection automated teller machines (ATMs) (on-site
(NETC), BHIM Aadhaar Pay and Aadhaar and off-site) operated by SCBs increased for
Enabled Payment System (AePS) points to the second consecutive year after declining in
greater acceptability of contactless payments 2018-19. The number of PSB ATMs, however,
during the year (Table IV.20). To measure the declined in their pursuit of greater cost efficiency
progress of digitisation and assess the deepening by leveraging network externalities (Table IV.21,
and penetration of digital payments, the Reserve Appendix Table IV.7).
24 These include Prepaid Payment Instrument (PPI) issuers, Card Networks and White Label Automated Teller Machine (ATM)
operators.
78OPERATIONS AND PERFORMANCE OF COMMERCIAL BANKS
Table IV.21: Number of ATMs
(At end-March)
Sr. Bank Group On-Site ATMs Off-site ATMs Total Number of ATMs
No.
2020 2021 2020 2021 2020 2021
I PSBs 80,691 78,007 57,855 59,106 1,38,546 1,37,113
II PVBs 30,483 34,828 38,886 37,566 69,369 72,394
III FBs 225 690 678 1,135 903 1,825
IV SFBs* 1,870 2,079 56 52 1,926 2,131
V PBs# 2 1 14 111 16 112
VI WLAs - - - - 23,597 25,013
VII All SCBs (I to V) 1,13,271 1,15,605 97,489 97,970 2,10,760 2,13,575
VIII Total (VI+VII) - - - - 2,34,357 2,38,588
Notes: 1. *: 10 scheduled SFBs as at end-March 2020 and end-March 2021.
2. #: 1 scheduled PB (Paytm Payments Bank) as at end-March 2020 and end-March 2021.
Source: RBI.
IV.71 The densely populated urban and evenly distributed across geographies, those of
metropolitan areas accounted for a majority—56.3 other bank-groups were skewed towards urban
per cent—share in total SCBs’ ATMs at end and metropolitan areas. In contrast, a majority
March 2021. While ATMs of PSBs were more of whi te label ATMs (WLAs) (around 85 per cent)
were concentrated in rural and semi-urban areas
Table IV.22: Geographical Distribution of
(Table IV.22).
ATMs – Bank-Group wise
(At end-March 2021)
11. Consumer Protection
Sr. Bank Group Rural Semi - Urban Metro- Total
No. Urban politan
IV.72 The Reserve Bank strives to ensure bank
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 customer protection through an efficient and
I PSBs 28,255 39,349 39,725 29,784 1,37,113 effective grievance redressal mechanism. With
(20.6) (28.7) (29.0) (21.7) (100.0)
II PVBs 6,140 18,197 18,918 29,139 72,394 the advent of technology-based banking products
(8.5) (25.1) (26.1) (40.3) (100.0)
and growing usage of these products by vulnerable
III FBs 96 365 413 951 1,825
(5.3) (20.0) (22.6) (52.1) (100.0) sections of the society, financial literacy,
IV SFBs* 241 665 651 574 2,131
(11.3) (31.2) (30.5) (26.9) (100.0) consumer protection and awareness assume
V PBs# 21 28 28 35 112 critical importance. The launch of the Reserve
(18.8) (25.0) (25.0) (31.3) (100.0)
VI All SCBs 34,753 58,604 59,735 60,483 2,13,575 Bank - Integrated Ombudsman Scheme (RB-
(I to V) (16.3) (27.4) (28.0) (28.3) (100.0)
IOS) on November 12, 2021 aims at developing
VII All SCBs 3.0 1.3 2.2 -0.4 1.3
(y-o-y growth) a hassle-free grievance redressal mechanism for
VIII WLAs 13,187 8,162 2,296 1,368 25,013
(52.7) (32.6) (9.2) (5.5) (100.0) customers of the entities regulated by the Reserve
IX WLAs 14.3 3.8 -7.8 -19.8 6.0 Bank. The Scheme, while doing away with the
(y-o-y growth)
jurisdictions of each ombudsman office, covers
Notes: 1. Figures in parentheses indicate percentage share of total
ATMs under each bank group. customer complaints on all areas of ‘deficiency
2.*: 10 scheduled SFBs as at end-March 2020 and end-March
in services’ rendered by the REs and as defined
2021.
3. #: 1scheduled PB (Paytm Payments Bank) as at end-March
in the Scheme, except those mentioned in the
2020 and end-March 2021.
Source: RBI. exclusion list.
79Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Table IV.23: Nature of Complaints at BOs more than 73 per cent of the total complaints
received during 2020-21. Moreover, the share of
Categories 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
complaints from metropolitan customers almost
ATM/ Debit Cards 29,603 69,205 60,203
Mobile / Electronic Banking 12,051 39,627 44,385 doubled in 2020-21 over 2018-19 levels, while
Credit Cards 13,172 26,616 40,721
the share of complaints from urban customers
Failure to Meet Commitments 11,948 22,758 35,999
Non-observance of Fair Practice Code 39,188 40,124 33,898 reduced significantly during the same period
Levy of Charges without Prior Notice 7,518 17,268 20,949
(Chart IV.36a).
Loans and Advances 6,380 14,731 20,218
Non-adherence to BCSBI Codes 5,921 11,758 14,490 IV.75 PSBs and PVBs accounted for more than
Deposit Accounts 8,520 10,188 8,580
three-fourth of the total complaints received
Pension Payments 7,331 6,884 4,966
Remittances 3,277 4,130 3,394 during 2020-21. Almost all pension-related
DSAs and Recovery Agents 602 1,474 2,440
complaints were filed against PSBs, which are
Para-Banking 1,127 1,134 1,236
Notes and Coins 799 551 332 the traditional preference of pensioners. On the
Others 31,339 30,844 39,686 other hand, a large share of complaints (55 per
Out of Purview of BO Scheme 5,956 9,412 10,250
cent) relating to levy of charges without prior
Total 1,84,732 3,06,704 3,41,747
notice were filed against PVBs (Chart IV.36b,
Note: Data pertain to April to March.
Source: Various offices of Banking Ombudsman. Appendix Table IV.8).
IV.76 Deposit insurance plays a crucial role
IV.73 During 2020-21, the number of
in protecting the interests of small depositors
complaints with Banking Ombudsman (BO) rose
and thereby ensuring public confidence in the
at a lower pace relative to the preceding year,
banking system. The Deposit Insurance and
with grievances pertaining to ATMs/debit cards,
Credit Guarantee Corporation (DICGC) extends
mobile/electronic banking and credit cards
deposit insurance to all commercial banks
contributing 42.5 per cent of the total complaints
including LABs, PBs, SFBs, RRBs and co-
(Table IV.23).
operative banks. By end-March 2021, 98.1 per
IV.74 The share of complaints emanating from cent depositors were insurance-protected under
urban and metropolitan areas accounted for the ₹5 lakh cover, with the amount of deposits
Chart IV.36: Population Group-wise Distribution of Complaints and Major Complaint Types
a. Population Group-wise Complaints Received b. Bank-Group wise Break-up of Major Complaint
at BOs Types: 2020-21
Notes: 1. Data pertain to April to March.
2. Data on population group was not available for 120,671 complaints during 2020-21, i.e., for 35% of complaints. Hence the available data
has been extrapolated to all the complaints retaining the proportions from the available data.
Source: Various offices of Banking Ombudsman.
80OPERATIONS AND PERFORMANCE OF COMMERCIAL BANKS
Table IV.24: Bank Group-wise Insured Deposits Monetary Fund (IMF)26 highlights the progress
(As at March 31, 2021)
made by India in dealing with the last mile
(Amount in ` crore)
problem of financial inclusion and increasing the
Bank Group No. of Total Total ID as
Insured Assessable Insured percentage popularity of financial products in the previous
Banks Deposits Deposits of AD
(AD)* (ID)* decade. The Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Yojana
1 2 3 4 5 (PMJDY) and its linkage with Aadhar and mobile
Public Sector Banks 12 85,23,813 47,91,132 56.2 phones created the JAM trinity, which was a
Private Sector Banks** 37 42,77,955 17,01,193 39.8
Foreign Banks 45 7,06,141 47,970 6.8 game changer not only for the welfare schemes
Regional Rural Banks 43 4,66,478 3,91,451 83.9
Co-operative Banks 1,919 9,92,491 6,88,790 69.4 under direct benefit transfers (DBTs) but also for
Local Area Banks 2 892 714 80.1
financial inclusion. Over the last decade, India
Total 2,0581,49,67,770 76,21,251 50.9
has taken long strides in expanding the number of
Notes: 1. *: Based on deposit base of September 2020 i.e., six months
prior to the reference date. commercial bank branches and deposit accounts,
2. **: Data on private sector banks is inclusive of ten small
finance banks and six payment banks. on a scale comparable with other emerging
Source: Deposit Insurance and Credit Guarantee Corporation.
market economies (EMEs), although below levels
covered by insurance close to 51 per cent achieved by advanced economies (AEs) (Chart
of the total (Table IV.24). IV.37a and b). With increase in banking outreach,
the number of ATMs per 100,000 adults has also
IV.77 The size of the Deposit Insurance Fund
grown, however, penetration remained low in an
(DIF), which is used for settlement of claims
international comparison (Chart IV.37c). The
of depositors of banks taken into liquidation/
number of loan accounts with commercial banks
amalgamation stood at ₹1,29,904 crore as
per 1,000 adults has also remained lower than
on March 31, 2021, yielding a reserve ratio of
country peers (Chart IV.37d).
1.70 per cent from 1.61 per cent a year ago25.
Moreover, claims amounting to ₹993 crore were IV.79 The National Strategy for Financial
processed and sanctioned during 2020-21, out Inclusion 2019-2024 (NSFI) and the National
of which claims amounting to ₹564 crore were Strategy for Financial Education 2020-2025
in respect of nine co-operative banks. The net (NSFE) was released by the Reserve Bank in
outgo of funds towards settlement of claims was, January 2020 and August 2020, respectively,
however, lower on account of recovery of ₹569 which provide a road map for accelerating the
crore during 2020-21. process of financial inclusion and promoting
financial literacy and consumer protection. The
12. Financial Inclusion
Reserve Bank introduced the Financial Inclusion
IV.78 Financial inclusion acts as a driver of Index (FI Index) in August 2021 to monitor the
balanced economic growth. The latest Financial progress of policy initiatives to promote financial
Access Survey (FAS) of the International inclusion (Box IV.4).
25 Defined as deposit insurance fund as a per cent of insured deposits.
26 Available at https://data.imf.org/?sk=E5DCAB7E-A5CA-4892-A6EA-598B5463A34C
81Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Chart IV.37: Progress in Financial Inclusion in Select Emerging and Advanced Economies
a. Number of commercial bank branches b. Number of deposit accounts with
per 100,000 adults commercial banks per 1,000 adults
c. Number of ATMs per 100,000 adults d. Number of loan accounts with commercial
banks per 1,000 adults
Source: Financial Access Survey, IMF.
IV.80 Two distinct pillars of financial inclusion digital technology (FinTech); and (b) greater
progress in India are: (a) advancement in participation of women. Financial inclusion
Box IV.4: Financial Inclusion Index
The Financial Inclusion Index (FI Index) released by Usage (45 per cent) and Quality (20 per cent) (Chart 1).
the Reserve Bank in August 2021 aggregates relevant Out of a total 97 indicators, 90 are primary indicators and
indicators into a composite index to map the progress the remaining 7 indicators are inequality measures which
of financial inclusion in the country. The index captures are computed as Gini coefficient based on Lorenz curve
the expansion of banking, investments, insurance, postal analysis. Indicators are adjusted for inflation by applying
as well as the pension sector and is responsive to ease of Consumer Price Index (CPI), wherever necessary. As
access, availability, extent of usage and quality of services, selected indicators are measured in different units, they
inequality and deficiency in services, extent of financial are normalised before aggregation based on the following
literacy and consumer protection in the formal financial formula:
system.
Similar to the methodology used by the United Nations
Development Programme (UNDP) for computation of the
Human Development Index (HDI) and Human Poverty
where Y represent the ith indicator and t the desired goal
Index (HPI), the FI Index is based on three sub-indices i i
of the ith indicator.
(weights indicated in brackets) viz., Access (35 per cent),
(Contd...)
82OPERATIONS AND PERFORMANCE OF COMMERCIAL BANKS
Chart 1: FI – Sub-indices and Dimensions
Source: RBI
Since the indicators are normalised with respect to complete calculated dimensions are used to construct three sub-
absence of financial inclusion, there is no base year for the indices which in turn are aggregated to construct the
index (i.e., the value of each constituent indicator depends composite FI Index.
on its own historical progress so far). Consequently, the
Data on the index available so far suggest that FI-Access
lowest value of each normalised indicator is ‘0’ and the
is markedly higher than FI-Usage and FI-Quality. While
highest value is ‘100’.
recognising the progress made in providing financial
The normalised indicators are aggregated on the basis access, it also highlights the ground that need to be
of exogenously determined weights to arrive at a single covered for improved usage and quality of financial
measure of financial inclusion for each dimension. The services (Chart 2).
Chart 2: FI Index and Sub-indices
a. Access b. Usage
c. Quality d. FI Index
Note: Some of the data points for March-21 are provisional.
Source: RBI.
Reference
Sharma A.K., Sengupta S., Roy I., & Phukan S. (2021), RBI Bulletin, Vol. LXXV, No. 9, pp 89-95, September 2021. Available
at https://www.rbi.org.in/Scripts/BS_ViewBulletin.aspx
83Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Chart IV.38: Gender-wise Share in Credit and Deposits
a. Deposits b. Credit
Source: Basic statistical returns I and II (annual), RBI.
acts as a key facilitator for reducing gender objective of encouraging banks to adopt a planned
inequality and helps engender women’s economic and structured approach towards financial
empowerment. As of December 15, 2021, 24.54 inclusion. FIP returns submitted by banks show
crore bank accounts were opened for women that progress has been made in provisioning of
beneficiaries under PMJDY, accounting for 55.6 banking services in the rural areas and with time,
per cent of the total account holders under the their usage have also increased. However, the
scheme. Over the last decade, the number of growth of traditional brick and mortar banking
branches has remained tepid, while banking
loan accounts and outstanding loans of female
services through BCs have gained greater
borrowers grew at a CAGR of 43.2 per cent
prominence in the last few years. At end-March
and 22.7 per cent, as against 29.0 per cent and
2021, BC outlets constituted more than 95 per
16.4 per cent, respectively, for male borrowers.
cent of the total banking outlets in villages, led by
The number of deposit accounts and deposit
the rapid growth in the number of BCs in villages
balances of females also grew at a faster rate
with population more than 2,000. On the usage
than that of males, indicating reduced gender
front, Basic Savings Bank Deposit Accounts
disparity in the usage of formal financial services
(BSBDA) and Information and Communication
(Chart IV.38). Women-centric financial products
Technology (ICT) based transactions through
and alternative delivery channels such as women
BCs witnessed strong growth during 2020-21
business correspondents (BCs) and women self-
(Table IV.25).
help groups (SHGs), helped in this direction.
12.2 Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Yojana
Notwithstanding these developments, further
progress needs to be made to achieve greater IV.82 Since its inception in August 2014,
financial equality and inclusion of women. PMJDY has been contributing towards financial
inclusion of the unserved and underserved
12.1 Financial Inclusion Plans
population of the country. Over the span of
IV.81 Financial Inclusion Plans (FIPs) were seven years, the number of total beneficiaries
introduced by the Reserve Bank in 2010 with the under PMJDY expanded to 44.12 crores, with
84OPERATIONS AND PERFORMANCE OF COMMERCIAL BANKS
Table IV.25: Progress in Financial Inclusion Plan
Sr. Particulars End-March End-March End-March End-March End-March
No. 2010 2015 2019 2020 2021*
1 Banking Outlets in Villages- Branches 33,378 49,571 52,489 54,561 55,112
2 Banking Outlets in Villages>2000-BCs 8,390 90,877 1,30,687 1,49,106 8,50,406^
3 Banking Outlets in Villages<2000-BCs 25,784 4,08,713 4,10,442 3,92,069 3,40,019
4 Total Banking Outlets in Villages – BCs 34,174 4,99,590 5,41,129 5,41,175 11,90,425^
5 Banking Outlets in Villages – Other Modes 142 4,552 3,537 3,481 2,542
6 Banking Outlets in Villages –Total 67,694 5,53,713 5,97,155 5,99,217 12,48,079
7 Urban Locations Covered Through BCs 447 96,847 4,47,170 6,35,046 4,26,745^
8 BSBDA - Through Branches (No. in Lakh) 600 2,103 2,547 2,616 2,659
9 BSBDA - Through Branches (Amt. in Crore) 4,400 36,498 87,765 95,831 1,18,392
10 BSBDA - Through BCs (No. in Lakh) 130 1,878 3,195 3,388 3,796
11 BSBDA - Through BCs (Amt. in Crore) 1,100 7,457 53,195 72,581 87,623
12 BSBDA - Total (No. in Lakh) 735 3,981 5,742 6,004 6,455
13 BSBDA - Total (Amt. in Crore) 5,500 43,955 1,40,960 1,68,412 2,06,015
14 OD Facility Availed in BSBDAs (No. in Lakh) 2 76 59 64 60
15 OD Facility Availed in BSBDAs (Amt. in Crore) 10 1,991 443 529 534
16 KCC - Total (No. in Lakh) 240 426 491 475 466
17 KCC - Total (Amt. in Crore) 1,24,000 4,38,229 6,68,044 6,39,069 6,72,624
18 GCC - Total (No. in Lakh) 10 92 120 202 202
19 GCC - Total (Amt. in Crore) 3,500 1,30,160 1,74,514 1,94,048 1,55,826
20 ICT-A/Cs-BC-Total Transactions (No. in Lakh) # 270 4,770 21,019 32,318 47,668
21 ICT-A/Cs-BC-Total Transactions (Amt. in Crore) # 700 85,980 5,91,347 8,70,643 11,48,237
Notes: 1. *: Provisional.
2. ^: Significant change in numbers is due to reclassification done by banks.
3. #: Transactions during the year.
Source: FIP returns submitted by banks.
deposits of `1.49 lakh crore deposits as on accounts, however, moderated as evident from
December 15, 202127. The majority of these the marginal decline in average balances for
accounts are maintained with PSBs and RRBs September 2021 across all bank groups (Chart
(97 per cent), with nearly two-thirds of the IV.39b). There has been a steady increase in the
total accounts operational in rural and semi- number of RuPay debit cards issued, driven by
urban areas (Chart IV.39a). The usage of these both PSBs and RRBs.
Chart IV.39: PMJDY Accounts: Distribution and Average Balance
a. Number of PMJDY Accounts b. Average Balance in PMJDY Accounts
Source: Pradhan Mantri Jan Dhan Yojana, Government of India.
27 Available at https://pmjdy.gov.in/account
85Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
12.3 New Bank Branches by SCBs Table IV.26: Tier-wise Break-up of Newly
Opened Bank Branches by SCBs
IV.83 Opening of new bank branches moderated
Centre 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
for the second consecutive year, with focus of
Tier 1 1694 2191 2266 1520
banks shifting to leveraging the BC model and (40.2) (47.5) (52.3) (49.6)
Tier 2 359 520 371 280
digitisation of banking operations, enabled by (8.5) (11.3) (8.6) (9.1)
Tier 3 620 709 568 481
automation and data analytics. During 2020-21, (14.7) (15.4) (13.1) (15.7)
Tier 4 374 361 354 262
new bank branches opened by SCBs declined by (8.9) (7.8) (8.2) (8.5)
Tier 5 472 373 282 177
29.2 per cent, on top of a contraction of 6.0 per (11.2) (8.1) (6.5) (5.8)
Tier 6 693 454 492 346
cent in the previous year. The decline occurred (16.5) (9.9) (11.4) (11.3)
Total 4212 4608 4333 3066
across all population groups as well as bank (100.0) (100.0) (100.0) (100.0)
groups, except for PSBs which increased their
Notes: 1. Tier-wise classification of centres is as follows: ‘Tier 1’
brick-and-mortar banking outreach by 15.8 per includes centres with population of 1, 00,000 and above, ‘Tier
2’ includes centres with population of 50,000 to 99,999, ‘Tier
cent as compared to a year ago (Chart IV.40). 3’ includes centres with population of 20,000 to 49,999, ‘Tier
4’ includes centres with population of 10,000 to 19,999, ‘Tier
5’ includes centres with population of 5,000 to 9,999, and
IV.84 Although fewer branches were opened
‘Tier 6’ includes centres with population of less than 5000.
across all tier centres, more than half of the 2. Data exclude ‘Administrative Offices’.
3. All population figures are as per census 2011.
new branches were opened in Tier 1 and Tier 2
4. Figures in the parentheses represent proportion of the
centres in 2020-21 (Table IV.26). branches opened in a particular area vis-à-vis the total.
Source: CISBI (erstwhile Master Office File system) database, RBI
(position as on December 01, 2021). CISBI data are dynamic
12.4 Microfinance Programme
in nature and are updated based on information as received
from banks and processed at our end.
IV.85 Microfinance involves extension of
small loans and other financial services to low-
income individuals or groups who are otherwise
deprived of access to formal financial services.
Chart IV.40: Bank and Population Group-wise Newly Over the years, microfinance programmes have
Opened Bank Branches by SCBs
played a significant role in facilitating financial
inclusion, particularly among the unbanked and
underbanked segments of the population. The
Self-Help Group – Bank Linkage Programme
(SHG – BLP) promoted by the National Bank for
Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD)
has emerged as the world’s largest microfinance
programme in terms of number of beneficiaries
and micro-credit extended.
IV.86 At end-March 2021, while SHGs’ savings
Notes: 1. Population-group wise classification of centres is as follows: ‘Rural’ with banks increased by 43.3 per cent, their
includes centres with population of less than 9,999, ‘Semi-Urban’
includes centres with population of 10,000 to 99,999, ‘Urban’ includes
loans outstanding with banks declined by 4.4 per
centres with population of 1, 00,000 to 9, 99,999 and ‘Metropolitan’
includes centres with population of 10, 00,000 and above.
cent in relation to end-March 2020 levels. Loans
2. Data exclude ‘Administrative Offices’.
3. All population figures are as per census 2011.
disbursed during 2020-21 declined by 25.2
Source: Central Information System for Banking Infrastructure (CISBI)
(erstwhile Master Office File system) database, RBI (position as on December 01, per cent in comparison to a growth of 33.2 per
2021). CISBI data are dynamic in nature and are updated based on information
as received from banks and processed at our end.
cent a year ago. Micro-credit disbursements to
86OPERATIONS AND PERFORMANCE OF COMMERCIAL BANKS
Joint Liability Groups (JLGs) and microfinance
Chart IV.41: SHGs – Average Loan Outstanding and
institutions also contracted by 30 per cent Average Savings
and 37 per cent, respectively, attributable to
subdued economic activity on account of nation-
wide lockdowns due to the pandemic (Appendix
Table IV.13).
IV.87 On an average, the amount of savings per
SHG augmented by 30.8 per cent from ₹25,531
in 2019-20 to ₹33,392 in 2020-21, whereas the
credit outstanding per SHG has decreased by 5.8
per cent from ₹1.90 lakh to ₹1.79 lakh during
the same period (Chart IV.41). The NPA ratio of
SHGs continued to improve, however, from 5.2
per cent in 2018-19 (4.9 per cent in 2019-20) to
4.7 per cent in 2020-2128.
Source: NABARD.
12.5 Credit to Micro, Small and Medium
Enterprises
The average amount of credit disbursed by PVBs,
IV.88 The number of MSME accounts
however, was much lower than that by PSBs
decelerated for all SCBs during 2020-21,
(Table IV.27).
primarily driven by PVBs and FBs. The share
12.6 Trade Receivables Discounting System
of PSBs in total MSME credit outstanding has
witnessed a secular decline since 2017-18, with IV.89 The Trade Receivables Discounting
corresponding increase in the share of PVBs. System (TReDS) was launched by the Reserve
Table IV.27: Credit Flow to the MSME Sector by SCBs
(Number of accounts in lakh, amount outstanding in ` crore)
Bank Groups Items 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
111.01 112.96 110.82 150.77
No. of accounts
(-0.86) (1.76) (-1.89) (36.05)
PSBs
8,64,597.79 8,80,032.90 8,93,314.83 9,08,659.06
Amount Outstanding
(4.30) (1.79) (1.51) (1.72)
148.33 205.30 270.62 266.81
No. of accounts
(24.03) (38.41) (31.82) (-1.41)
PVBs
4,10,760.21 5,63,678.47 6,46,988.27 7,92,041.95
Amount Outstanding
(-4.69) (37.23) (14.78) (22.42)
2.20 2.40 2.74 2.60
No. of accounts
FBs (6.28) (9.09) (14.17) (-5.11)
48,881.34 66,939.13 73,279.06 83,223.79
Amount Outstanding
(33.91) (36.94) (9.47) (13.57)
261.54 320.68 384.18 420.19
No. of accounts
(11.95) (22.61) (19.80) (9.37)
All SCBs
13,24,239.35 15,10,650.52 6,13,582.17 17,83,924.80
Amount Outstanding
(2.15) (14.08) (6.81) (10.56)
Note: Figures in the parentheses indicate y-o-y growth rates.
Source: Financial Inclusion and Development Department, RBI.
28 NABARD Annual Report 2020-21
87Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Bank in 2017 to facilitate financial inclusion of Table IV.28: Progress in MSME Financing
through TReDS
MSMEs. It is an electronic platform for financing/
(Invoices in number, amount in ` crore)
discounting trade receivables of MSMEs due
from large corporates, PSUs and government Financial Year Invoices Uploaded Invoices Financed
Invoices Amount Invoices Amount
departments with banks/NBFCs through a
2017-18 22,704 1,094.82 19,890 814.54
competitive auction process. Over the last four 2018-19 2,51,695 6,699.57 2,32,098 5,854.48
2019-20 5,30,077 13,088.27 4,77,969 11,165.86
years, there has been noteworthy growth in 2020-21 8,61,560 19,669.84 7,86,555 17,080.14
the financing of trade receivables of MSMEs
Source: RBI.
through the TReDS platform. During 2020-21,
the number of invoices uploaded and financed 12.7 Regional Banking Penetration
through the platform grew by more than 62 per
IV.90 Notwithstanding concerted efforts to
cent, with the success rate29 improving to 91.3
improve banking penetration across geographies,
per cent from 90.2 per cent in the previous year
banking outreach at the sub-national level
(Table IV.28). Going forward, with the central
remains tilted towards western, southern and
government permitting non-factor NBFCs and northern regions in terms of shares in credit,
other entities to offer factoring services, credit deposits and number of branches (Chart
supply to MSMEs through the platform is IV.42a). Accordingly, the average population
expected to increase further. Onboarding of more served per bank branch remains significantly
public sector enterprises on the TReDS can make higher in eastern, central and north-eastern
a material difference in making the scheme more regions relative to other parts of the country
effective. (Chart IV.42b).
Chart IV.42: Regional Penetration of Banks
a. Regional Shares in Deposits, Credit and Branches b. Population per Bank Branch
(At end-September 2021) (At end-September 2021)
Source: RBI and Ministry of Statistics and Program Implementation (MoSPI).
29 Defined as per cent of invoices uploaded that get financed.
88OPERATIONS AND PERFORMANCE OF COMMERCIAL BANKS
13. Regional Rural Banks pattern espouses the spirit of co-operative
federalism and aspires to achieve the goal of last
IV.91 Combining the reach, familiarity and
mile financial inclusion.
rural orientation of credit co-operatives and
professionalism of commercial banks, regional IV.92 The number of RRBs reduced from 45
rural banks (RRBs) attend to the basic banking to 43 during 2020-21, due to amalgamation
and credit needs of small farmers, agricultural of 3 RRBs in Uttar Pradesh as a part of the
labourers, artisans and other rural poor. RRBs third phase of their consolidation programme.
are jointly owned by the Government of India, Amalgamation drives in RRBs have helped boost
the concerned State Government, and the their profitability and improved their asset quality
sponsoring commercial bank. The ownership while strengthening their capital base (Box IV.5).
Box IV.5: Impact of Amalgamation of Regional Rural Banks
Since their inception in 1975, RRBs remained unprofitable in the second phase (2012-2014), RRBs across sponsor
for nearly two decades, constrained by limited banks within a state were amalgamated. The third phase of
operational flexibility, inadequate scope for expansion or amalgamation was initiated in 2018-19 on the principle of
diversification and small ticket but high-risk lending ‘One state - One RRB’ in smaller states and reduction in the
profiles. In 1994-95 the government initiated reforms number of RRBs in larger states. As a result, the number
which, coupled with capital infusion, helped them turn of RRBs reduced from 196 in 2005 to 43 at end-March
profitable. However, at end-March 2005, 42 per cent of the 2021, while the number of standalone RRBs that have
RRBs still carried legacy losses. In order to improve their never undergone any amalgamation since their inception
operational viability and to take advantage of economies came down to 9.
of scale, the government initiated a consolidation
Impact on Profitability: The share of profitable and
programme in 2005-0630.
sustainably viable31 RRBs improved continuously during
In the first phase (2005-2010), RRBs belonging to the the first two phases of amalgamation32 (Chart 1). The
same sponsor bank within a state were amalgamated; quantum of accumulated losses as a percentage of total
Chart 1: Impact of Amalgamation on Profitability
Amalgamation Phase I Phase II
Source: NABARD.
(Contd...)
30 The amalgamation process was initiated based on the recommendations of the “Advisory Committee on Flow of Credit to
Agriculture and Related Activities” (Dr.Vyas Committee, 2004) and the recommendations of the Internal Working Group on RRBs,
headed by Shri A.V. Sardesai.
31 RRBs that do not have accumulated losses and have posted net profit in the current year.
32 The impact of the third phase of amalgamation on bank financials cannot be independently gauged since the pension scheme,
implemented from April 2018, has also had a simultaneous impact.
89Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Chart 2: Impact of Amalgamation on Capital and Leverage
Amalgamation Phase I Phase II
Note: Leverage ratio of RRBs is calculated as a percentage of core capital (share capital+reserves-accumulated losses) to the total assets of the bank.
Source: NABARD.
assets declined throughout the two phases. RoA increased decreased, partly reflecting increased professionalism and
steeply during the first phase but declined after 2009-10 efficiencies of scale amongst RRBs. Post the AQR, while
due to withdrawal of income tax concessions given to them the GNPAs of both SCBs and RRBs increased, the increase
and greater recognition of asset quality. in the latter was less sharp than in the former. This asset
quality deterioration of RRBs was due to more transparent
Impact on Capital Position: Improved profitability of
recognition of NPAs that were concentrated in economically
RRBs post amalgamation, coupled with capital infusion in
aspirational regions (Chart 3).
weak banks, boosted their leverage ratio, as well as the
reserves to capital ratio33 (Chart 2). The percentage of Impact on Business Parameters: The average growth rate
RRBs requiring recapitalisation to achieve regulatory norm in key business parameters viz., credit and deposits peaked
of 9 per cent CRAR decreased in the post amalgamation during the first phase of amalgamation. While the C-D ratio
phases. consistently improved even subsequently, growth in credit
and deposits was less sanguine. After the second phase of
Impact on Asset Quality: RRBs have historically had
amalgamation, the C-D ratio reached a trough in 2016-
higher GNPA ratio than SCBs. Since the beginning of the
17 due to sharp increase in deposits post demonetisation
amalgamation process, the difference between the two has
(Chart 4).
Chart 3: Impact of Amalgamation on Asset Quality
Source: NABARD and DBIE, RBI.
(Contd...)
33 The concept of CRAR was introduced for RRBs only in 2007, and consequently, data on CRAR is not available for the period prior
to amalgamation. Therefore, leverage ratio and reserves to capital ratio are used for assessing the impact of amalgamation on the
capital position of RRBs.
90OPERATIONS AND PERFORMANCE OF COMMERCIAL BANKS
Chart 4: Impact of Amalgamation on Business Parameters
Amalgamation Phase I Phase II
Source: NABARD
An additional benefit of the amalgamation drive was a per cent after the second phase of amalgamation. The
renewed focus on priority sector lending. The share of PSL third phase of the consolidation programme is expected
in gross loans and advances increased from an average to further improve profitability, capital positions and asset
of 76 per cent during the pre-amalgamation phase to 88 quality of RRBs.
13.1 Balance Sheet Analysis IV.95 Priority sector lending with a focus on
agriculture is the mainstay of RRBs’ operations.
IV.93 During 2020-21, ₹400 crores (of which
Central Government’s share was ₹200 crore) was Table IV.29: Consolidated Balance Sheet of
Regional Rural Banks
sanctioned towards recapitalisation of 7 RRBs
(Amount in ` Crore)
which had CRAR less than 9 per cent. A few
RRBs also received state governments’ share of Sr. Item At Y-o-Y Growth in
No. end-March Percent
recapitalisation sanctioned during the previous
2020 2021P 2019-20 2020-21
financial year. Catalysed by capital infusion
1 2 3 4 5 6
and bolstered by growth in borrowings and 1 Share Capital 7,849 8,393 16.5 6.9
2 Reserves 26,814 30,348 5.6 13.2
deposits, the liabilities of RRBs grew robustly
3 Deposits 4,78,737 5,25,226 10.2 9.7
during 2020-21. Borrowings were mainly from 3.1 Current 10,750 11,499 -3.4 7.0
3.2 Savings 2,44,414 2,71,516 9.1 11.1
NABARD, aided by the Special Liquidity Facility 3.3 Term 2,23,573 2,42,211 12.2 8.3
4 Borrowings 54,393 67,864 1.6 24.8
(SLF) and relaxations in eligibility criteria for
4.1 from NABARD 46,120 61,588 -1.6 33.5
availing refinance. 4.2 Sponsor Bank 4,519 3,444 20.6 -23.8
4.3 Others 3,754 2,832 28.7 -24.6
5 Other Liabilities 20,227 19,754 13.2 -2.3
IV.94 The availability of funds helped RRBs Total liabilities/Assets 5,88,021 6,51,585 9.3 10.8
6 Cash in Hand 2,860 2,954 -1.8 3.3
sustain their credit growth at rates higher than 7 Balances with RBI 16,744 18,947 -6.4 13.2
8 Balances in current account 7,613 5,987 39.2 -21.4
SCBs, as also their own 5-year average growth
9 Investments 2,50,859 2,75,658 10.9 9.9
rate of 10.5 per cent. As a result, the C-D ratio 10 Loans and Advances (net) 2,80,220 3,15,181 7.0 12.5
11 Fixed Assets 1,235 1,229 -3.0 -0.5
of RRBs improved to 63.6 per cent at end- 12 Other Assets # 28,490 31,629 27.7 11.0
12.1 Accumulated Losses 6,467 8,264 124.0 27.8
March 2021 from 62.2 per cent at end-March
Note: 1. #: Includes accumulated losses
2020. During 2020-21, the prevalence of excess
2. P Provisional.
3. Totals may not tally on account of rounding off of figures in
liquidity also prompted RRBs to park more
` crore. Percentage variations could be slightly different as
absolute numbers have been rounded off to ` crore.
funds with the Reserve Bank (Table IV.29).
Source: NABARD.
91Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Table IV.30: Purpose-wise Outstanding Table IV.31: Financial Performance of
Advances by RRBs Regional Rural Banks
(At end-March) (Amount in ` Crore)
(Amount in ` Crore)
Sr. Item Amount Y-o-Y Change in
Sr. Purpose 2020 2021P No. per cent
No.
2019-20 2020-21P 2019-20 2020-21
1 2 3 4
1 2 3 4 5 6
I Priority (i to v) 2,70,182 3,00,962
Per cent of total loans outstanding 90.6 90.1 A Income (i + ii) 49,452 53,858 15.0 8.9
i Interest income 43,698 46,803 12.2 7.1
i Agriculture 2,08,762 2,33,145
ii Other income 5,754 7,055 41.8 22.6
ii Micro small and medium enterprises 35,240 39,543
B Expenditure (i+ii+iii) 51,660 52,176 18.4 1.0
iii Education 2,358 2,132 i Interest expended 25,985 25,588 9.6 -1.5
vi Housing 19,814 21,127 ii Operating expenses 20,076 19,768 45.4 -1.5
v Others 4,008 5,016 of which, Wage bill 14,654 15,101 56.2 3.0
iii Provisions and 5,599 6,819 -8.5 21.8
II Non-priority (i to vi) 28,032 33,209
contingencies
Per cent of total loans outstanding 9.4 9.9 of which, Income Tax 931 1,279 12.3 37.5
i Agriculture 9 29 C Profit
ii Micro small and medium enterprises 495 434 i Operating profit 2,972 8,304 -45.6 179.5
iii Education 74 92 ii Net profit -2,208 1,682 -
D Total Average Assets 5,55,660 6,17,305 7.2 11.1
iv Housing 3,538 4,347
E Financial ratios #
v Personal Loans 7,069 8,311
i Operating profit 0.5 1.3
vi Others 16,847 19,996 ii Net profit -0.4 0.3
Total (I+II) 2,98,214 3,34,171 iii Income (a + b) 8.9 8.7
(a) Interest income 7.9 7.6
Notes: 1. P: Provisional (b) Other income 1.0 1.1
2. Totals may not tally on account of rounding off of figures in
iv Expenditure (a+b+c) 9.3 8.5
` crore.
(a) Interest expended 4.7 4.1
Source: NABARD.
(b) Operating expenses 3.6 3.2
of which, Wage bill 2.6 2.4
(c) Provisions and 1.0 1.1
During 2020-21, agricultural lending constituted contingencies
F Analytical Ratios (%)
70 per cent of total loans and advances of RRBs
Gross NPA Ratio 10.4 9.4
(Table IV.30). Even though their total asset size CRAR 10.3 10.2
was only 3.3 per cent of that of SCBs, their Notes: 1. P- Provisional
2. # Financial ratios are percentages with respect to average
loans to the sector were 16.8 per cent of the
total assets.
SCBs’ advances. With all except 3 RRBs lending 3. Totals may not tally and percentage variations could be
slightly different on account of rounding off of figures in
more than 75 per cent of the previous year’s ` crore.
4. Provisions & Contingencies include Provision for Income Tax/
ANBC to the priority sector, they overachieved Income Tax paid.
Source: NABARD.
their target by 17 per cent in 2020-21 (Appendix
Table IV.15).
During 2020-21, the total volume of PSLCs
13.2 Performance of RRBs traded by RRBs grew by 26 per cent and they
accounted for 33 per cent of the total volume of
IV.96 During 2020-21, RRBs, as a whole, turned
PSLCs traded by all banks.
around from losses in the preceding two years
and reported net profit despite a moderation in IV.97 During 2020-21, even as 30 of the 43
their interest income as their interest expenses RRBs posted net profit (Appendix Table IV.14),
contracted (Table IV.31). Moreover, RRBs 17 RRBs carried accumulated losses of ₹8,264
effectively utilised their high priority sector crore as at end-March 2021, and 16 of them had
lending portfolio (particularly agriculture) to CRARs less than the regulatory minimum of 9
augment their income through sale of PSLCs. per cent.
92OPERATIONS AND PERFORMANCE OF COMMERCIAL BANKS
IV.98 In the budget estimates for 2021-22, the Table IV.32: Profile of Local Area Banks
(At end-March)
Central Government allocated ₹1,200 crore for
(Amount in ` crore)
recapitalisation of RRBs, which is expected to
2019-20 2020-21
further strengthen their capital buffers and help
1. Assets 1026.0 1170.8
enhance their credit disbursement to the rural
(10.8) (14.1)
2. Deposits 813.8 952.5
poor.
(9.0) (17.0)
3. Gross Advances 660.5 769.2
IV.99 According to the Fraud Vulnerability (18.0) (16.5)
Index (VINFRA) that measures adherence Notes: Figures in parenthesis represent y-o-y growth in per cent.
Source: Off-site returns, global operations, RBI.
to fraud management guidelines, out of the
42 RRBs (for which data are available for 14.1 Financial Performance of LABs
2020-21), 41 RRBs were categorised as Grade
IV.102 The profitability of LABs improved
A, indicating least vulnerability. However,
during 2020-21 as the contraction in operating
being a self-assessment tool, the gradation
expenses, especially the wage bill, outweighed
does not completely preclude the vulnerability
that in non-interest income, which resulted in
of a bank against fraud. On the other hand,
boosting profitability ratios (Table IV.33).
the Vulnerability Index for Cyber Security
Framework (VICS), which is also a self- Table IV.33: Financial Performance of
Local Area Banks
assessment tool, during 2020-21, indicated 21
(At end-March)
out of the 43 RRBs were categorised as Grade
Amount Y-o-Y growth
A, while 6 RRBs fell under Grade C, reflecting
(in ` crore) (in per cent)
the need for strengthening their cyber security
2020 2021 2019-20 2020-21
framework (CSF).
1. Income (i+ii) 135 148 14.9 9.5
i. Interest income 107 123 10.6 14.8
ii. Other income 28 25 35.0 -10.4
14. Local Area Banks 2. Expenditure (i+ii+iii) 121 122 13.9 0.2
i. Interest expended 52 55 14.8 6.5
IV.100 Local Area Banks (LABs) were set up ii. Provisions and 13 20 53.8 47.1
contingencies
as private limited companies with the objective iii. Operating expenses 56 47 6.7 -16.7
of which, wage bill 26 22 8.1 -15.9
of enabling local institutions to mobilise rural 3. Profit
i. Operating profit/loss 27 46 37.3 69.7
savings and strengthen institutional credit
ii. Net profit/loss 14 27 24.6 91.3
mechanisms in local areas (up to three contiguous 4. Net Interest Income 55 68 6.9 22.7
5. Total Assets 1026 1171 10.8 14.1
district towns). During 2020-21, the Reserve 6. Financial Ratios @
i. Operating Profit 2.7 3.9
Bank cancelled the banking licence issued to ii. Net Profit 1.4 2.3
iii. Income 13.2 12.7
Subhadra Local Area Bank Ltd., Kolhapur,
iv. Interest Income 10.4 10.5
Maharashtra and consequently, the number of v. Other Income 2.8 2.2
vi. Expenditure 11.8 10.4
LABs operational in the country reduced to two, vii. Interest Expended 5.0 4.7
viii. Operating Expenses 5.5 4.0
accounting for a mere 0.006 per cent of the total ix. Wage Bill 2.6 1.9
x. Provisions and 1.3 1.7
assets of SCBs as at end-March 2021.
contingencies
xi. Net Interest Income 5.4 5.8
IV.101 The consolidated balance sheet of LABs
Notes: 1. Financial ratios for 2019-20 and 2020-21 are calculated
expanded during 2020-21. However, the credit– based on the asset of current year only.
2. ‘Wage Bill’ is taken as payments to and provisions for
deposit ratio remained unchanged at around 81 employees.
3. @: Ratios as per cent of average assets of last two years.
per cent (Table IV.32).
Source: Off-site returns, global operations, RBI.
93Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
15. Small Finance Banks Table IV.34: Consolidated Balance Sheet of
Small Finance Bank
IV.103 Small finance banks (SFBs), set up in (At end-March)
2016, provide a savings vehicle for underserved (Amount in ` crore)
sections of the population and also meet
Sr. 2020 2021 Y-o-Y growth
No. (in per cent)
credit needs of small borrowers, through high
2020-21
technology low-cost operations. These banks are
1 Share Capital 5,150.9 5,375.4 4.4
expected to deploy 75 per cent of their ANBC 2 Reserves & Surplus 11,046.9 14,800.3 34.0
in priority sectors, with at least 50 per cent 3 Tier II Bonds 3,795.4 2,468.0 -35.0
4 Deposits 82,487.8 1,09,472.5 32.7
below ₹25 lakh. As of November 2021, twelve
4.1 Current Demand 2,381.2 3,964.2 66.5
Deposits
SFBs were operational in the country, including
4.2 Savings 10,283.5 22,198.3 115.9
recently licenced Shivalik Small Finance Bank
4.3 Term 69,823.0 83,310.0 19.3
Ltd. and Unity Small Finance Bank Ltd. 5 Borrowings 30,004.2 27,828.2 -7.3
(Including Tier II Bonds)
15.1 Balance Sheet of SFBs 5.1 Bank 3,783.8 1,366.4 -63.9
5.2 Others 26,220.5 26,461.8 0.9
IV.104 Since their inception, the consolidated 6 Other Liabilities & provisions 4,078.4 6,076.3 49.0
Total liabilities/Assets 1,32,768.2 1,63,552.5 23.2
balance sheet of SFBs has been growing at a
7 Cash in Hand 975.9 1,052.2 7.8
pace higher than that of SCBs, mainly reflecting 8 Balances with RBI 4,082.4 5,869.2 43.8
9 Other Bank Balances/ 8,700.9 12,309.1 41.5
inorganic growth in their operations. During
Balances with Financial
Institutions
2020-21, this was aided by higher deposits on
10 Investments 24,203.1 30,659.8 26.7
the liabilities side. With SFBs offering lucrative
11 Loans and Advances 90,576.1 1,08,612.6 19.9
interest rates on savings accounts, the share of 12 Fixed Assets 1,649.3 1,676.3 1.6
13 Other Assets 2,580.4 3,373.2 30.7
CASA in their total deposits increased to 23.9
Note: Data pertain to ten SFBs operational as at end March 2021.
per cent in 2020-21, from 15.4 per cent in
Source: Off-site returns (domestic operations), RBI.
2019-20. On the assets side, growth was
supported by higher accretion to investments.
15.3 Financial Performance of SFBs
Although loans and advances was the dominant
IV.106 Despite the significant acceleration in
constituent—with share of more than 66 per
operating profits during 2020-21, net profits of
cent of total assets—their growth decelerated,
reflecting the overall system wide anaemic credit
Table IV.35: Purpose-wise Outstanding
growth (Table IV.34). Advances by Small Finance Banks
(Share in total advances)
15.2 Priority Sector Lending of SFBs
Purpose 31-Mar-20 31-Mar-21
IV.105 The share of SFBs’ PSL in total lending
I Priority (i to v) 76.0 71.8
declined for the fourth consecutive year during Per cent to total loans outstanding
i. Agriculture and allied activities 22.1 21.8
2020-21, with the non-priority sector accounting
ii. Micro small and medium enterprises 34.4 25.9
for more than 28 per cent of total loans as at iii. Education 0.1 0.1
iv. Housing 3.8 4.3
end-March 2021. Within the priority sector,
v. Others 15.7 19.7
micro, small and medium enterprises remained II Non-priority (i to vi) 24.0 28.2
Total (I+II) 100.0 100.0
the main focus of SFBs’ lending, although their
share declined (Table IV.35). Source: Off-site returns (domestic operations), RBI.
94OPERATIONS AND PERFORMANCE OF COMMERCIAL BANKS
Table IV.36: Financial Performance of 16. Payments Banks
Small Finance Banks
(At end-March) IV.107 Payments banks (PBs) were set up as
(Amount in ` crore) differentiated banks that harness technology
Sr. Item 2020 2021 Y-o-Y to further financial inclusion by providing low-
No. growth
cost banking solutions to small businesses,
(in per
cent) low-income households and other entities in
2020-21
the unorganised sector. By end-March 2021,
1 2 3 4 5
six PBs were operational in the country. Unlike
A Income (i + ii) 19,219.1 22,499.9 17.1
commercial banks, PBs are not permitted to
i Interest Income 16,947.9 19,523.4 15.2
undertake lending activities, with restrictions
ii Other Income 2,271.2 2,976.4 31.1
B Expenditure (i+ii+iii) 17,251.1 20,462.2 18.6 on deposit balances per customer. The Reserve
i Interest Expended 7,927.7 9,122.2 15.1 Bank’s April 2021 move to enhance the limit
ii Operating Expenses 7,152.0 7,549.0 5.6
of the maximum deposit balance per customer
of which, Staff Expenses 3,811.2 4,301.8 12.9
from ₹1 lakh to ₹2 lakh is expected to grant
iiiProvisions and contingencies 2,171.5 3,791.0 74.6
C Profit (Before Tax) 2,678.6 2,580.9 -3.6 banks more flexibility in their operations.
i Operating Profit (EBPT) 4,141.4 5,828.7 40.7
16.1 Balance Sheet of PBs
ii Net Profit (PAT) 1,969.9 2,037.7 3.4
D Total Assets 1,32,768.2 1,63,552.5 23.2
IV.108 In contrast to the flat growth in the
E Financial Ratios #
SCBs’ balance sheet, that of PBs expanded by
i Operating Profit 3.1 3.6
ii Net Profit 1.5 1.2 48.9 per cent in 2020-21, on top of a growth
iiiIncome (a + b) 14.5 13.8 of 17.5 per cent in 2019-20. The acceleration
a. Interest Income 12.8 11.9 was led by deposits growth on the liabilities
b. Other Income 1.7 1.8
side and investments on the assets side (Table
iv Expenditure (a+b+c) 13.0 12.5
IV.37). The share of deposits in total liabilities
a. Interest Expended 6.0 5.6
b. Operating Expenses 5.4 4.6
Table IV.37: Consolidated Balance Sheet of
of which Staff Expenses 2.9 2.6
Payments Banks
c. Provisions and contingencies 1.6 2.3
(Amount in ` crore)
F Analytical Ratios (%)
Gross NPA Ratio 1.9 5.4 Sr. Item March-19 March-20 March-21
No.
CRAR 20.2 22.1
Core CRAR 17.2 20.1 1. Total Capital and Reserves 1,899 1,868 1,792
2. Deposits 882 2,306 4,622
Note: # As per cent to total assets.
Source: Off-site returns (domestic operations), RBI. 3. Other Liabilities and Provisions 4,392 4,254 6,133
Total Liabilities/Assets 7,172 8,429 12,547
1. Cash and Balances with RBI 712 785 1,255
SFBs grew moderately on higher provisioning
2. Balances with Banks and Money 1,375 2,101 2,413
Market
for bad and restructured loans. The GNPA ratio
3. Investments 3,136 4,077 7,102
nearly tripled, reflecting the impact of COVID-19 4. Fixed Assets 638 351 355
5. Other Assets 1,311 1,115 1,421
on asset quality. There was improvement in
Note: Data for end-March 2019, end-March 2020 and end-March 2021
capital positions (CRARs) on the back of high-
pertain to seven, six and six PBs, respectively. Hence, the data are not
comparable across years.
quality Tier-1 capital (Table IV.36).
Source: Off-site returns (domestic operations), RBI.
95Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
increased to 36.8 per cent from 27.4 per cent a Table IV.39: Select Financial Ratios of
Payments Banks
year ago and the recent enhancement in deposit
balance limit is expected to further expand their Sr. Item March-19 March-20 March-21
No.
deposit base.
1 Return on Assets -13.1 -9.8 -6.4
2 Return on Equity -49.4 -44.3 -44.5
16.2 Financial Performance of PBs
3 Investments to Total Assets 43.7 48.4 56.6
IV.109 PBs are still in a nascent stage of 4 Net Interest Margin 6.1 4.8 2.8
5 Efficiency (Cost-Income Ratio) 136.6 124.8 116.9
development, incurring extensive investment
6 Operating profit to working funds -12.7 -10.9 -6.1
costs for developing basic infrastructure. 7 Profit Margin -39.2 -23.9 -20.3
Moreover, their customer base is yet to develop Note: : Data for end-March 2019, end-March 2020 and end-March 2021
pertain to seven, six and six PBs, respectively. Hence, the data are not
fully, making break-even challenging. As a comparable across years.
Source: Off-site returns (domestic operations), RBI.
result, since inception, they have been suffering
losses. The same trend held in 2020-21, despite
improvement in their non-interest income
remained negative, although the extent of losses
(Table IV.38).
reduced (Table IV.39).
IV.110 During 2020-21, efficiency of PBs
16.3 Inward and Outward Remittances of PBs
measured in terms of cost-to-income ratio
improved while their NIM declined. Their other
IV.111 Total inward and outward remittances
performance metrics such as profit margin,
through PBs declined by more than 20 per cent
RoA, and operating profit to working funds ratio
in 2020-21, in terms of both volume and value.
Given the predominance of small-value large-
Table IV.38: Financial Performance of volume transactions in their operations, UPI had
Payments Banks
the largest share in total remittance business for
(Amount in ` crore)
the third consecutive year, followed by IMPS and
Sr. Item March-19 March-20 March-21
No. E-wallets (Table IV.40).
A Income (i + ii)
i. Interest Income 291 348 360 17. Overall Assessment
ii. Non-Interest Income 2,099 3,115 3,562
B Expenditure IV.112 Notwithstanding a sharp downturn in
i. Interest Expenses 35 62 100
global as well as domestic macroeconomic
ii. Operating Expenses 3,265 4,324 4,584
Provisions and Contingencies 26 -96 36 conditions, the banking sector in India remained
of which, resilient, with strong profitability indicators,
Risk Provisions 2 3 9
and improved asset quality. Various regulatory
Tax Provisions 16 -100 22
C Net Interest Income 255 286 260 measures initiated by the Reserve Bank in
D Profit
response to the pandemic played a crucial role
i. Operating Profit (EBPT) -911 -923 -762
ii. Net Profit -937 -827 -798 in protecting banks’ balance sheets, providing
necessary liquidity support and stabilising the
Note: Data for end-March 2019, end-March 2020 and end-March 2021
pertain to seven, six and six PBs, respectively. Hence, the data are not
financial sector. Additionally, the establishment
comparable across years.
Source: Off-site returns (domestic operations), RBI. of the National Asset Reconstruction Company
96OPERATIONS AND PERFORMANCE OF COMMERCIAL BANKS
Table IV.40: Remittances through Payments Banks
(Number in thousand, amount in ` crore)
2019-20 2020-21
Channel Inward Remittances Outward Remittances Inward Remittances Outward Remittances
Number Amount Number Amount Number Amount Number Amount
1. NEFT 898 19,398 1,408 43,593 1,389 26,295 826 60,649
(0.4) (5.3) (0.6) (10.1) (0.9) (9.8) (0.5) (19.8)
i) Bill Payments 63 6,103 421 8,151 9 17 23 28
(0.0) (1.7) (0.2) (1.9) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0)
ii) Other than Bill Payments 835 13,295 987 35,442 1,380 26,278 803 60,621
(0.4) (3.6) (0.4) (8.2) (0.8) (9.8) (0.5) (19.8)
2. RTGS 20 81,411 7 56,794 19 56,460 2 35,107
(0.0) (22.2) (0.0) (13.2) (0.0) (21.0) (0.0) (11.4)
3. IMPS 14,069 34,309 34,522 1,05,366 13,627 37,466 18,988 65,866
(6.8) (9.3) (15.0) (24.5) (8.3) (14.0) (11.1) (21.5)
4. UPI 1,44,227 1,70,998 1,45,370 1,60,976 1,17,270 1,13,289 1,20,069 1,03,908
(69.4) (46.6) (63.2) (37.4) (71.8) (42.2) (70.3) (33.9)
5. E - Wallets 33,960 23,427 40,316 41,274 23,162 20,406 30,150 38,317
(16.3) (6.4) (17.5) (9.6) (14.2) (7.6) (17.7) (12.5)
6. Micro ATM (POS) 4,736 16,746 69 229 3 20 14 45
(2.3) (4.6) (0.0) (0.1) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0) (0.0)
7. ATM - - 375 1,169 - - 1 3
- - (0.2) (0.3) - - (0.0) (0.0)
8. Others 10,045 20,740 7,840 21,515 7,821 14,384 719 2,866
(4.8) (5.7) (3.4) (5.0) (4.8) (5.4) (0.4) (0.9)
Total 2,07,955 3,67,030 2,29,908 4,30,916 1,63,292 2,68,321 1,70,768 3,06,761
Notes: 1. Figures in the parentheses are percentage to total; -: Nil/Negligible.
2. Data for end-March 2020 and end-March 2021 pertain to six PBs each.
Source: Off-site returns (domestic operations), RBI.
Limited (NARCL) by the Government of India monetary and fiscal measures unwind. Although
is expected to aid the recovery process, while most of the regulatory relaxation measures have
alleviating stress on banks’ balance sheets. run their course, full extent of their impact on
banking is yet to unravel.
IV.113 Although credit offtake by banks
remained subdued in an environment of risk IV.114 Banks would need to strengthen their
aversion and muted demand conditions during corporate governance practices and risk
2020-21, a pick up has started in Q2:2021-22, management strategies to build resilience
with the economy emerging out of the shadows in an increasingly dynamic and uncertain
of the second wave of COVID-19. Going forward, economic environment. With rapid technological
revival in bank balance sheets hinges around advancements in the digital payments landscape
overall economic growth which is contingent and emergence of new entrants across the
on progress on the pandemic front. However, FinTech ecosystem, banks have to prioritise
banks would need to further bolster their capital upgrading their IT infrastructure and improving
positions to absorb potential slippages as well customer services, together with strengthening
as to sustain the credit flow, especially when their cybersecurity.
97Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
DEVELOPMENTS IN
V
CO-OPERATIVE BANKING
The co-operative banking segment—both urban and rural—remained robust throughout the COVID-19
stress. Although the balance sheet growth of urban co-operatives banks (UCBs) in 2020-21 was driven by
deposits on the liabilities side, subdued credit growth prompted acceleration in investments on the assets side.
The financial indicators of UCBs, including their capital position and profitability, improved. Among the
short-term rural co-operatives, the profitability of state co-operative banks and district central co-operative
banks improved, while their asset quality deteriorated. Going forward, structural reforms that address
deep-seated fault lines are expected to catalyse change in their operations.
1. Introduction for enabling the development of multi-state co-
operatives.
V.1 The co-operative banking sector,
especially the rural co-operatives, emerged V.2 Against this background, the rest of the
relatively unscathed from the first wave of chapter examines the performance of urban
the pandemic in 2020-21. Yet, structural and rural co-operative banks during the period
impediments emanating from regulatory under review. The structure of the co-operative
overlaps, high levels of loan delinquencies and banking sector and its regulation are set out in
erosion of depositor confidence due to frauds Section 2, followed by a discussion of business
continue to beset the sector. In 2020-21, the operations and financial performance of urban
Reserve Bank and the government set out to co-operative banks (UCBs) in 2020-21 in Section
address these issues. The Banking Regulation 3. The financial viability of short-term and long-
(Amendment) Act, 2020 gave the Reserve Bank term rural co-operatives is evaluated in Section
42. Section 5 concludes the chapter with an
additional powers to regulate this sector. The
enhancement in deposit insurance from `1 lakh overall assessment.
to `5 lakh augmented the share of co-operative
2. Structure of the Co-operative Banking
depositors’ coverage from 42.7 per cent at end-
Sector
March 2019 to 69.4 per cent at end-March
20211. The creation of Ministry of Co-operation V.3 The structure of co-operative banking in
in July 2021 is intended to provide a separate India is multi-tiered, with urban and rural co-
administrative, legal and policy framework operatives as its main pillars. UCBs are classified
1 Pursuant to the announcement made in the Union Budget 2021-22, the Deposit Insurance and Credit Guarantee Corporation
(DICGC) Act was amended on August 13, 2021 which came into force on September 1, 2021. The amendment empowered the
DICGC to make interim deposit insurance payouts to troubled banks, even if they are under the Reserve Bank’s All Inclusive
Directions (AID), within 90 days of imposition of such Directions. As of December 20, 2021, out of 21 troubled banks, the DICGC
has paid 16 UCBs that were eligible to receive such payouts. The disbursement of `1,374 crore was made through agency bank,
involving 1.09 lakh depositors. This has brought considerable relief to long-stressed depositors and instilled confidence in the
UCB sector.
2 Although primary agricultural credit societies (PACS) and long-term co-operatives are outside the regulatory purview of the Reserve
Bank, data and a brief description of their activities are covered in this chapter for providing a complete outline of the sector.
98DEVELOPMENTS IN CO-OPERATIVE BANKING
Chart V.1: Structure of Co-operative Banks
Multi-State((35))
ScheduledUCBs((53))
Singgle-state((18))
UrbaaanCo-opperativeBanks((1,,534))
Multi-State((23))
Non-scheduledUCBs((1,,481))
Singgle-State((1,,458))
Co-opperativeBanks((98,,042))
SCARDBs((13))
Loongg-tteerm((66155))
PCARDBs((602))
RuralCo-opperativeBanks((96,,508))
StCBs((33))*
Short-term((95,,893)) DCCBs((351))
PACS((95,,509))
Notes: 1. StCBs: State Co-operative Banks; DCCBs: District Central Co-operative Banks; PACS: Primary Agricultural Credit Societies; SCARDBs: State
Co-operative Agriculture and Rural Development Banks; PCARDBs: Primary Co-operative Agriculture and Rural Development Banks.
2. Figures in parentheses indicate the number of institutions at end-March 2021 for UCBs and at end-March 2020 for rural co-operatives.
* excludes Daman & Diu StCB which is yet to be bifurcated completely from Goa StCB.
Source: RBI, NABARD and NAFSCOB.
as scheduled and non-scheduled, based on their 19.4 per cent in 2004-05. Rural co-operatives,
inclusion or otherwise in the second schedule especially short-term, overshadow their urban
of the Reserve Bank of India Act, 19343, and counterparts, both in terms of number and total
their geographical outreach (single-state or asset size (Chart V.2).
multi-state). Rural co-operatives, on the other
hand, are classified into two arms—short-term 3. Urban Co-operative Banks
and long-term. At end-March 2021, there were
V.5 Financial liberalisation in the 1990s
98,042 co-operatives, consisting of 1,534 UCBs
resonated through the urban co-operative
and 96,508 rural co-operatives4 (Chart V.1).
banking sector. Interest rate deregulation
V.4 Over a period of time, the relative size provided an incentive for attracting new players
and, consequently, the influence of co-operative with wider operational margins, while a liberal
banks has been shrinking. The aggregate balance licensing policy eased barriers to entry. The
sheet size of the co-operative banking sector at number of UCBs increased from 1,307 in 1991
`18.8 lakh crore at end-March 2020, was close to to 2,105 in 2004, accompanied by an 18 per
10 per cent of the scheduled commercial banks’ cent compounded annual growth rate (CAGR)
(SCBs’) consolidated balance sheet, down from of deposits5. In subsequent years, however,
3 Apart from Scheduled Co-operative Banks, Scheduled Commercial Banks are also included in the same schedule of the Act.
4 Data on rural co-operatives are available with a lag of one year, i.e., they relate to 2019-20.
5 Vision Document for Urban Co-operative Banks, 2005.
99Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Chart V.2: Distribution of Co-operative Banks Chart V.3: Number of UCBs
by Asset Size
(At end-March 2020)
Source: Off-site surveillance returns, RBI.
Note: The sunburst chart represents layers in the co-operative progressively declined to 1,534 by end-March
banking sector. Size of each chart segment is proportional to its share
2021 (Chart V.3).
(mentioned in parentheses) in total assets of the sector.
Source: RBI, NABARD and NAFSCOB.
V.6 Starting 2004-05, the consolidation drive
financial weakness in some entities led to has yielded a total of 136 mergers till March
concerns about their systemic impact. The 2021, with more than three-fourths of them in
Reserve Bank initiated a process of consolidation two states, viz. Maharashtra and Gujarat (Chart
in the sector, including amalgamation of unviable V.4a). Licence cancellations accompanied the
UCBs with their viable counterparts, closure of merger process, with a total of 44 UCB licences
non-viable entities and suspension of issuance of being cancelled since 2015-16. With most of
new licenses. As a result, the number of UCBs the amalgamations and closures occurring in
Chart V.4: Consolidation Drive in UCBs
a. Geographical Distribution of UCB Mergers b. Licence Cancellation
(Cumulative as at end-March 2021)
16
14
14
12
Bs
C10 9
U
umberof
8
6
7
5
6
N
4 3
2
0
2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Source: RBI
100DEVELOPMENTS IN CO-OPERATIVE BANKING
Chart V.5: Balance Sheet Indicators: UCBs versus SCBs
a: UCBs’ Assets as share of SCBs b: UCBs’ Deposits and Advances as share of SCBs
6
5.5
nt 5
e
c
er4.5
p
4
3.5
3
5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2
Mar- 005- 006- 007- 008- 009- 010- 011- 012- 013- 014- 015- 016- 017- 018- 019- 020- Mar-
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Increase Decrease Total
Source: Off-site surveillance returns, RBI.
the non-scheduled category, the number of cent at end-March 2005 to 3.4 per cent at end-
scheduled UCBs (SUCBs) has broadly remained March 2021 (Chart V.5a). Their share in deposits
constant (Chart V.4b). and advances has also fallen proportionately
(Chart V.5b).
V.7 Despite the large localised presence of
UCBs, their clientele share is increasingly being V.8 For regulatory purposes, UCBs are
taken away by SCBs, leveraging on banking classified into Tier-I and Tier-II categories, based
correspondent networks and FinTech. As a on their depositor base6. The Tier-II category
result, the total balance sheet size of UCBs as a has become dominant, mainly on the back of an
proportion to that of SCBs has fallen from 5.6 per expansion of their depositor bases (Table V.1).
Table V.1: Tier-wise Distribution of Urban Co-operative Banks
(At end-March 2021)
(Amount in `Crore)
Tier Type Number of Banks Deposits Advances Total Assets
Number % to Total Amount % to Total Amount % to Total Amount % to Total
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Tier I 846 55.1 33,854 6.4 19,188 6.1 44,120 6.7
Tier II 688 44.9 4,93,128 93.6 2,93,577 93.9 6,13,731 93.3
All UCBs 1,534 100.0 5,26,982 100.0 3,12,765 100.0 6,57,851 100.0
Note: Data are provisional.
Source: Off-site surveillance returns, RBI.
6 (a) Tier I UCBs are defined as: i) Banks with deposits below `100 crore operating in a single district, ii) Banks with deposits
below `100 crore operating in more than one district will be treated as Tier I provided the branches are in contiguous districts
and deposits and advances of branches in one district separately constitute at least 95 per cent of the total deposits and advances
respectively of the bank, and iii) Banks with deposits below `100 crore, whose branches were originally in a single district but
subsequently, became multi-district due to reorganisation of the district may also be treated as Tier I UCBs.
(b) All other UCBs are defined as Tier-II UCBs.
101Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
V.9 Following the failure of a large UCB in 3.1 Balance Sheet
2019, the Reserve Bank initiated supervisory
V.10 The consolidation drive initiated in
actions to protect depositors’ interests. This
2004-05 yielded encouraging results for nearly
episode, however, brought forth issues that
a decade, with the combined balance sheet of
were simmering for several years. Legislative
UCBs expanding at a CAGR of 14 per cent. Since
amendments to the Banking Regulation Act,
2017-18, however, a low growth phase took hold
1949 carried out in 2020 and alluded to earlier,
right up to 2020-21. From 2013-14 to 2015-16,
are considered as important steps to address
SUCBs were leaders driving the sector’s growth;
such issues. Furthermore, the Expert Committee
since then, however, non-scheduled UCBs
on UCBs (Chairman: Shri N S Vishwanathan)
(NSUCBs) have picked up steam. Overall, the
recommended measures to streamline the sector
sector has been growing at a slower pace than
(Box V.1).
SCBs in the last four years (Chart V.6).
Box V.1: Report of the Expert Committee on Primary (Urban) Co-operative Banks
The Reserve Bank set up an Expert Committee on UCBs (Chairman: Shri N.S. Vishwanathan) in February 2021. In its report
submitted on July 31, 2021, the Committee has made the following major recommendations:
• Scale-based differential regulation of UCBs by categorizing them into four tiers, based on size of deposits:
Items Tier-1 Tier-2 Tier-3 Tier-4
Classification All unit UCBs and salary earner’s UCBs, Deposit base between `100 crore to Deposit base between Deposit base of
basis and all UCBs with deposit base up to `1,000 crore `1,000 crore to over `10,000 crore
`100 crore `10,000 crore
Net worth/ A minimum net worth of `2 crore for banks A minimum CRAR of 15 per cent A minimum CRAR CRAR as per
CRAR operating in a single district and `5 crore (on credit risk), which may be of 15 per cent as Basel III norms
for others. Minimum CRAR of 9 per cent, reduced by 1 per cent upon the applicable to SFBs applicable to
with additional CRAR of 2.5 per cent each bank becoming a member of the universal banks
for not having the prescribed minimum UO.
net worth and not being member of the
Umbrella Organisation (UO).
Sectoral Maximum exposure on housing loans, gold Maximum exposure on housing As applicable to As applicable to
Exposure loans with bullet repayment terms and loans, gold loans with bullet SFBs universal banks
Ceilings unsecured advances to be linked with their repayment terms and unsecured
Tier 1 capital, subject to regulator-specified advances to be linked with their
ceiling. Tier 1 capital with their own board-
approved ceiling
Membership Incentives for membership wherein not being a member attracts Voluntary Membership
of UO higher CRAR requirements.
• The Committee recommended expediting the operationalisation of an UO for which in-principle approval was granted by
the Reserve Bank in 2019. It recommended that for the UO to be financially strong with adequate capital, a minimum
capital of `300 crore may be maintained, while the organisation may have a regulatory framework similar to the regime for
the largest segment of NBFCs;
• Considering the need for listing the securities issued by UCBs, suitable amendments may be made in the Banking Regulation
Act, 1949 to enable the Reserve Bank to notify instruments issued by co-operative banks as “securities” for the purpose
of Securities Contracts (Regulation) Act, 1956 and the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 so as to facilitate
their listing and trading on recognised stock exchanges.
• Tier 3 and Tier 4 UCBs equipped with necessary technology and wherewithal may be permitted to issue shares at premium;
• On the Supervisory Action Framework, the Committee recommended adoption of a twin indicator approach, i.e. only net
NPA and CRAR as triggers, instead of triple indicators at present viz., asset quality, capital adequacy and profitability;
• As a remedial action for weak UCBs, the Reserve Bank should nudge them towards voluntary merger at an early stage of
stress. For cases where prudential requirements are not met within a prescribed timeline and voluntary solutions are not
forthcoming, the Committee has recommended mandatory mergers;
• The Committee also recommended issuance of new licences after the UO has stabilised.
102DEVELOPMENTS IN CO-OPERATIVE BANKING
side and investments on the assets side, both
Chart V.6: Asset Growth
of which were spearheaded by NSUCBs. The
increase in operating profits is responsible for the
growth in UCBs’ net worth (capital plus reserves
and surplus), while the increase in balances with
the Reserve Bank and in investments stems from
the lack of credit growth despite excess liquidity
conditions. In the aftermath of the outbreak of
the pandemic, some major SUCBs had borrowed
heavily from the Reserve Bank’s repo window
under the liquidity adjustment facility (LAF). At
end-March 2021, SUCBs’ aggregate borrowings
declined on base effect (Table V.2).
V.12 The balance sheet composition of SUCBs
and NSUCBs differs, with NSUCBs having a larger
Source: Off-site Surveillance returns, RBI.
deposit base and being much less dependent
V.11 UCBs’ balance sheet growth in 2020-21 on borrowings. Just like SUCBs, the NSUCBs
can be attributed to deposits on the liabilities are also required to maintain CRR and other
Table V.2: Balance Sheet of Urban Co-operative Banks
(At end-March)
(Amount in ` Crore)
Items Scheduled UCBs Non-Scheduled UCBs All UCBs Rate of Growth (%) All UCBs
2020 2021 2020 2021 2020 2021 2019-20 2020-21
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Liabilities
1) Capital 4,415 4,467 9,696 9,765 14,111 14,233 3.9 0.9
(1.5) (1.5) (2.9) (2.7) (2.3) (2.2)
2) Reserves and Surplus 14,896 15,836 18,423 21,354 33,319 37,190 -10.6 11.6
(5.1) (5.3) (5.5) (6.0) (5.3) (5.7)
3) Deposits 2,29,706 2,39,576 2,71,124 2,87,406 5,00,830 5,26,982 3.4 5.2
(78.9) (79.5) (81.4) (80.7) (80.3) (80.1)
4) Borrowings 5,003 3,748 334 314 5,337 4,062 -1.0 -23.9
(1.7) (1.2) (0.1) (0.1) (0.9) (0.6)
5) Other Liabilities and Provisions 36,950 37,913 33,518 37,471 70,467 75,385 20.4 7.0
(12.7) (12.6) (10.1) (10.5) (11.3) (11.5)
Assets
1) Cash in Hand 1,797 1,676 4,037 4,212 5,835 5,888 8.3 0.9
(0.6) (0.6) (1.2) (1.2) (0.9) (0.9)
2) Balances with RBI 9,804 11,121 2,792 3,418 12,595 14,539 -8.4 15.4
(3.4) (3.7) (0.8) (1.0) (2.0) (2.2)
3) Balances with Banks 18,526 21,906 47,719 47,694 66,245 69,600 8.6 5.1
(6.4) (7.3) (14.3) (13.4) (10.6) (10.6)
4) Money at Call and Short Notice 6,260 5,087 2,135 1,792 8,395 6,879 39.8 -18.1
(2.2) (1.7) (0.6) (0.5) (1.3) (1.0)
5) Investments 75,175 80,278 86,328 99,872 1,61,504 1,80,150 3.0 11.5
(25.8) (26.6) (25.9) (28.0) (26.0) (27.4)
6) Loans and Advances 1,41,151 1,43,201 1,64,138 1,69,564 3,05,289 3,12,765 0.7 2.4
(48.5) (47.5) (49.3) (47.6) (48.9) (47.5)
7) Other Assets 38,257 38,271 25,945 29,760 64,201 68,031 20.8 6.0
(13.2) (12.7) (7.8) (8.4) (10.3) (10.3)
Total Liabilities/ Assets 2,90,970 3,01,540 3,33,094 3,56,311 6,24,064 6,57,851 4.2 5.4
(100.0) (100.0) (100.0) (100.0) (100.0) (100.0)
Notes: 1. Data for March 2021 are provisional.
2. Figures in parentheses are proportion to total liabilities / assets (in per cent).
3. Components may not add up to the whole due to rounding off.
Source: Off- Site surveillance returns, RBI.
103Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Chart V.7: Deposits and Advances: SCBs versus UCBs
a: Deposit Growth b: Advances Growth
20
18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Source: Off-site surveillance returns, RBI.
104
tnecreP
11-0102 21-1102 31-2102 41-3102 51-4102 61-5102 71-6102 81-7102 91-8102 02-9102 12-0202
25
20
15
10
5
0
All UCBs SCBs
tnecrep
11-0102 21-1102 31-2102 41-3102 51-4102 61-5102 71-6102 81-7102 91-8102 02-9102 12-0202
AllUCBs SCBs
statutory reserves. Unlike the former, however, V.16 The credit-deposit (C-D) ratio has always
the latter have the option of not maintaining it been significantly lower for UCBs, particularly
with the Reserve Bank and can maintain it with NSUCBs, than SCBs. This is attributable to
other specified financial institutions. As a result, relatively lower credit disbursal and higher
they hold more cash with themselves and with reliance on deposits. During the last two years,
banks, as opposed to balances with the Reserve the C-D ratio of SUCBs has declined as credit
Bank. growth across the board was lower than deposit
growth and converged with that of NSUCBs
V.13 For more than a decade now, the
(Chart V.8).
consolidated balance sheet of UCBs has been
decelerating on account of a slowdown in
deposits on the liabilities side and loans and Chart V.8: Credit-Deposit Ratio: UCBs versus SCBs
advances on the assets side. This trend was,
however, reversed during 2020-21, mainly led by
NSUCBs.
V.14 Until 2016-17, the deposit growth of
UCBs was higher than SCBs but the former
have been performing progressively worse than
the latter in the last four years, partly owing to
the entry of new-age banks which provide better
returns on deposits (Chart V.7a).
V.15 During 2020-21, advances of UCBs
picked up marginally even while SCBs’ credit
decelerated. The credit contraction experienced
by SUCBs during 2019-20 was reversed in the
Source: Off-site surveillance returns, RBI.
subsequent financial year (Chart V.7b).DEVELOPMENTS IN CO-OPERATIVE BANKING
Chart V.9: Distribution of UCBs by Asset Size Chart V.10: Distribution of UCBs by Deposits and Advances
(end-March 2021)
Source: Off-site surveillance returns, RBI. Source: Off-site surveillance returns, RBI.
V.17 UCBs’ distribution in terms of asset size Over the years, this distribution has also shifted
has undergone a shift over time, an outcome of the rightward as a result of an increase in average
consolidation drive. Since 2015-16, `100 crore deposits per customer. In contrast, the advances
to `250 crore emerged as the modal class, but structure differs, with the modal class being `10
the distribution has shifted rightward, indicating crore to `25 crore (Table V.3 and Chart V.10).
asset concentration at higher levels (Chart V.9).
V.19 During 2020-21, credit offtake remained
V.18 The distribution of UCBs in terms of subdued, but deposits accelerated. Co-operative
deposits follows the pattern of assets distribution, banks – scheduled as well as non-scheduled –
with `100 crore to `250 crore as the modal class. increased their investments as an alternative
Table V.3: Distribution of UCBs by size of Deposits and Advances
(At end-March 2021)
(Amount in `crore)
Deposits No. of UCBs Amount of Deposits Advances No. of UCBs Amount of Advances
Number % Share Amount % Share Number % Share Amount % Share
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0.00 ≤ D < 10 105 6.8 563 0.1 0.00 ≤ Ad < 10 231 15.1 1,223 0.4
10 ≤ D < 25 199 13.0 3,445 0.7 10 ≤ Ad < 25 293 19.1 4,936 1.6
25 ≤ D < 50 268 17.5 9,832 1.9 25 ≤ Ad < 50 289 18.8 10,176 3.3
50 ≤ D < 100 282 18.4 20,132 3.8 50 ≤ Ad < 100 264 17.2 19,258 6.2
100 ≤ D < 250 318 20.7 50,166 9.5 100 ≤ Ad < 250 235 15.3 37,791 12.1
250 ≤ D < 500 167 10.9 57,526 10.9 250 ≤ Ad < 500 110 7.2 38,472 12.3
500 ≤ D < 1000 102 6.6 70,299 13.3 500 ≤ Ad < 1000 62 4.0 42,783 13.7
1000 ≤ D 93 6.1 3,15,018 59.8 1000 ≤ Ad 50 3.3 1,58,125 50.6
Total 1,534 100.0 5,26,982 100.0 Total 1,534 100 3,12,765 100.0
Notes: 1. Data are provisional.
2. ‘D’ and ‘Ad’ indicates amount of deposits and advances respectively.
3. Components may not add up to the whole due to rounding off.
Source: Off- Site surveillance returns, RBI.
105Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Table V.4: Investments by Urban Co-operative Banks
(Amount in ` Crore)
Item Amount outstanding (At end-March) Variation (%)
2019 2020 2021 2019-20 2020-21
1 2 3 4 5 6
Total Investments (A + B) 1,56,799 1,61,504 1,80,150 3.0 11.6
(100.0) (100.0) (100.0)
A. SLR Investments (i to iii) 1,39,447 1,41,901 1,60,560 1.8 13.1
(88.9) (87.9) (89.1)
(i) Central Govt. Securities 98,174 96,289 1,02,147 -1.9 6.1
(62.6) (59.6) (56.7)
(ii) State Govt. Securities 40,596 44,418 57,944 9.4 30.4
(25.9) (27.5) (32.2)
(iii) Other approved Securities 678 1,194 470 76.2 -60.6
(0.4) (0.7) (0.3)
B. Non-SLR Investments 17,351 19,603 19,590 13.0 -0.1
(11.1) (12.1) (10.87)
Note: 1. Data for 2021 are provisional.
2. Figures in parentheses are proportion to total investments (in per cent).
Source: Off-site surveillance returns, RBI.
source of income – in fact, investment of NSUCBs government securities (Chart V.11b). For the
grew at 16 per cent, at par with SCBs, led by SLR last couple of years, low credit demand and the
securities, which more than compensated for the search for returns have prompted investment
decline in non-SLR investments (Table V.4 and in state government securities. As a result, the
Chart V.11a). proportion of central government securities in
UCBs’ investments declined from 73 per cent
V.20 At end-March 2021, 89 per cent of total
at end-March 2016 to 57 per cent at end-March
investments of UCBs were in SLR instruments,
2021.
more than half of which was in central
Chart V.11: Investments by UCBs
a: Investments Growth b: Distribution of UCBs’ Investments
(At end-March 2021)
Non-SLR
Investments CentralGovt.
11% Securities
57%
SLR
Investments
89%
StateGovt.
Securities
32%
Source: Off-site surveillance returns, RBI.
106DEVELOPMENTS IN CO-OPERATIVE BANKING
3.2 Soundness cent UCBs falling under this rating category
(Table V.5).
V.21 Concerns over the financial soundness of
UCBs have risen in recent years. An increasing V.23 Even though the scale of the new rating
number of UCBs are being placed under the system is not strictly comparable with the old
Supervisory Action Framework (SAF) by the scale, there has been a marked deterioration in
Reserve Bank7. Furthermore, instances of UCBs’ ratings over time. The proportion of UCBs
penalty imposition increased to 43 during 2020- with ‘A’ rating has declined, with a creeping
21, up from 9 in the previous year (Refer to Table increase in the ‘C’ and ‘D’ rated ones, the latter
IV.14). Additionally, claims settled by the Deposit now comprising of more than 25 per cent of
Insurance and Credit Guarantee Corporation the total number of UCBs. Banking business,
(DICGC) during the year pertained entirely to co- calculated as the sum of deposits and advances
operative banks. of UCBs, has followed the distribution of the
number of UCBs, and has steadily come down
V.22 The CAMELS-based rating system8,
for the ‘A’ rated entities (Chart V.12).
which assesses the financial strength of a UCB,
was reviewed in 2019. The revised model gives 3.3 Capital Adequacy
a composite rating of A/B+/B/C/D (in decreasing
V.24 UCBs are governed by Basel I norms
order of performance) to UCBs, based on
under which they are required to maintain a
the weighted average rating of the individual
minimum capital-to-risk weighted assets ratio
components of CAMELS. At end-March 2021, ‘B’
(CRAR) of 9 per cent. The capital position of
category formed the modal class, both number-
wise and business-wise, with more than 50 per
Chart V.12: Distribution of Number and Banking
Business of UCBs-by Rating Categories
Table V.5: Rating-wise Distribution of UCBs (End-March)
(End-March 2021)
(Amount in `crore)
Ratings Number Deposits Advances
Banks % share Amount % share Amount % share
in Total in Total in Total
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
A 131 8.5 36,120 6.9 21,611 6.9
B+ 201 13.1 82,390 15.6 48,598 15.5
B 792 51.6 2,74,145 52 1,66,349 53.2
C 324 21.1 1,10,269 20.9 64,274 20.6
D 86 5.6 24,058 4.6 11,933 3.8
Total 1,534 100 5,26,982 100 3,12,765 100
Notes: 1. Data are provisional.
2. Components may not add up to the whole due to rounding off.
3. Ratings are based on latest available inspection data.
4. Percentage variation could be slightly different because
absolute numbers have been rounded off to `crore.
Source: Off-site surveillance returns, RBI.
Source: Off-site surveillance returns, RBI.
7 The SAF for UCBs is equivalent of prompt corrective action for SCBs. The framework specifies initiation of corrective action by
UCBs themselves or by the Reserve Bank on breach of specified thresholds for CRAR, asset quality, and profitability.
8 The CAMELS (capital adequacy, asset quality, management, earnings, liquidity, and systems and control) rating model in its
present form became applicable to UCBs from April 2008.
107Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Table V.6: CRAR-wise Distribution of UCBs
Chart V.13: Share of UCBs with CRAR
(End-March 2021)
less than 9 per cent
(End-March) (Number of banks)
CRAR (in Per cent) Scheduled Non-Scheduled All UCBs
UCBs UCBs
1 2 3 4
CRAR < 3 4 57 61
3 <= CRAR < 6 0 11 11
6 <= CRAR < 9 0 24 24
9 <= CRAR < 12 4 160 164
12 <= CRAR 45 1,229 1,274
Total 53 1,481 1,534
Note: Data are provisional.
Source: Off-site surveillance returns, RBI.
higher than 12 per cent (Table V.6 and Appendix
Table V.1).
Source: Off-site surveillance returns, RBI.
V.26 At end-March 2021, the CRAR of UCBs
recorded an improvement over a year ago.
SUCBs has been improving since 2009-10, with
NSUCBs, which have better capital positions than
the number of banks breaching the regulatory
SUCBs, reported a further improvement, mostly
minimum declining over the years. In the case of
due to a reduction in their risk-weighted assets
NSUCBs, however, the proportion of banks with
(RWAs). Even though other capital requirements
CRAR below 9 per cent has increased since 2016-
mandatory for SCBs such as capital conservation
17, pointing to vulnerabilities in their financial
buffer and minimum common equity tier 1
position (Chart V.13).
(CET-I) capital are not applicable to UCBs, they
V.25 On the other end of the spectrum, more maintained adequate levels of tier-1 capital,
than 80 per cent of UCBs in each category albeit lower than SCBs, abstracting from the
maintained strong capital buffers with CRARs drag from one defaulting UCB (Table V.7).
Table V.7: Component-wise Capital Adequacy of UCBs
(At end-March)
(Amount in ` crore)
Scheduled UCBs Non-Scheduled UCBs All UCBs
2020 2021 2020 2021 2020 2021
1 Capital Funds 13,407 13,794 25,408 27,610 38,815 41,404
i) Tier I Capital 7,521 8,000 22,009 24,011 29,530 32,011
ii) Tier II Capital 5,886 5,794 3,399 3,600 9,285 9,393
2 Risk-Weighted Assets 1,42,573 1,45,767 1,75,015 1,68,622 3,17,588 3,14,388
3 CRAR (1 as % of 2) 9.4 9.5 14.5 16.4 12.2 13.2
Of which:
Tier I 5.3 5.5 12.6 14.2 9.3 10.2
Tier II 4.1 4.0 2.0 2.1 2.9 3.0
Source: Off-site returns, RBI.
108DEVELOPMENTS IN CO-OPERATIVE BANKING
3.4 Asset Quality
Chart V.14: NPA Ratio: UCBs versus SCBs
V.27 During 2015-16 to 2018-19, SCBs had
higher delinquency rates than UCBs. The position
reversed during the last two years as SCBs’ gross
non-performing assets (GNPA) ratio fell, while
for UCBs, it has been on a rising trajectory right
up to 2020-21. Within the sector, both SUCBs
and NSUCBs faced increasing GNPA ratios, with
the latter experiencing sharply higher slippages
(Chart V.14).
V.28 In January 2020, the SAF for UCBs was
revised, making a net NPA ratio greater than
6 per cent a trigger for initiation of corrective
action. With rising slippage, this has prompted
an increase in provisioning (Table V.8). Source: Off-site surveillance returns, RBI.
V.29 Large borrowal accounts i.e., exposure
of `5 crore and above, exhibit varied behaviour V.30 NPAs emanating from large borrowers
between SCBs and UCBs, as well as among have been proportionally higher than lending to
SUCBs and NSUCBs. During 2020-21, 25 per such borrowers for all bank groups (Chart V.15).
cent of UCBs’ total funded loans and 32 per cent There has, however, been a noticeable reduction
of their NPAs originated from large borrowal in both lending and NPAs in comparison to 2019-
accounts as against 51 per cent of loans and 66 20. This may be attributable to the January 2020
per cent of NPAs, respectively, for SCBs. Within regulation which curtailed large exposures of
UCBs, NSUCBs’ exposure to large borrowers was UCBs, while encouraging small-scale lending.
less than 10 per cent of their total loans during The latter criterion requires that at least 50 per
the year as against 44 per cent share of SUCBs. cent of UCBs’ aggregate loans and advances or
Table V.8: Non-Performing Assets of UCBs
(At end-March)
Sr. Items Scheduled UCBs Non-Scheduled UCBs All UCBs
No.
2019-20 2020-21 2019-20 2020-21 2019-20 2020-21
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1 Gross NPAs (`crore) 13,779 14,785 18,443 21,674 32,222 36,459
2 Gross NPA Ratio (%) 9.8 10.3 11.3 12.8 10.6 11.7
3 Net NPAs (`crore) 5,051 5,264 8,167 7,981 13,217 13,245
4 Net NPA Ratio (%) 3.8 3.9 5.3 5.1 4.6 4.6
5 Provisioning (`crore) 8,728 9,521 10,276 13,693 19,004 23,214
6 Provisioning Coverage Ratio (%) 63.4 64.4 55.7 63.2 59.0 63.7
Note: Data for 2020-21 are provisional.
Source: Off- site surveillance returns, RBI.
109Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
NPA ratio of large borrowal accounts are higher
Chart V.15: Large Borrowal Accounts –
Lending versus NPAs for UCBs than for SCBs. During 2020-21, the
SMA-0 and SMA-2 ratios deteriorated, signifying
stress building up incipiently in the sector
(Chart V.16a). This was reflected across both
categories of UCBs (Chart V.16b).
3.5 Financial Performance and Profitability
V.32 After registering sizeable losses in 2019-
20 – mainly contributed by a large SUCB – the
financial performance of UCBs improved in
2020-21 but they are yet to break back into
profit levels achieved in 2018-19. With lower
borrowings, SUCBs’ interest expenditure
contracted, leading to a fall in overall
Source: Off-site surveillance returns, RBI.
expenditure. Interest income, which had been
declining for two consecutive years, picked
0.2 per cent of their tier-I capital, whichever is
up during 2020-21, driven by an increase in
higher, should be geared towards loan sizes of
investments. Coupled with growth in non-
less than `25 lakh9.
interest income, there was acceleration in the
V.31 All categories of special mention account total income of UCBs. The uncharacteristically
ratios viz., SMA-0, SMA-1 and SMA-210 as well as high growth in provisions and contingencies of
Chart V.16: Stress in Large Borrowal Accounts
a: UCBs verus SCBs b: SUCBs versus NSCUBs
25
20
15
10
5
0
Source: Central Repository of Information on Large Credits (CRILC) database.
9 Available at https://www.rbi.org.in/Scripts/NotificationUser.aspx?Id=11819&Mode=0.
10 Special mention accounts, i.e., SMA-0, SMA-1 and SMA-2, refer to credit accounts wherein the principal and interest payments
have been overdue for 30 days, 60 days and 90 days, respectively.
110
0-AMS 1-AMS 2-AMS sAPN 0-AMS 1-AMS 2-AMS sAPN
UCBs SCBs
tnuomadednuf
fotnecrep
sA
25
20
15
10
5
0
Mar-20 Mar-21
0-AMS 1-AMS 2-AMS sAPN 0-AMS 1-AMS 2-AMS sAPN
SUCBs NSUCBs
tnuomadednuf
fotnecrep
sA
Mar-20 Mar-21DEVELOPMENTS IN CO-OPERATIVE BANKING
Table V.9: Financial Performance of Scheduled and Non-scheduled Urban Co-operative Banks
(Amount in `crore)
Item Scheduled UCBs Non-scheduled UCBs All UCBs All UCBs Variation (%)
2019-20 2020-21 2019-20 2020-21 2019-20 2020-21 2020-21
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
A. Total Income [i+ii] 20,307 23,430 29,777 30,348 50,084 53,778 7.4
(100.0) (100.0) (100.0) (100.0) (100.0) (100.0)
i. Interest Income 16,920 19,524 27,811 27,887 44,731 47,411 6.0
(83.3) (83.3) (93.4) (91.9) (89.3) (88.2)
ii. Non-interest Income 3,387 3,905 1,966 2,462 5,353 6,367 19.0
(16.7) (16.7) (6.6) (8.1) (10.7) (11.8)
B. Total Expenditure [i+ii] 20,877 19,764 25,780 25,865 46,657 45,630 -2.2
(100.0) (100.0) (100.0) (100.0) (100.0) (100.0)
i. Interest Expenditure 14,659 13,501 18,518 18,653 33,177 32,154 -3.1
(70.2) (68.3) (71.8) (72.1) (71.1) (70.5)
ii. Non-interest Expenditure 6,217 6,263 7,262 7,212 13,480 13,476 -0.03
(29.8) (31.7) (28.2) (27.9) (28.9) (29.5)
of which: Staff Expenses 2,833 2,731 3,895 3,892 6,728 6,622 -1.6
C. Profits
i. Amount of Operating Profits -569 3,665 3,986 4,483 3,417 8,148 138.5
ii. Provision, Contingencies 4,722 2,007 2,977 2,073 7,699 4,080 -47.0
iii. Provision for taxes 356 603 927 717 1,283 1,320 2.9
iv. Amount of Net Profit before Taxes -5,292 1,659 1,009 2,410 -4,282 4,069 195.0
v. Amount of Net Profit after Taxes -5,648 1,056 82 1,693 -5,566 2,749 149.4
Notes: 1. Data for 2020-21 are provisional.
2. Components may not add up to the total due to rounding off.
3. Percentage variation could be slightly different because absolute numbers have been rounded off to `crore.
4. Figures in parentheses are proportion to total income/expenditure (in per cent).
Source: Off-site surveillance returns, RBI.
SUCBs in 2019-20, which led to net losses for recovered from a trough a year ago (Table V.10
the consolidated sector, was reversed, causing and Chart V.17).
an increase in net profits during the year
3.6 Priority Sector Advances
(Table V.9 and Appendix Table V.2).
V.35 Priority sector lending guidelines for
V.33 Interest income constitutes 88 per cent
UCBs were revised in March 2020. They are
of the total income of UCBs, while interest
required to progressively increase their priority
expenditure makes up 70 per cent of their total
expenditure. The composition of total income is Table V.10: Select Profitability
different for the two cohorts – NSUCBs are more Indicators of UCBs
(Per cent)
dependent on interest income in comparison
Indicators Scheduled Non-Scheduled All
to SUCBs, whereas expenditure composition is
UCBs UCBs UCBs
relatively similar for both groups. 2019-20 2020-21 2019-20 2020-21 2019-20 2020-21
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
V.34 All indicators of profitability were in the
Return on Assets -1.96 0.36 0.03 0.49 -0.91 0.43
green in 2020-21. NSUCBs are more profitable
Return on Equity -26.95 5.33 0.29 5.71 -11.32 5.56
than SUCBs. The return on assets (RoA) and
Net Interest 0.79 2.03 2.87 2.68 1.89 2.38
return on equity (RoE), which turned negative for Margin
SUCBs in 2019-20, moved into positive territory Note: Data for 2020-21 are provisional.
Source: Off-site surveillance returns, RBI.
during 2020-21. Net interest margin (NIM)
111Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
V.36 Consequent upon the new norms, a target
Chart V.17: Profitablity Indicators –
SUCBs versus NSUCBs of 45 per cent of the higher of ANBC or CEOBE
was set for priority sector lending during 2020-
21, up by 5 percentage points above the target
a year ago. UCBs managed to meet the priority
sector target comfortably. Although UCBs
adhered to the sub-target of lending 10 per cent
of advances to weaker sections, the share of such
loans declined in 2020-21. The composition
of UCBs’ credit to the priority sector shows
that advances to micro, small and medium
Table V.11: Composition of Credit to Priority
Sectors by UCBs
(At end-March)
(Amount in `Crore)
Source: Off-site surveillance returns, RBI. Item 2020 2021
Amount Share Amount Share
loan portfolio to 75 per cent of their adjusted in Total in Total
Advances Advances
net bank credit (ANBC) or credit equivalent (%) (%)
amount of off-balance sheet exposures (CEOBE), 1. Agriculture [(i)+(ii)+(iii)] 11,716 3.8 12,245 3.9
whichever is higher, by end-March 202411. UCBs (i) Farm Credit 8,682 2.8 8,913 2.8
(ii) Agriculture 500 0.2 676 0.2
have historically lent higher than the prescribed Infrastructure
targets to the priority sector (Chart V.18). (iii) Ancillary Activities 2,534 0.8 2,701 0.9
2. Micro and Small 95,102 31.1 1,01,340 32.4
Enterprises
[(i) + (ii) +(iii) + (iv)]
Chart V.18: Priority Sector Lending
(i) Micro Enterprises 31,497 10.3 34,301 11.0
(At end-March)
(ii) Small Enterprises 49,569 16.2 46,128 14.8
(iii) Medium Enterprises 13,648 4.5 20,547 6.6
(iv) Advances to 387 0.1 365 0.1
Khadi and
Village Industries
(Including ‘Other
Finance to MSMEs’)
3. Export Credit 378 0.1 368 0.1
4. Education 2,434 0.8 2,374 0.8
5. Housing 25,359 8.3 25,211 8.1
6. Social Infrastructure 923 0.3 1,185 0.4
7. Renewable Energy 1,476 0.5 1,291 0.4
8. ‘Others’ category under 16,496 5.4 17,694 5.7
Priority Sector
9. Total (1 to 8) 1,53,886 50.4 1,61,708 51.7
of which, Loans to Weaker 35,764 11.7 33,590 10.7
Sections under Priority
Sector
Notes: 1. Data for 2021 are provisional.
2. Percentage shares are with respect to the total credit of UCBs.
3. Components may not add up to total due to rounding off.
Source: Off-site surveillance returns, RBI. Source: Off-site surveillance returns, RBI.
11 As per the revised guidelines issued on March 13, 2020, UCBs shall comply with the targets of 45 per cent, 50 per cent, 60 per
cent and 75 per cent of ANBC or CEOBE, whichever is higher, by end-March 2021, 2022, 2023 and 2024, respectively.
112DEVELOPMENTS IN CO-OPERATIVE BANKING
enterprises (MSMEs) constituted 63 per cent of hand, the mandate of long-term co-operatives—
total priority sector lending, followed by housing SCARDBs and PCARDBs—is to provide funding
at 16 per cent (Table V.11). for investment in agriculture, including land
development, farm mechanisation and minor
4. Rural Co-operatives irrigation, rural industries and housing. For more
than a decade now, the share of long-term credit
V.37 Rural co-operatives, which comprised
co-operatives in total assets is falling to reach
around 67 per cent of the assets of all co-operatives
just over 5 per cent by end-March 2020, largely
at end-March 2020, are distinguished from their
in line with the shrinking share of agriculture
urban peers in terms of their area of operations,
investment in total investments (Chart V.19a).
reach, performance as well as composition of
Concomitantly, their financial performance has
liabilities. While a broad depositor base enables
also deteriorated: at end-March 2020, their
UCBs to raise funds at relatively low cost,
shares in total NPAs and net losses of rural co-
rural co-operatives are heavily dependent on
operatives were higher than that in total assets
borrowings for their operations – at end-March
(Chart V.19 b and Table V.12).
2020, borrowings constituted around 1 per cent
of UCBs’ liabilities, but were as high as 27 per 4.1 Short-term Rural Co-operatives
cent for rural co-operatives.
V.39 Initially formed to provide short-term
V.38 Amongst the rural co-operatives, short- crop loans, short-term rural co-operatives have
term institutions—comprising State Co-operative been diversifying their operations to cover the
Banks (StCBs), District Central Co-operative non-farm sector, term lending to allied sectors,
Banks (DCCBs) and Primary Agricultural Credit and personal and housing loans, among others.
Societies (PACS) — were established to provide Currently, 20 states have a three-tier structure,
short-term crop loans and working capital loans with StCBs at the state level, DCCBs at the
to farmers and rural artisans. On the other district level and PACS functioning at the village
Chart V.19: Long-term versus Short-term Rural Co-operatives
(At end-March 2020)
a: Share in Investment and Long Term Credit Co-operatives b: Balance sheet and Financial Performance
200
150
100
50
0
-50
-100
Source: MOSPI and NABARD Source: NABARD and NAFSCOB
113
)tnecrep(
erahS
stisopeD sgniworroB secnavdAdnasnaoL stessA/seitilibaiLlatoT stiforPteN sAPN
Short-term Credit Co-operatives Long-term CreditCo-operativesReport on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Table V.12: A Profile of Rural Co-operatives
(At end-March 2020)
(Amount in `Crore)
Item Short-term Long-term
StCBs DCCBs PACS SCARDBs (P) PCARDBs (P)
1 2 3 4 5 6
A. Number of Cooperatives 33* 351** 95,509 13 602
B. Balance Sheet Indicators
i. Owned Funds (Capital + Reserves) 21,900 43,246 43,741 4,859 3,673
ii. Deposits 2,10,342 3,45,682 1,65,476 2,409 1,372
iii. Borrowings 85,723 97,448 1,38,571 13,710 16,643
iv. Loans and Advances 1,99,943 2,79,272 2,14,533 20,700 15,819
v. Total Liabilities/Assets 3,40,267 5,35,977 3,25,322 27,104 31,337
C. Financial Performance
i. Institutions in Profits
a. No. 32 291 47,027 10 227
b. Amount of Profit 1,740 1,887 6,531 287 86
ii. Institutions in Loss
a. No. 1 60 37,369 3 375
b. Amount of Loss 16 1,041 8,325 35 657
iii. Overall Profits (+)/Loss (-) 1,724 846 -1,794 252 -571
D. Non-performing Assets
i. Amount 13,477 35,298 70,160 6,836 6,815
ii. As percentage of Loans Outstanding 6.7 12.6 31.0 33.0 43.1
E. Recovery of Loans to Demand Ratio***(Per cent) 94.4 70.2 69.3 43.1 44.1
Notes: 1. StCBs: State Co-operative Banks; DCCBs: District Central Co-operative Banks; PACS: Primary Agricultural Credit Societies; SCARDBs: State
Co-operative Agriculture and Rural Development Banks; PCARDBs: Primary Co-operative Agriculture and Rural Development Banks
2. (P)- Data are provisional.
3. *Data of Daman & Diu StCB (which is yet to be bifurcated completely from Goa StCB) is reported as a part of Goa StCB.
4. **: Excluding Tamil Nadu Industrial Co-operative Bank Limited (TAICO)
5. ***: Denotes the share of outstanding NPAs that have been recovered and on June 30, 2019..
Source: NAFSCOB and NABARD.
level. Among them, Jharkhand and Kerala12 have V.41 In terms of regional presence, StCBs’
only one DCCB while the rest were amalgamated branches are concentrated in the southern
with the respective StCBs. In 9 states and 5 states. The western region claims the highest
union territories, they are arranged in a two-tier share of DCCBs’ branches and PACS. The latter
structure, consisting of only StCBs and PACS. also have a substantial presence in the eastern
region, while DCCBs have no presence in the
V.40 Among short-term rural co-operatives,
north-eastern states (Chart V.20b).
StCBs are relatively better performers, with a
4.1.1 State Co-operative Banks
proportionally higher share in net profits and a
lower share in NPAs. PACS, on the other hand, V.42 State co-operative banks (StCBs) are
are heavily reliant on borrowings, incur larger the apex institutions in the rural co-operative
net losses, and comprise a larger share in NPAs structure and as such they are responsible for
of the rural co-operative sector (Chart V.20a). providing liquidity and technical assistance to
12 After the final approval given by the Reserve Bank, thirteen out of fourteen DCCBs (except Malappuram DCCB) of Kerala were
amalgamated with the Kerala State Co-operative Bank Ltd. on November 29, 2019. Additionally, on June 8, 2020 the State
Government of Punjab was given in-principle approval for merger of the DCCBs in Punjab with the Punjab State Co-operative
Bank Ltd.
114DEVELOPMENTS IN CO-OPERATIVE BANKING
Chart V.20: Comparison of Short-term Rural Co-operatives
(At end-March 2020)
a: Balance Sheet Indicators b: Regional Distribution
400
300
200
100
0
-100
-200
-300
Source: NABARD and NAFSCOB
the other two tiers. At end-March 2020, they
operated with 2,072 branches across the country,
providing credit for a range of agricultural as well
as non-agricultural purposes, including loans to
MSMEs, housing and education which together
comprise more than half of their total lending
activities.
Balance Sheet Operations
V.43 StCBs’ balance sheet grew by over 7 per
cent for the second consecutive year in 2019-
20, mainly fuelled by healthy deposit growth.
The amalgamation of 13 Kerala DCCBs with the
Kerala State Co-operative Bank Ltd. did not alter
the broad composition of assets and liabilities
of the consolidated balance sheet of the latter.
The financial side, however, deteriorated due to
accumulated losses of the former (Table V.13).
V.44 During 2020-21, StCBs’ credit growth
remained subdued, but they performed better
than both SCBs and UCBs (Table V.14).
Profitability
V.45 Both income and expenditure of StCBs
declined in 2019-20. The larger decline in
expenditure led to an increase in net profits.
115
)tnecrep(
erahS
stisopeD sgniworroB secnavdAdnasnaoL stessA/seitilibaiLlatoT stiforPteN APN
100
80
60
40
20
0
StCBs DCCBs PACS
StCBs DCCBs PACS
)tnecrep(
erahS
CentralRegion EasternRegion North-EasternRegion
NorthernRegion Southern Region Western Region
Table V.13: Liabilities and Assets of
State Co-operative Banks
(Amount in `Crore)
Item At end-March Variation (%)
2019 2020 2018-19 2019-20
1 2 3 4 5
Liabilities
1. Capital 7,429 7,459 8.8 0.4
(2.3) (2.1)
2. Reserves 13,797 14,441 10.6 4.7
(4.3) (4.2)
3. Deposits 1,92,693 2,10,342 6.3 9.2
(60.7) (61.8)
4. Borrowings 84,074 85,723 10.2 2.0
(26.5) (25.1)
5. Other Liabilities 19,081 22,301 6.7 16.9
(6) (6.5)
Assets
1. Cash and Bank Balances 15,168 10,229 12.4 -32.6
(4.7) (3)
2. Investments 1,03,131 1,12,828 0.3 9.4
(32.5) (33.1)
3. Loans and Advances 1,83,633 1,99,943 11.6 8.9
(57.9) (58.7)
4. Accumulated Losses 986 1,232 -3.5 25.0
(0.3) (0.3)
5. Other Assets 14,156 16,035 9.3 13.3
(4.4) (4.7)
Total Liabilities/Assets 3,17,074 3,40,267 7.6 7.3
(100.00) (100.00)
Notes: 1. Figures in parentheses are proportion to total liabilities/assets
(in per cent).
2. Y-o-Y variations could be slightly different because absolute
numbers have been rounded off to `1 Crore.
3. Components may not add up to the total due to rounding off.
4. During 2019-20, 13 DCCBs (except Mallapuram DCCB) in
Kerala were amalgamated with Kerala StCB. The data of 13
DCCBs have been added to the StCB totals for previous years
to facilitate comparison and compute growth rates.
Source: NABARD.Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Table V.14: Select Balance Sheet Indicators of Scheduled State Co-operative Banks
(Amount in `crore)
Item 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20* 2020-21
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Deposits 79,564 90,277 98,768 1,10,559 1,87,456 1,97,751
(3.0) (13.5) (9.4) (11.9) (69.6) (5.5)
Credit 1,07,360 1,10,934 1,17,989 1,31,399 1,94,310 2,06,322
(3.4) (3.3) (6.4) (11.4) (47.9) (6.2)
SLR Investments 24,220 26,225 33,411 33,130 54,181 67,788
(4.0) (8.3) (27.4) (-0.8) (63.5) (25.1)
Credit plus SLR Investments 1,31,580 1,37,159 1,51,400 1,64,529 2,48,492 2,74,110
(3.5) (4.2) (10.4) (8.7) (51.0) (10.3)
Notes: 1. Data pertains to last reporting Friday of March of the corresponding year.
2. Figures in brackets are growth rates in per cent over previous year.
3. *: The high growth is mainly due to amalgamation of 13 District Central Co-operative Banks with Kerala State Co-operative Bank.
Source: Form B under Section 42 of RBI Act.
While interest income declined, non-interest Table V.15: Financial Performance of
State Co-operative Banks
income more than doubled, mainly due to the
(Amount in `Crore)
reversal of reserves and excess provisions, and
Item As during Percentage Variation
deferred tax income in the Maharashtra StCB.
2018-19 2019-20 2018-19 2019-20
This was complemented by profit booking on
1 2 3 4 5
investments and gains in commission exchange
A. Income (i+ii) 22,283 21,922 6.5 -1.6
and brokerage services by many StCBs during the (100.0) (100.0)
i. Interest Income 21,383 20,014 6.7 -6.4
year. On the expenditure side, a reduced wage bill,
(95.9) (91.2)
accompanied by declining interest expenditure, ii. Other Income 901 1,908 1.0 111.9
(4.0) (8.7)
was offset by sizeable growth in provision and B. Expenditure (i+ii+iii) 21,063 20,198 4.6 -4.1
contingencies, causing a diminution in total (100.0) (100.0)
i. Interest Expended 16,276 14,871 2.0 -8.6
expenditure (Table V.15). (77.2) (73.6)
ii. Provisions and 1,579 2,646 6.3 67.6
V.46 StCBs have stronger presence in the Contingencies (7.4) (13)
iii. Operating Expenses 3,209 2,681 18.6 -16.4
southern region, which also accounts for higher
(15.2) (13.2)
profit than other regions. In growth terms, Of which, Wage Bill 1,740 1,491 5.7 -14.3
(8.2) (7.3)
earnings in the eastern and central states
C. Profits
surpassed other regions, culminating in a 41.3 i. Operating Profits 2,360 2,974 21.4 26.0
ii. Net Profits 1,220 1,724 55.3 41.3
per cent increase in all-India profits (Chart V.21).
Notes: 1. Figures in parentheses are proportion to total income/
expenditure (in per cent).
Asset Quality
2. Y-o-Y variations could be slightly different because absolute
numbers have been rounded off to `1 Crore in the table.
V.47 StCBs’ asset quality deteriorated in 2019- 3. Components may not add up to the total due to rounding off.
4. During 2019-20, 13 DCCBs (except Mallapuram DCCB) in
20, led by a substantial growth in sub-standard Kerala were amalgamated with Kerala StCB. The data of 13
DCCBs have been added to the StCB totals for previous years
assets (Table V.16). Out of 33 StCBs, 17 reported to Facilitate comparison and compute growth rates.
Source: NABARD.
acceleration in fresh slippages during the year.
116DEVELOPMENTS IN CO-OPERATIVE BANKING
4.1.2 District Central Co-operative Banks
Chart V.21: State Co-operative Banks’ Profits
V.49 District central co-operative banks
(DCCBs) are the intermediate tier in the short-
term rural co-operative structure, mobilising
funds through public deposits, borrowing from
StCBs and refinance from NABARD. DCCBs lend
to individual borrowers as well as to PACS. In
practice, however, they are less dependent on
borrowings in comparison to StCBs, as they can
leverage their extensive branch network to garner
deposits. This also translates to lower C-D ratios
than StCBs, although the outstanding credit of
DCCBs is larger (Chart V.22).
Note: Data for Southern region for the two years is not comparable V.50 During the year, 13 DCCBs in Kerala were
as the impact of amalgamation of Kerala DCCBs is not accounted for.
Source: NABARD. amalgamated with the Kerala State Co-operative
Bank Ltd. and a DCCB in Bihar, viz., Supaul
DCCB was granted banking license, taking their
V.48 On asset quality, StCBs in Arunachal
total to 351 at end-March 2020, with a network
Pradesh, Jharkhand, Andaman and Nicobar
of 13,589 branches.
Islands, Manipur and Puducherry have high NPA
Balance Sheet Operations
ratios (Appendix Table V.3).
V.51 The consolidated balance sheet of DCCBs
Table V.16: Soundness Indicators of decelerated to 6.9 per cent in 2019-20, led by
State Co-operative Banks
slowdown in deposit growth on the liabilities
(Amount in ` crore)
Item Percentage
At end-March Variation
Chart V.22: Credit-Deposit Ratio
2019 2020 2018- 2019-
19 20
1 2 3 4 5
A. Total NPAs (i+ii+iii) 9,968 13,477 5.2 35.2
i. Sub-standard 4,712 7,883 9.6 67.3
(47.2) (58.4)
ii. Doubtful 4,011 4,400 9.2 9.7
(40.2) (32.6)
iii. Loss 1,245 1,195 -17.2 -4.1
(12.4) (8.8)
B. NPAs to Loans Ratio (%) 5.4 6.7 - -
C. Recovery to Demand Ratio (%) 93.9 94.4 - -
Notes: 1. Figures in parentheses are shares in total NPA (%).
2. Absolute numbers have been rounded off, leading to slight
variations in per cent.
3. Components may not add-up to the total due to rounding off.
4. During 2019-20, 13 DCCBs (except Mallapuram DCCB) in
Kerala were amalgamated With Kerala StCB. The data of 13
DCCBs have been added to the StCB totals for previous years
to facilitate comparison and compute growth rates.
5. Recovery Position as on 30th June of the corresponding FY
Source: NABARD. Source: NABARD.
117Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Table V.17: Liabilities and Assets of District
Chart V.23: Share of Operating Expenses in
Central Co-operative Banks
Total Expenses
(Amount in `Crore)
Item Percentage
At end-March Variation
2019 2020 2018- 2019-
19 20
1 2 3 4 5
Liabilities
1. Capital 20,122 20,913 9.3 3.9
(4) (3.9)
2. Reserves 20,780 22,332 5.5 7.5
(4.1) (4.1)
3. Deposits 3,20,947 3,45,682 10.6 7.7
(63.9) (64.4)
4. Borrowings 92,962 97,448 7.9 4.8
(18.5) (18.1)
5. Other Liabilities 46,762 49,602 9.4 6.1
(9.3) (9.2)
Assets
1. Cash and Bank Balances 25,637 23,409 11.3 -8.7
(5.1) (4.3) Source: NABARD.
2. Investments 1,69,554 1,86,745 8.4 10.1
(33.8) (34.8)
3. Loans and Advances 2,65,026 2,79,272 8.4 5.4
expenses (Chart V.23). During 2019-20, a
(52.8) (52.1)
4. Accumulated Losses 6,139 6,721 15.6 9.5 deceleration in operating expenses, especially the
(1.2) (1.2)
5. Other Assets 35,217 39,830 26.2 13.1 wage bill, helped in building up their operating
(7) (7.4)
profits. An acceleration in interest income more
Total Liabilities/Assets 5,01,573 5,35,977 9.7 6.9
(100.00) (100.00) than compensated for an increase in interest
Notes: 1. Figures in parentheses are proportion to total liabilities/assets expenses, and accompanied by a slowdown in
(in per cent).
provisions and contingencies, produced a surge
2. Y-o-Y variations could be slightly different because absolute
numbers have been rounded off to `1 Crore in the table. in net profits in 2019-20 after a contraction for
3. Components may not add up to the total due to rounding off.
4. During 2019-20, 13 DCCBs (except Mallapuram DCCB) in three consecutive years (Table V.18).
Kerala were amalgamated with Kerala StCB. The data of 13
DCCBs have been deducted from the DCCB totals for previous V.53 Typically, DCCBs in the southern and
years to facilitate comparison and compute growth rates.
eastern regions contribute the lion’s share in
Source: NABARD.
all-India net profits. During 2019-20, however,
profits of the western region, especially
side and loans and advances on the assets side.
Maharashtra, accelerated, surpassing the
The contraction in cash and bank balances—due
eastern region (Chart V.24). DCCBs in Tamil
to lower CRR requirements13—was matched by
Nadu posted the highest net profits while those
an acceleration in investments (Table V.17).
in Madhya Pradesh registered the highest net
Profitability
losses. Out of 351 DCCBs, 60 were loss-making
V.52 DCCBs have a higher wage bill burden during 2019-20, with a cumulative loss of `1,041
than StCBs, which pushes up their operating crore (Appendix Table V.4.).
13 On March 27, 2020, as a one-time measure to help banks tide over the disruption caused by COVID-19, the Reserve Bank decided
to reduce the CRR of all banks by 100 basis points to 3.0 per cent of net demand and time liabilities (NDTL) with effect from the
reporting fortnight beginning March 28, 2020.
118DEVELOPMENTS IN CO-OPERATIVE BANKING
Table V.18: Financial Performance of District
Chart V.24: DCCBs’ Profits
Central Co-operative Banks
(Amount in `Crore)
Item As during Percentage Variation
2018-19 2019-20 2018-19 2019-20
1 2 3 4 5
A. Income (i+ii) 35,778 38,398 5.3 7.3
(100.00) (100.00)
i. Interest Income 33,995 36,473 4.8 7.3
(95) (94.9)
ii. Other Income 1,782 1,924 14.6 8.0
(4.9) (5)
B. Expenditure (i+ii+iii) 35,119 37,552 6.8 6.9
(100.00) (100.00)
i. Interest Expended 23,014 24,830 3.3 7.9
(65.5) (66.1)
ii. Provisions and 3,596 3,886 17.2 8.0
Contingencies (10.2) (10.3)
iii. Operating 8,508 8,836 12.9 3.9
Expenses (24.2) (23.5)
Of which, Wage Bill 5,374 5,663 12.2 5.4 Note: Data for Southern region for the two years is not comparable
(15.3) (15) as the impact of amalgamation of Kerala DCCBs is not accounted for.
C. Profits Source: NABARD.
i. Operating Profits 3,784 4,229 2.7 11.8
ii. Net Profits 659 846 -39.8 28.4
Notes: 1. Figures in parentheses are in proportion to total income/ Kashmir, Madhya Pradesh, Himachal Pradesh
expenditure (in per cent).
and Maharashtra have NPA to loan ratios
2. Y-o-Y variations could be slightly different because absolute
numbers have been rounded off to ` 1 Crore in the table.
exceeding 20 per cent (Appendix Table V.4).
3. Components may not add up to the total due to rounding off.
4. During 2019-20, 13 DCCBs (except Mallapuram DCCB) in
Kerala were amalgamated with Kerala StCB. The data of 13 V.56 As per provisional data from NABARD
DCCBs have been deducted from the DCCB totals for previous
years to facilitate comparison and compute growth rates. for 2020-21, financial indicators of StCBs and
Source: NABARD.
DCCBs suggest that their performance had
improved despite the pandemic due to regulatory
Asset Quality
Chart V.25: NPA Ratio: StCBs versus DCCBs
V.54 DCCBs have faced higher asset quality
stress than StCBs for more than a decade now.
Both have been worsening since 2016-17 when
a number of states announced farm debt waiver
schemes, partly affecting the credit culture and
the recovery-to-demand ratio (Chart V.25).
V.55 The deterioration in the asset quality
of DCCBs continued in 2019-20 (Table V.19).
A deceleration in sub-standard assets and
acceleration in doubtful assets is indicative
of aging of bad assets and stress becoming
entrenched. Weak credit culture, governance
issues and poor management practices in some
DCCBs play a major role in worsening asset
quality. Five states viz., Jharkhand, Jammu and Source: NABARD.
119Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Table V.19: Soundness Indicators of District and fiscal support from the Reserve Bank as well
Central Cooperative Banks
as government agencies (Box V.2).
(Amount in `Crore)
Item At Percentage 4.1.3 Primary Agricultural Credit Societies
end-March Variation
V.57 Primary Agricultural Credit Societies
2019 20202018-192019-20
1 2 3 4 5 (PACS) constitute the third tier in the rural
A. Total NPAs (i+ ii + iii) 31,998 35,298 15.7 10.3 co-operative structure. They primarily engage
i) Sub- standard 15,641 15,885 19.5 1.6
(48.8) (45.0) in providing short-term and medium-term
ii) Doubtful 13,918 16,990 15.0 22.1
agricultural credit, along with arranging for the
(43.4) (48.1)
iii) Loss 2,439 2,423 -0.9 -0.6
supply of agricultural inputs, distribution of
(7.6) (6.8)
B. NPAs to Loans Ratio (%) 12.1 12.6 - - consumer articles and marketing of produce for
C. Recovery to Demand Ratio (%) 72.0 70.2 - -
their members.
Notes: 1. Figures in parentheses are proportion to total NPAs (in per
cent).
V.58 PACS had a reach into 6,44,089
2. Y-o-y variations could be slightly different because absolute
numbers have been rounded off to `1 Crore in the table. villages, serving 13.8 crore members and 5.3
3. Components may not add up to the total due to rounding off.
4. During 2019-20, 13 DCCBs (except Mallapuram DCCB) in crore borrowers, with dominant presence in
Kerala were amalgamated with Kerala StCB. The data of 13
DCCBs have been deducted from the DCCB totals for previous the western region at end-March 2020. The
years to facilitate comparison and compute growth rates.
5. Recovery Position as on 30th June of corresponding FY. borrower-to-member ratio—a metric to gauge
Source: NABARD.
credit penetration of PACS—has progressively
Box V.2: Impact of COVID-19 on Rural Co-operative Banks
StCBs and DCCBs together have over 78 per cent of their Rural co-operative institutions employed innovative tools
branches in rural/semi-urban areas and agricultural loans and strategies to deal with the pandemic as presented
constitute over 40 per cent and 50 per cent, respectively, below:
of their outstanding loan portfolio. As compared to SCBs,
StCBs and DCCBs were thus operating in favourable Table 2: Challenges and Strategies in the Face of the Pandemic
geographies and sectors in managing the pandemic. Impact on Strategies Adopted
The share of co-operative banks in ground level credit to Lending • The RuPay KCC helped farmers to access timely credit.
agriculture has been declining consistently as SCBs made Operations • Online workshops were conducted for staff.
inroads in this segment. In 2020-21, however, the share of • Closed User Groups (CUG) were formed to monitor day
to day activities of branches and field staff.
the former increased on sharp acceleration in fresh loans
• Review meetings were conducted through video
provided (Table 1).
conferencing to monitor progress in credit business.
94 per cent of StCBs and 88 per cent of DCCBs14 reported Liquidity • Reduction in CRR by 100 bps.
profits in 2020-21 as compared with 97 per cent and 83 • Enhanced borrowing under the Marginal Standing
Facility (MSF)
per cent, respectively, in 2019-20.
• NABARD’s Special Liquidity Facility which disbursed
`16,800 crore to rural co-operatives.
Table 1: Share in Credit Flow to Agriculture (%) Capital • Recapitalisation by some state governments helped in
Adequacy shoring up capital buffers.
Year Co-operative banks RRBs Commercial Banks • Some augmented their capital through internal
accruals and share capital contribution from individual
2015-16 16.7 13.0 70.2
members or credit societies.
2016-17 13.4 11.6 75.0
2017-18 12.9 12.1 74.9 Source: NABARD
2018-19 12.1 11.9 76.0
2019-20 11.3 11.9 76.8 StCBs and DCCBs weathered the first wave of the pandemic
2020-21* 12.0 12.2 75.8 well, but early indicators suggest that the impact of the
Note: *-Data are provisional. second wave has been more pronounced and stress is
Source: Data submitted by Banks on ENSURE portal of NABARD. likely to rise in 2021-22 on account of fresh slippages.
14 Data of Tamil Nadu Industrial Co-operative Bank Ltd. (TAICO) which is also a DCCB, has not been included as it is an industrial
co-operative bank.
120DEVELOPMENTS IN CO-OPERATIVE BANKING
declined from 39.6 per cent in 2016-17 to 38 per they lend through PCARDBs as well as through
cent in 2019-20. They are conduits of financial their own branches.
inclusion at the grassroot level as majority of
4.2.1 State Co-operative Agriculture and Rural
their borrowers as well as members are marginal
Development Banks (SCARDBs)
farmers (Appendix Table V.7).
V.62 Functioning with 791 branches across
V.59 A healthy growth in deposits was
13 states/UTs, the consolidated balance sheet of
matched by expansion of loans, with short-term
SCARDBs contracted for the third consecutive
outstanding loans doubling (Appendix Table
year in 2019-20, dragged down by investments on
V.5). Borrowings, on the other hand, contracted
the assets side and borrowings on the liabilities
marginally. There was also a substantial
side (Appendix Table V.8). Turning their financial
reduction in the government’s contribution to
position around, they reported net profits after a
PACS’ owned funds.
gap of three years, with SCARDBs in Uttar Pradesh
V.60 Both agricultural and non-agricultural
and Haryana completely reversing their losses
lending expanded at similar rates, which helped
reported in 2018-19 (Appendix Table V.11).
maintain the dominant share of agricultural
Operating profits doubled as operating expenses
loans in total lending at 81 per cent in
and interest expenditure declined, and non-
2019-20. While half of the total PACS were
interest income grew by 150 per cent (Appendix
profitable during the year, the losses incurred
Table V.9). However, asset quality continued to
by the other half outweighed profits. The bulk
deteriorate as sub-standard and doubtful assets
of the losses stemmed from the southern region,
grew by 19 per cent and 29 per cent, respectively,
especially Andhra Pradesh and Kerala (Appendix
along with a marginal reduction in recovery-to-
Table V.6).
demand ratio (Appendix Table V.10).
4.2 Long Term Rural Co-operatives
4.2.2 Primary Co-operative Agriculture and
V.61 Long-term co-operatives provide term
Rural Development Banks (PCARDBs)
finance for capital formation and rural non-farm
projects. Their structure, consisting of state co- V.63 At end-March 2020, there were 602
operative agriculture and rural development PCARDBs functioning across eight states.
banks (SCARDBs) operating at the state level The consolidated balance sheet of PCARDBs
and primary co-operative agriculture and rural expanded in 2019-20 on the back of higher
development banks (PCARDBs) operating at the borrowings and reserves on the liabilities side
district/block level, does not follow a uniform and loans and advances and investments on
pattern across states. Currently, five (Gujarat, the assets side (Appendix Table V.12). Both
Jammu and Kashmir, Puducherry, Tripura and interest and non-interest income rose; however,
Uttar Pradesh) out of thirteen fully functional the substantial increase in provisions and
SCARDBs, are unitary, i.e., they lend directly contingencies on the expenditure side led to net
without separate PCARDBs. Six (Haryana, losses for PCARDBs, with Kerala reporting the
Karnataka, Kerala, Punjab, Rajasthan and highest absolute losses (Appendix Table V.13).
Tamil Nadu) are federal in nature, i.e., they lend The NPA ratio of PCARDBs worsened, with the
through PCARDBs, and two (Himachal Pradesh northern states reporting the highest NPA ratios.
and West Bengal) have mixed structures, i.e., (Appendix Table V.14 and V.15).
121Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
5. Overall Assessment such as SFBs. Matters of inadequate governance
are being addressed through regulatory as well
V.64 Early indicators suggest that co-operative
as enforcement actions. Going forward, with a
banks weathered the first wave of the pandemic
turnaround in economic activity, it is expected
well. Structural reforms that address deep-
seated fault lines are expected to catalyse change that the sector may build on its resilience and
in their operations. UCBs are increasingly leverage on recent financial improvements to
adopting technology to address competitive expand its footprint in order to reach finance to
pressures from other niche banking segments grassroot levels.
122NON-BANKING FINANCIAL
VI
INSTITUTIONS
The pandemic tested the resilience of the NBFC sector. Their balance sheet expanded in 2020-21 on the
back of credit growth of NBFCs-ND-SI aided by proactive policy support and revival of the economy. Asset
quality and capital buffers improved during the year, while profitability worsened marginally. HFCs’ balance
sheet grew on the back of a pickup in credit in 2020-21. The consolidated balance sheet of AIFIs expanded
during 2020-21 and their net profits posted an impressive growth.
1. Introduction and the National Housing Bank (NHB) are apex
financial institutions that play an important role
VI.1 During 2020-21, non-banking financial
in meeting the long-term funding requirements
companies (NBFCs) consolidated their balance
of agriculture and the rural sector, foreign trade,
sheets with credit deployment gaining traction,
small industries, housing finance companies,
improved asset quality and enhanced capital
NBFCs, Micro Finance Institutions (MFIs) and
buffers notwithstanding the testing challenges
other specialised segments and institutions.
imposed by the pandemic. This chapter deals
PDs act as market makers in the government
with non-banking financial institutions (NBFIs)
securities (G-secs) market, besides ensuring
regulated by the Reserve Bank1 comprising
subscription to primary issuances.
NBFCs, housing finance companies (HFCs), all-
India financial institutions (AIFIs) and primary VI.2 The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has
dealers (PDs). NBFCs are government/ public/ deeply impacted the NBFC sector. In Q1:2020-
private limited companies engaged in purveying 21, they faced severe disruptions during and in
credit to key and niche sectors of the economy; the wake of the nation-wide lockdown, leading to
viz., from infrastructure to the unbanked sections a standstill of economic activity and a contraction
of the society. HFCs specialise in housing finance of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) by 24.4 per
to individuals, co-operative societies, corporate cent. As the impact on the real sector spilled
bodies, and lease commercial and residential over to financial markets, NBFCs witnessed a
premises to support housing activity in the sharp drop in collections and disbursements
country (Chart VI.1)2. AIFIs, i.e., the National and a substantial increase in the cost of their
Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development borrowings even as access to market funding
(NABARD), the EXIM Bank of India, the Small became restricted. The provision of moratorium
Industries Development Bank of India (SIDBI) also had an impact on their cash inflows, resulting
1 Although, merchant banking companies, stock exchanges, companies engaged in the business of stock-broking/sub-broking,
alternative investment fund companies, nidhi companies, insurance companies and chit fund companies are NBFCs, they have
been exempted from the requirement of registration with the Reserve Bank under Section 45-IA of the RBI Act, 1934.
2 The Finance (No.2) Act, 2019 (23 of 2019) amended the National Housing Bank Act, 1987, conferring certain powers for regulation
of housing finance companies (HFCs) with the Reserve Bank of India. HFCs are henceforth treated as a category of NBFCs for
regulatory purposes.
123Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Chart VI.1: Structure of NBFIs under the Reserve Bank’s Regulation
(As on September 30, 2021)
Non-Banking Financial Institutions
All India Financial Non-Banking Financial Primary Dealers
Institutions (4) Companies (9,680) (21)
NABARD, SIDBI, Asset Housing Finance
NBFCs-D NBFCs-ND Bank PDs
EXIM Bank and Reconstruction Companies
(52) (9,500) (14)
NHB Companies (28) (100)
Systemically Important
NBFCs-ND Standalone PDs
(NBFCs-ND-SI) (312) (7)
Other NBFCs-ND
(NBFCs-ND)
(9,188)
Notes: 1. Figures in parentheses indicate the number of institutions (Provisional).
2. Although, Standalone PDs are registered as NBFCs under Section 45-IA of RBI Act, 1934, they have been kept under PD.
3. Other NBFCs-ND include 61 CICs.
Source: RBI.
in reduction in collections. Timely measures on costs, quick decision making, customer
monetary, fiscal, and regulatory fronts by the orientation and prompt provision of services
Reserve Bank and the government aided their have typically differentiated NBFCs from banks.
revival, eased financial conditions and bolstered The reach and last mile advantages of NBFCs
market sentiments. From Q2:2020-21 onwards, have empowered them with agility, innovation
the situation improved, aided by policy support. and a cutting edge in providing formal financial
Many NBFCs also recalibrated their business services to underbanked and unserved sections
strategies, leveraging on digital technology with of the society.
a strong emphasis on data analytics. The NBFC
VI.4 The rest of the chapter is organised into
sector faced headwinds again when the second
four sections. Section 2 provides an overview
wave hit the country by March 2021. With the
of the NBFC sector – both non-deposit taking
passing of the second wave, the outlook is
systemically important NBFCs (NBFCs-ND-
brightening again; however, downside risks
SI) and deposit-taking NBFCs (NBFCs-D). The
remain significant.
activities and financial performance of HFCs are
VI.3 NBFCs have a competitive edge in also covered in this section. An assessment of
their superior understanding of regional the performance of AIFIs is made in Section 3.
dynamics, well-developed collection systems
Section 4 evaluates the role and performance of
and personalised services in the drive to expand
PDs. Section 5 concludes and offers some policy
financial inclusion in India. Lower transaction
perspectives.
124NON-BANKING FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
Chart VI.2: NBFCs’ Credit vis-à-vis SCBs’ Credit and GDP
a. Credit to GDP Ratio (end-March) b. NBFCs’ Credit to SCBs’ Credit Ratio and their Growth
Note: GDP refers to GDP at Current Market Prices (base: 2011-12).
Sources: 1. Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India, various issues.
2. Handbook of Statistics on the Indian Economy, various issues.
2. Non-Banking Financial Companies on activities, there are 11 categories of NBFCs
(NBFCs)3 (Table VI.1).
VI.5 NBFCs’ credit intensity measured by the VI.7 Regulatory guidelines mandate that only
credit/GDP ratio has been rising consistently, those NBFCs with minimum net owned funds
reaching a high in 2021 (Chart VI.2 a). (NOF) of `2 crore4 can be allowed to operate.
Significantly, NBFCs’ credit as proportion to
In 2018-19, there was a record number of
SCBs’ credit has also risen (Chart VI.2 b).
cancellations/surrender of licenses of non-
VI.6 NBFCs can be classified on the basis of a) compliant NBFCs. During 2020-21, the number
asset/liability structures; b) systemic importance; of registrations and cancellations were the lowest
and c) the activities they undertake. In terms of in the last five years (Chart VI.3).
liability structures, NBFCs are subdivided into
2.1 Ownership Pattern
deposit-taking NBFCs (NBFCs-D) - which accept
VI.8 The NBFC sector is dominated by
and hold public deposits - and non-deposit
NBFCs-ND-SI that constitute 85.1 per cent of
taking NBFCs (NBFCs-ND) - which source their
funding from markets and banks. Among non- the total assets of the sector. The number of
deposit taking NBFCs, those with asset size of large government-owned NBFCs, which mainly
`500 crore or more are classified as non-deposit lend in the infrastructure space, has remained
taking systemically important NBFCs (NBFCs- unchanged but their share in total assets of
ND-SI). As on September 30, 2021, there were NBFCs-ND-SI has increased during the year
52 NBFCs-D and 312 NBFCs-ND-SI. Based (Table VI.2).
3 This section does not include Core Investment Companies (CICs) and other NBFCs-ND.
4 Stipulation differs for IFCs, IDF-NBFCs, HFCs, NBFC-MGC, NBFCs-MFI, CICs and Factors.
125Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Table VI.1 :Classification of NBFCs by Activity
Type of NBFC Activity
1. Investment and Credit Company (ICC) Lending and investment.
2. NBFC-Infrastructure Finance Company (NBFC-IFC) Financing of infrastructure sector.
3. Core Investment Company (CIC) Investment in equity shares, preference shares, debt, or loans of group companies.
4. NBFC-Infrastructure Debt Fund (NBFC-IDF) Facilitation of flow of long-term debt only into post commencement operations in infrastructure
projects which have completed at least one year of satisfactory performance.
5. NBFC-Micro Finance Institution (NBFC-MFI) Providing collateral free small ticket loans to economically disadvantaged groups.
6. NBFC-Factor Acquisition of receivables of an assignor or extending loans against the security interest of the
receivables at a discount.
7. NBFC-Non-Operative Financial Holding Company Facilitation of promoters/ promoter groups in setting up new banks.
(NBFC-NOFHC)
8. Mortgage Guarantee Company (MGC) Undertaking of mortgage guarantee business.
9. NBFC-Account Aggregator (NBFC-AA) Collecting and providing information about a customer’s financial assets in a consolidated,
organised, and retrievable manner to the customer or others as specified by the customer.
10. NBFC–Peer to Peer Lending Platform (NBFC-P2P) Providing an online platform to bring lenders and borrowers together to help mobilise funds.
11. Housing Finance Company (HFC) Financing for housing.
Source: RBI.
VI.9 The Reserve Bank has been monitoring only investment grade NBFCs-D shall accept
the operations and growth of NBFCs-D in order fixed deposits from the public up to a limit of 1.5
to secure depositors’ interest, given that deposits times of their NOF and for a tenure of 12 to 60
of NBFCs-D are not covered by the Deposit months only, with interest rates capped at 12.5
Insurance and Credit Guarantee Corporation per cent.
(DICGC). The Reserve Bank has mandated that
VI.10 NBFCs-D accounted for 14.9 per cent of
the total assets of the NBFC sector at end-March
2021. Privately owned NBFCs-D accounted for
Chart VI.3 : Registrations and Cancellations of
88.4 per cent of NBFCs-D’ total assets in 2020-
Certificate of Registrations of NBFCs
21 (Table VI.2).
2.2 Balance Sheet
VI.11 During the year under review, the balance
sheet of NBFCs expanded at a faster rate than
a year ago, driven essentially by growth in
credit and investments of NBFCs-ND-SI. The
balance sheet of NBFCs-D, on the other hand,
grew modestly as they adopted a more cautious
approach. In 2020-21, the share capital and
reserves of NBFCs expanded significantly as
some NBFCs raised additional capital via rights
issues, prudently buttressing their financials
against the likely recognition of impaired assets
Note: Data are provisional.
Source: RBI. after the lifting of the Supreme Court’s order on
126NON-BANKING FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
Table VI.2: Ownership Pattern of NBFCs
(End-March 2021)
(Amount in ` crore)
Type NBFC-ND-SI NBFC-D
Number of Asset Size Asset Share Number of Asset Size Asset Share
Companies in per cent Companies in per cent
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
A. Government Companies 21 13,47,377 45.6 5 60,214 11.6
B. Non-government Companies (1+2) 379 16,09,976 54.4 50 4,57,769 88.4
1. Public Limited Companies 202 11,59,669 39.2 48 3,15,889 61.0
2. Private Limited Companies 177 4,50,307 15.2 2 1,41,880 27.4
Total (A+B) 400$ 29,57,352 100.0 55 5,17,983 100.0
Notes: 1. Data are provisional.
2. $The total number of NBFCs-ND-SI differs from that in Chart VI.1 as it includes group companies even with less than `500 crore asset size.
Source: Supervisory Returns, RBI.
standstill on asset classification5. NBFCs’ credit source of funding. On the assets side, investments
also gained traction with the support provided by continued to grow at an accelerated pace, while
regulatory initiatives6, including the “co-lending loans and advances picked up pace marginally
model” introduced in November 2020, which vis-à-vis 2019-20 (Table VI.3).
allows banks to co-lend with NBFCs (including
VI.13 On credit disbursement, 57 NBFCs, each
HFCs) in respect of priority sector loans. NBFCs
having a loan book of more than `5000 crore,
also increased their investments substantially
lent 90.1 per cent of the total credit disbursed
during the year. In view of the pandemic, NBFCs
in 2020-21(Chart VI.4). Smaller NBFCs (asset
also built liquidity buffers, with their cash and size less than `500 crore) are numerous but
bank balances growing at a robust pace, except accounted for only 0.9 per cent of total NBFC
for NBFCs-ND-SI. In 2021-22 (up to September), credit outstanding.
balance sheet growth of NBFCs remained buoyant
VI.14 Amongst NBFCs-ND-SI, ICCs, IFCs and
due to pick up in investments by NBFCs-ND-SI
NBFCs-MFI together accounted for 98.1 per cent
(Appendix Tables VI.1, VI.2 and VI.3).
of the total asset size of the sub-sector in March
VI.12 Public deposits of NBFCs-D grew strongly 2021. All categories of NBFCs-ND-SI exhibited
in 2019-20 and 2020-21 and remained a stable balance sheet growth in 2020-21, except for
5 In view of the pandemic, the Reserve Bank introduced a policy on March 27, 2020 which allowed lending institutions to grant a
moratorium on payment of instalments of term loans falling due between March 1, 2020 and May 31, 2020 which was extended
till August 31, 2020. In October 2020, the Supreme Court passed an interim order that any account which was standard as of
August 31, 2020 when the moratorium ended should not be downgraded until final orders. On March 23, 2021, the Supreme
Court lifted this ban on NPA classification.
6 When COVID-19 struck, the Reserve Bank introduced TLTRO to provide targeted liquidity to sectors and entities experiencing
liquidity constraints and restricted market access. The funds received by banks were to be invested in investment grade corporate
debt. Under TLTRO 1.0 which was announced on March 27, 2020, the Reserve Bank conducted four auctions in tranches of
`25,000 crore each, amounting to a total of `1,00,000 crore. TLTRO 2.0 was announced on 17 April, 2020 which sought to
address liquidity constraints faced by small and mid-sized corporates, including NBFCs and micro finance institutions (MFIs).
Under the TLTRO 2.0 window, a sum of `50,000 crore was to be made available at policy repo rate for tenors up to three
years. In the first tranche, total bids received amounted to `12,850 crores. On October 9, 2020, the Reserve Bank announced
commencement of on-tap TLTRO of up to three years tenor for a total amount of up to `1, 00,000 crore at a floating rate linked to
the policy repo rate to revive economic activity in certain sectors which have backward and forward linkages.
127Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Table VI.3: Abridged Balance Sheet of NBFCs
(Amount in ` crore)
Items As at end-March - 2020 As at end-March - 2021 As at end- September - 2021
NBFCs NBFCs- NBFCs-D NBFCs NBFCs- NBFCs-D NBFCs NBFCs- NBFCs-D
ND-SI ND-SI ND-SI
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1. Share Capital and Reserves 6,13,810 5,28,044 85,766 7,76,214 6,75,759 1,00,455 8,12,562 7,06,936 1,05,626
(11.8) (9.6) (27.7) (26.5) (28.0) (17.1) (25.6) (28.2) (10.5)
2. Public Deposits 50,022 - 50,022 62,262 - 62,262 66,443 - 66,443
(24.9) (24.9) (24.5) (24.5) (21.1) (21.1)
3. Debentures 9,04,655 8,01,317 1,03,338 9,84,448 8,85,746 98,702 9,88,342 8,85,414 1,02,928
(10.1) (10.9) (4.2) (8.8) (10.5) (-4.5) (7) (7.2) (5.6)
4. Bank Borrowings 6,93,918 5,69,530 1,24,388 7,75,491 6,60,669 1,14,822 7,30,740 6,25,219 1,05,521
(13.8) (13.1) (17.1) (11.8) (16) (-7.7) (5.0) (9.5) (-15.8)
5. Commercial Paper 64,877 57,399 7,478 70,631 62,109 8,523 71,990 60,369 11,621
(-54.6) (-54.0) (-58.7) (8.9) (8.2) (14.0) (6.0) (-0.1) (56.0)
6. Others 7,53,994 6,38,166 1,15,828 8,06,289 6,73,069 1,33,219 8,40,595 7,00,069 1,40,527
(13.9) (11.8) (27.1) (6.9) (5.5) (15) (7.5) (5.8) (16.9)
Total Liabilities/Assets 30,81,276 25,94,456 4,86,820 34,75,335 29,57,352 5,17,983 35,10,671 29,78,006 5,32,665
(9.1) (8.0) (15.4) (12.8) (14.0) (6.4) (10.7) (11.5) (6.3)
1. Loans and Advances 24,60,552 20,42,745 4,17,807 26,98,689 22,74,622 4,24,068 26,61,782 22,22,579 4,39,203
(7.2) (6.6) (10.2) (9.7) (11.4) (1.5) (4.9) (4.7) (5.8)
2. Investments 2,93,903 2,54,752 39,151 4,19,319 3,73,282 46,037 4,69,945 4,23,116 46,829
(13.5) (8.4) (63.9) (42.7) (46.5) (17.6) (50.5) (61.9) (-8.1)
3. Cash and Bank Balances 1,30,956 1,13,681 17,275 1,56,260 1,22,096 34,164 1,62,029 1,29,667 32,363
(36.4) (31.8) (76.5) (19.3) (7.4) (97.8) (20.3) (16.6) (37.4)
4. Other Current Assets 1,47,981 1,38,487 9,494 1,56,871 1,46,727 10,145 1,60,835 1,50,712 10,123
(19.2) (18.7) (26.1) (6.0) (5.9) (6.9) (6.5) (7.4) (-5.6)
5. Other Assets 47,884 44,792 3,093 44,195 40,625 3,570 56,081 51,934 4,147
(-5.3) (-8.5) (93.2) (-7.7) (-9.3) (15.4) (56.2) (47.2) (565.6)
Notes: 1. Data are provisional.
2. Figures in parentheses indicate y-o-y growth in per cent.
Source: Supervisory Returns, RBI.
NBFCs-Factor (Table VI.4). With the
Chart VI.4: Distribution of NBFCs’ Credit
(End- March 2021) harmonisation of major NBFC categories,
NBFCs-D now comprise only ICCs.
VI.15 ICCs’ share in total assets dipped
marginally. Their credit growth, albeit modest,
was aided by favourable base effects. Balance
sheets of micro finance institutions (NBFCs-
MFI), on the other hand, expanded on the back
of robust credit growth, a favourable policy
environment, pent-up demand and phased
reopening of the economy (Chart VI.5 a).
VI.16 IFCs’ credit disbursements in the
infrastructure sector (power) grew strongly,
Notes: 1. Bubble size corresponds to share of NBFCs in total number.
2. Figures are share of NBFCs in total credit. insulated from the impact of COVID-19. Two large
3. NBFCs here include NBFCs-ND-SI, group companies and
government-owned NBFCs ensured liquidity in
NBFCs-D.
Source: Supervisory Returns, RBI.
the power sector during the pandemic period.
128NON-BANKING FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
Table VI.4: Major Components of Liabilities and Assets of NBFCs-ND-SI by Classification
(Amount in ` crore)
Category / Liability As at end-March 2020 As at end-March 2021 As at end- September 2021 Percentage Variation
of Total Liabilities
Borrow- Other Total Borrow- Other Total Borrow- Other Total
ings Liabilities Liabilities ings Liabilities Liabilities ings Liabilities Liabilities (March (March
2020 2021
over over
March March
2019) 2020)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
ICC 8,93,148 4,64,366 13,57,513 9,25,001 6,05,666 15,30,667 8,82,735 6,16,628 14,99,363 3.6 12.8
NBFC-Factor 1,822 2,070 3,893 1,839 2,039 3,878 1,632 1,964 3,596 -6.7 -0.4
IDF-NBFC 24,868 4,935 29,804 28,429 6,415 34,844 31,510 6,764 38,274 20.9 16.9
Infrastructure Finance Company 9,10,033 2,15,025 11,25,058 10,41,895 2,39,500 12,81,395 10,65,847 2,61,896 13,27,743 13.4 13.9
NBFC-MFI 45,594 19,241 64,835 62,310 26,249 88,559 58,562 22,924 81,487 -1.0 36.6
Others 2 13,352 13,354 77 17,933 18,009 80 27,462 27,542 117.5 34.9
Total 18,75,467 7,18,989 25,94,456 20,59,551 8,97,801 29,57,352 20,40,367 9,37,639 29,78,006 8.0 14.0
Category / Asset Loans and Other Total Loans and Other Total Loans Other Total Percentage Variation
Advances Assets Assets Advances Assets Assets and Assets Assets of Total Assets
Advances
(March (March
2020 2021
over over
March March
2019) 2020)
ICC 9,44,992 4,12,521 13,57,513 10,03,748 5,26,919 15,30,667 9,20,368 5,78,995 14,99,363 3.6 12.8
NBFC-Factor 3,096 797 3,893 2,961 917 3,878 2,763 833 3,596 -6.7 -0.4
IDF-NBFC 27,410 2,394 29,804 30,414 4,430 34,844 31,477 6,797 38,274 20.9 16.9
Infrastructure Finance Company 10,15,853 1,09,205 11,25,058 11,69,240 1,12,155 12,81,395 12,04,869 1,22,874 13,27,743 13.4 13.9
NBFC-MFI 51,394 13,441 64,835 68,258 20,301 88,559 63,102 18,385 81,487 -1.0 36.6
Others - 13,354 13,354 - 18,009 18,009 - 27,542 27,542 117.5 34.9
Total 20,42,745 5,51,711 25,94,456 22,74,622 6,82,731 29,57,352 22,22,579 7,55,427 29,78,006 8.0 14.0
Note: Data are provisional.
Source: Supervisory Returns, RBI.
They sanctioned `1.34 lakh crore and disbursed (DISCOMs) under the Liquidity Infusion Scheme
over `79,000 crore to distribution utilities as part of the Aatmanirbhar Bharat Abhiyaan of
Chart VI.5: Classification-wise NBFCs: Select Indicators
a. Share in Total Assets
b. Growth in Loans and Advances
(At end-March)
Source: Supervisory Returns, RBI.
129Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
together comprise 96.2 per cent credit extended
the Union Government. Under this scheme, they
by NBFCs as of end-March 2021. The fall in the
extended special long-term transitional loans at
share of ICCs was primarily due to the strong
concessional rates to DISCOMS to enable them
growth of other two categories viz., IFCs and
to clear their outstanding dues. A renewed focus
NBFCs-MFI (Chart VI.6 a & b).
on encouraging green energy and introduction
of policy measures to boost renewable projects VI.18 In 2020-21, the recovery in sectoral lending
has enabled greater funding of renewable energy of NBFCs has been uneven. Credit to agriculture
projects by NBFCs. Another government-owned and services recorded absolute declines, while
NBFC in the railway sector recorded substantial retail and industrial sectors expanded. Growth
growth (48 per cent) in annual disbursements in in retail loans was primarily driven by housing
2020-21. These three government-owned NBFCs loans, vehicle loans, microfinance and loans
contributed 35.5 per cent of credit flows from against the collateral of gold (Table VI.5).
the NBFC sector during the year. NBFCs-Factor,
VI.19 Both ICCs and NBFCs-MFI increased
on the other hand, faced the brunt of the impact
lending to the industrial sector at the cost
of COVID-19 which took a heavy toll on MSMEs
of lending to agriculture. ICCs reduced their
(Chart VI.5 b).
exposure to services [including commercial
2.3 Sectoral Credit of NBFCs
real estate (CRE)] in contact-sensitive segments
VI.17 Industry remained the largest recipient of severely affected by the pandemic. As NBFCs-
credit extended by the NBFC sector, followed by MFI are required to have a minimum of 85 per
retail loans and services (Appendix Table VI.4). cent of their net assets in microfinance loans
In 2020-21, the share of the retail loan portfolio by regulation, the share of retail loans in their
of the sector continued to rise with a concomitant overall credit portfolio is the largest. IFCs lend
fall in the share of services sector. ICCs and IFCs mostly to the industrial sector (Chart VI.7).
Chart V1.6: Distribution of NBFC Credit
(End-March)
a. Sectoral b. Classification-wise
Source: Supervisory Returns, RBI.
130NON-BANKING FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
Table VI.5: Sectoral Credit Deployment by NBFCs
(` crore)
Type At end-March 2020 At end-March 2021 At end-September 2021 Percentage Variation
2019-20 2020-21
1 2 3 4 5 6
I. Gross Advances 24,60,552 26,98,689 26,61,782 7.2 9.7
II. Food Credit 75 274 10 -62.5 265.9
III. Non-food Credit (1 to 5) 24,60,477 26,98,415 26,61,772 7.2 9.7
1. Agriculture and Allied Activities 49,012 37,892 37,737 -21.9 -22.7
2. Industry (2.1 to 2.4) 9,66,456 10,61,284 10,63,631 3.8 9.8
2.1 Micro and Small 36,441 44,294 36,156 -2.5 21.5
2.2 Medium 13,931 15,037 15,169 -13.0 7.9
2.3 Large 7,95,275 8,55,386 8,84,217 71.0 7.6
2.4 Others 1,20,809 1,46,567 1,28,090 -70.7 21.3
3. Services 3,56,624 3,29,320 3,27,550 -13.2 -7.7
Of which,
3.1 Commercial Real Estate 1,01,452 80,568 79,337 -24.9 -20.6
3.2 Retail Trade 35,041 26,638 25,604 -5.9 -24.0
4. Retail Loans 7,03,094 7,86,518 7,62,232 17.4 11.9
Of which,
4.1 Housing Loans 19,480 21,478 21,497 5.6 10.3
4.2 Consumer Durables 19,171 18,336 19,854 -2.3 -4.4
4.3 Vehicle/Auto Loans 3,32,449 3,56,551 3,48,671 9.3 7.2
4.4 Advances to Individuals 34,678 94,840 1,14,013 NA 173.5
against Gold
4.5 Micro finance loan/SHG Loan 43,802 57,270 60,008 NA 30.7
5. Other Non-food Credit 3,85,291 4,83,401 4,70,621 31.9 25.5
Note: Data are provisional.
Source: Supervisory Returns, RBI.
VI.20 Notwithstanding disruptions caused by and railway sectors, by government-owned
COVID-19 during the year, NBFCs’ industrial NBFCs, as alluded to earlier (Chart VI.8).
credit grew, reflecting their lending to the power
Chart VI.7: Classification-wise Sectoral Distribution of Credit Chart VI.8: NBFC Credit to Industry vis-a-vis
(At end-March) Macro Indicators
Source: 1. Supervisory Returns, RBI.
2. Handbook of Statistics on Indian Economy, RBI.
Source: Supervisory Returns, RBI. 3. CSO, MOSPI.
131Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
VI.21 The MSME sector was among the most MFI’ loan book comprises micro and small loans
pandemic afflicted sectors. Accordingly, the (Chart VI.9.b).
Reserve Bank and the Union Government
VI.23 In view of the significance of the sector
introduced several measures to revive activity
for income and employment generation, many
in the sector: a) special refinance facilities for
regulatory policies to support the sector have been
AIFIs, which included `15,000 crore to SIDBI
extended. The scheme of one-time restructuring
for on-lending/refinancing to the MSME sector; of loans to MSMEs without an asset classification
b) Emergency Credit Line Guarantee Scheme downgrade was extended in May 2021 and the
(ECLGS) which provided `3 lakh crore of exposure threshold was increased to `50 crore
unsecured loans to MSMEs and business; c) in June, 2021. The on Tap TLTRO scheme was
extension of the scheme7 of one-time restructuring extended till December 31, 2021. The special
of loans to MSMEs without an asset classification refinance facility was bolstered in April 2021
downgrade; d) permitting bank lending to NBFCs by providing fresh support of `15,000 crore to
(other than MFIs) for on-lending to agriculture, the SIDBI to meet the funding requirements of
MSMEs and housing to be classified as priority MSMEs during 2021-22. In June 2021, another
sector lending (PSL); e) introduction of on-tap special liquidity facility of `16,000 crore was
Targeted Long-Term Repo Operations (TLTRO) provided to the SIDBI for on-lending/refinancing
in October 2020 for reviving specific sectors, through novel models and structures including
including MSMEs. double intermediation and pooled bond/loan
issuances to meet MSMEs’ short and medium-
VI.22 NBFCs’ credit to MSMEs grew at 17.8 per
term credit needs with a focus on smaller
cent during 2020-21. ICCs, together with NBFCs-
MSMEs and businesses, including those in credit
MFI, are the main purveyors of MSME credit
deficient and aspirational districts. The Union
(Chart VI.9.a). Eleven per cent of the NBFCs-
Government extended the ECLGS facility till
Chart VI.9: MSME Credit by NBFCs
(At end-March)
a. Distribution b. Share of MSME Credit in Total Credit
Note: MSME lending to industrial sector only.
Source: Supervisory Returns, RBI.
7 Where the borrower’s account was a ‘standard asset’ as on March 1, 2020 and the aggregate exposure of banks and NBFCs was
not more than `25 crore.
132NON-BANKING FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
September 30, 2021 or till guarantees worth `3
Chart VI.11: Distribution of Retail Loans of NBFCs
trillion are issued. Bank lending to registered (At end-March)
NBFCs was permitted to be classified as PSL till
September 30, 2021.
VI.24 Nearly one-fourth of NBFCs’ credit to the
services sector goes to commercial real estate.
In the total lending to commercial real estate
by SCBs and NBFCs, the share of NBFCs was a
sizable 25.5 per cent in March 2021. Credit flows
to this segment have been severely affected as
both banks and NBFCs reduced their exposures
in view of the pandemic. In fact, credit flows
from NBFCs were in the negative zone in 2020-
21 while banks’ lending to the segment increased
only marginally (Chart VI.10).
Source: Supervisory Returns, RBI.
VI.25 Vehicle loans credit, the largest segment
negative zone in 2020-21 while passenger vehicle
in retail loans, witnessed reduction in share
sales picked up marginally aided by the opening
during 2020-21 owing to disruption of activity
up of the economy and a growing preference for
while the share of lending against gold doubled
personal vehicles. Tractor sales grew at a robust
(Chart VI.11).
pace in 2020-21 as agriculture and rural areas
VI.26 Vehicle financing is a niche area for NBFCs
were relatively insulated from the first wave and
in which they still account for a predominant
normal monsoon whetted activity (Chart VI.12).
share. Component-wise, sales growth of
Consequently, NBFCs rebalanced their credit
commercial vehicles continued to be in the
portfolios in favour of this section.
Chart VI.10: Incremental Credit to Commercial Real Chart VI.12: Vehicle Loans: NBFCs and SCBs
Estate: NBFCs and SCBs
Sources: 1. Supervisory Returns, RBI.
2. Society of Indian Automobile Manufacturers.
3. Tractor and Mechanization Association.
Source: 1. Supervisory Returns, RBI.
4. Handbook of Statistics on Indian Economy, RBI.
2. Handbook of Statistics on Indian Economy, RBI.
133Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Chart VI.13: Incremental Vehicle Loans: NBFCs and SCBs
a. NBFCs b. SCBs
Sources: 1. Supervisory Returns, RBI.
2. Handbook of Statistics on Indian Economy, RBI.
3. Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India, various issues.
VI.27 Incremental credit flows of NBFCs to the VI.29 NBFCs-MFI play a crucial role in
vehicle loans segment outpaced those of SCBs. furthering financial inclusion, with a share of
By 2020-21, NBFCs had a larger vehicle loan 31.1 per cent in total micro-credit (Chart VI.15).
portfolio than SCBs (Chart VI.13 a and b).
VI.30 Microfinance was adversely impacted
VI.28 NBFCs consolidated their position in the by the pandemic. During the first wave of
gold loan segment vis-a-vis SCBs in 2020-21 the pandemic (Q1:2020-21), the segment
(Chart VI.14). faced calamitous business interruptions with
Chart VI.14: Distribution of Advances against Gold: Chart VI.15: Micro-credit Loan Outstanding across
NBFCs and SCBs (At end-March) Lenders (At end- March 2021)
Source: 1. Supervisory Returns, RBI. Source: Micrometer, Issue 37, Microfinance Institutions Network
2. Handbook of Statistics on Indian Economy, RBI. (MFIN).
134NON-BANKING FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
drop in collections on account of the nation-
Chart VI.16: Disbursement Trend in the
wide lockdown as well as the moratorium. Microfinance Segment
Resumption of demand for credit facilitated
higher disbursements by Q4:2020-21. The
second wave further reduced the disbursements
due to localised lockdowns. Nevertheless, the
decline in Q1:2021-22 was not as severe as in
Q1:2020-21 (Chart VI.16).
VI.31 In the case of NBFCs-MFI, the pandemic
had differential impact on big and small NBFCs-
MFI (Box VI.1). The impact of the second wave
was subdued as compared to the first wave -
outstanding loans in June 2021 were higher than
what was witnessed till December 2020, which
bears testimony to the resilience of the segment
Source: Micrometer, Issue 36-37, MFIN.
(Chart VI.17).
Box VI.1: Impact of COVID-19 on NBFCs-MFI
NBFCs-MFI provide collateral-free, short-term and where i and t represent NBFC and quarter, respectively.
small-ticket loans to borrowers, especially low-income The equation was estimated independently for for (a):
households and unorganised sector enterprises that are the incremental credit8 on yearly basis (accounting for
generally under-served by the formal channels of credit seasonality) and (b) NPA ratio9 : gross NPAs/total advances.
(RBI, 2021). The dummy was fixed at 0 for the quarter ending
The COVID-19 pandemic and associated lockdowns June 2020 and March 2020 was chosen as the baseline
disproportionately affected the unorganised sector period indicating the onset of the pandemic10.The main
enterprises and the economically weaker sections. coefficient of interest in the equation is , which captures
The stoppage of economic activity and mobility caused the difference in the outcome variable in each quarter
impediments to credit deployment by NBFCs-MFI and (analysed with respect to the onset of the pandemic i.e.,
repayment of loans to them. March 2020). captures the time-invariant NBFC-specific
fixed effects and represents the vector of NBFC-specific
To empirically analyse the effect of the pandemic on
control variables.
credit growth and asset quality of NBFCs-MFI, a panel
regression was run in an event study framework [following The incremental credit flow for all NBFCs-MFI declined
the methodology by Clarke and Tapia-Scythe (2021) and in the period immediately following the outbreak (June
Ramacharan et al. (2015)] using quarterly supervisory 2020). Although it has recovered in the later quarters,
data on 33 NBFCs-MFI for the period March 2019-June this recovery has been driven by the big-sized NBFCs-
2021 with the help of the following equation:
(Contd...)
8 In the first specification, the impact of the pandemic on incremental credit by NBFCs-MFI was assessed controlling for asset size,
asset quality and profitability ratios.
9 In the second specification, the impact of the pandemic on asset quality of NBFCs-MFI was assessed controlling for asset size,
incremental credit and profitability ratio.
10 The baseline period indicates the quarter in which the event occurred and hence, is omitted. The impact of the event is expected
to be seen in subsequent quarters.
11 NBFCs-MFI were differentiated into big-sized and small-sized based on the median asset size in March 2020.
135Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
MFI11. Incremental credit flows of small-sized NBFCs-MFI
has not yet been able to reach the pre-Covid levels (Charts
1a-1c).
The results also indicate that the NPA ratio for NBFCs-
MFI was largely maintained immediately following the
pandemic, possibly due to the moratorium benefit and
standstill in asset classification for NBFC borrowers.
However, the effect of the pandemic on the asset quality
of NBFCs-MFI has started to show from December 2020
(Chart 1d).
136
oitaR
APN
6
4
2
0
2-
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
Time
Point Estimate 95% CI
)erorC
sR(tiderC
latnemercnI
Y-o-Y
001
0
001-
002-
Chart 1c. On Credit of Small NBFCs-MFI Chart 1d. On NPA of All NBFCs-MFI
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
Time
Point Estimate 95% CI
Controls: NPA Ratio and ROA Controls: Total Assets (log), incremental credit (Y-o-Y) and ROA
)erorC
sR(tiderC
latnemercnI
Y-o-Y
005
0
005-
0001-
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
Time
Point Estimate 95% CI
)erorC
sR(tiderC
latnemercnI
Y-o-Y
002
0
002-
004-
Chart 1: Impact of COVID-19 on NBFCs-MFI: Coefficient Plots
Chart 1a. On Credit of All NBFCs-MFI Chart 1b. On Credit of Big NBFCs-MFI
-5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4
Time
Point Estimate 95% CI
Controls: Total Assets (log), NPA Ratio and ROA Controls: NPA Ratio and ROA
References
Clarke, D. and K. Tapia-Schythe (2021). Implementing the
Panel Event Study. Stata Journal.
Ramcharan, R., A. Kermani and M. Di Maggio (2015).
Monetary Policy Pass-Through: Household Consumption
and Voluntary Deleveraging. Society for Economic
Dynamics, Meeting Papers 256.
Reserve Bank of India (2021). Consultative Document on
Regulation of Microfinance, June.
2.4 Resource Mobilisation
VI.32 Policy measures by the Reserve Bank and and market access of NBFCs improved, many
the Government provided timely liquidity support NBFCs also adopted prudent debt recycling to
to NBFCs, bolstered market confidence and pay off their extant high-cost borrowings for new
reduced borrowing costs. As financial conditions debt at a lower cost.NON-BANKING FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
Table VI.6: Sources of Borrowings of NBFCs
Chart VI.17: NBFCs-MFI: Outstanding Loans and
Number of Active Accounts (Amount in ` crore)
Items At end- At end- At end- Percentage
March March Sep- variation
-2020 -2021 tember
-2021 2019-20 2020-21
1 2 3 4 5 6
1. Debentures 9,04,655 9,84,428 9,88,342 5.0 8.8
(41.7) (42.0) (42.5)
2. Bank 6,93,918 7,75,484 7,30,740 13.8 11.8
Borrowings (32.0) (33.1) (31.4)
3. Borrowings 63,133 56,224 55,862 63.0 -10.9
from FIs (2.9) (2.4) (2.4)
4. Inter- 77,032 76,839 87,189 6.8 -0.3
corporate (3.6) (3.3) (3.8)
Borrowings
5. Commercial 64,877 70,631 71,990 -54.6 8.9
Paper (3.0) (3.0) (3.1)
6. Borrowings 18,752 19,131 17,923 30.2 2.0
from (0.9) (0.8) (0.8)
Source: Micrometer, Issues 35-37, MFIN. Government
7. Subordinated 73,513 68,857 67,095 16.2 -6.3
Debts (3.4) (2.9) (2.9)
8. Other 2,73,969 2,94,074 3,04,638 37.2 7.3
Borrowings (12.6) (12.5) (13.1)
VI.33 NBFCs’ borrowings from banks continued
9. Total 21,69,849 23,45,668 23,23,777 8.3 8.1
to grow on top of a y-o-y growth rate of 13.8 per Borrowings
cent in the previous year. Borrowings through Notes: 1. Data are provisional.
2. Figures in parentheses indicate share in total borrowings.
debentures and via commercial paper (CPs) Source: Supervisory Returns, RBI.
also increased. At end-September 2021, total
borrowings mobilised by NBFCs decelerated broadly coincides with the implementation of
(Table VI.6) (Appendix tables VI.1, VI.2 and VI.3). TLTRO. NCDs of long tenure (greater than 10
years) were mainly raised by government-owned
VI.34 NBFCs have been gradually swapping
their short-term borrowings for long-term
Chart VI.18: NBFCs’ Borrowings: Repayment
borrowings; consequently, the share of long-term in Time Buckets
borrowings (payable in more than 12 months) in
March 2021 inched up (Chart VI.18).
VI.35 Rating-wise, AAA-rated non-convertible
debentures (NCDs) of NBFCs have a preponderant
share in overall NCD private placements of
NBFCs (Chart VI.19 a). In Q1:2020-21, debenture
issuances shot up, mainly by AAA and AA-rated
entities, bolstered by liquidity measures. In Q2:
2020-21, A-rated NCDs raised higher funds,
aided by Special Liquidity Scheme and Partial
Credit Guarantee Scheme 2.0.
VI.36 Tenure-wise, NCDs of three-year tenure Note: Data are provisional.
Source: Supervisory Returns, RBI.
were issued the most in Q1:2020-21 and this
137Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Chart VI.19: NCD Private Placements of NBFCs
a: Rating-wise
b. Tenure-wise
Sources: 1. Staff calculations 2. PRIME database.
IFCs and prominent private NBFCs (Chart witnessed in the beginning of 2020-21 eased
VI.19 b). The unprecedented spike in spreads subsequently (Chart VI.20 a and b).
Chart VI.20: Yield of NBFC Bonds: Spread over G-Sec of Corresponding Maturity
a. AAA-rated NBFCs b. AA-rated NBFCs
Source: FIMMDA, Bloomberg.
138NON-BANKING FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
Chart VI.21: Box Plot of NCD Coupon Rates of NBFCs- Rating-wise
a: AAA-rated b: AA-rated
Sources: 1. Staff calculations 2. PRIME database.
VI.37 Coupon rates of AAA-rated NCDs of NBFCs VI.38 Amongst SCBs, public sector banks
softened in tandem with the easing monetary (PSBs) remained dominant lenders to NBFCs,
cycle and it reduced considerably from Q3: although private sector banks (PVBs) expanded
2020-21. However, the variance in rates among lending to NBFCs in 2020-21 (Chart VI.22 a & b).
AAA-rated NCDs has widened relative to the pre-
VI.39 Overall bank exposure to NBFCs grew as
pandemic period, indicative of differentiation by
their investment in NBFCs’ debentures increased
the market on the basis of inherent balance sheet
on the back of COVID-19-related schemes (Chart
strength. In the case of AA-rated NCDs of NBFCs,
VI.23 a and b).
the dispersion in the coupon rates broadened
with policy support and increase in number of VI.40 The share of NBFCs in overall CP
issuances (Chart VI.21 a and b). issuances fell sharply in April 2020, but recovered
Chart VI.22: Bank Lending to NBFCs: Group-wise
a: Share b: Growth
Source: Supervisory Data, RBI
139Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Chart VI.23: Instruments of Banks’ Lending to NBFCs
a. Growth b. Share
Note: Data are provisional.
Source: Supervisory Returns, RBI.
in the months of July and September 2020, with March 2021 (Chart VI.25). Certain large NBFCs-D
sector-specific policy actions. Subsequently, have explicitly increased their reliance on retail
NBFCs’ CP issuances surpassed their pre-Covid deposits relative to corporate deposits during the
levels. During the second wave, however, NBFCs year. 90.1 per cent of deposits were raised by 5
did not borrow much via CPs due to adequate NBFCs-D (Chart VI.26).
liquidity on their books. Nevertheless, NBFCs
2.6 Asset Sales and Securitisation
were quickly back in this space in July 2021
when their share jumped to 65 per cent of total VI.43 Asset sales that are undertaken by
issuances and many NBFCs utilised the funds NBFCs for liquidity management, rebalancing
so raised to provide funding to individuals for exposures, or strategic sales, and securitisation
subscribing to Initial Public Offerings (Chart for redistribution of credit risk by repackaging
VI.24 a). assets into tradable securities with different risk
profiles, dipped in June 2020 but they recovered
VI.41 The spike in NBFCs’ CP rates during the
over the rest of the year. Nevertheless, loan sales
second wave was not as severe as the previous
volumes of NBFCs-ND-SI have not picked up
one and it quickly recovered (Chart VI.24 b).
to pre-COVID levels. Loans securitised, on the
2.5 NBFCs-D: Deposits
other hand, picked up from September 2020
VI.42 Deposit mobilisation by NBFCs onwards, when the first wave of the pandemic
progressed at a robust pace. The number of started waning. As NBFCs’ business improved,
companies authorised to accept deposits has the investor outlook towards loan securitisation
progressively reduced and stood at 55 as of gradually turned positive (Chart VI.27 a and b).
140NON-BANKING FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
Chart VI.24: CP Issuances and Rates
a. Non-Govt. and Govt. NBFCs: Share in Total CP Issuances
b. CP and T-bill Rates
Sources: 1. Supervisory Returns, RBI.
2. Database on Indian Economy, RBI.
Guidelines issued by the Reserve Bank in segments. In H1: 2021-22, loans sales picked up,
September 2021 are expected to strengthen these while securitisation decelerated.
Chart VI.25: Public Deposits with NBFCs- D Chart VI.26: Distribution of Deposits with NBFCs-D
(At end-March 2021) (At end-March 2021)
Notes: 1. Bubble size corresponds to share of NBFCs in total number.
Note: Data are provisional. 2. Figures are share of NBFCs-D’ deposits in total deposits.
Source: Supervisory Returns, RBI. Source: Supervisory Returns, RBI.
141Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Chart VI.27: Loan Sales and Securitisation of NBFCs-ND-SI
a. Loan sales during the quarter b. Loans securitised during the quarter
Source: Supervisory Returns, RBI.
2.7 Asset Liability Profile of NBFCs 2021, the mismatch (inflows minus outflows) in
one-two months, two-three months and three-
VI.44 NBFCs have gradually changed their
six months buckets improved vis-à-vis March
borrowing profile, relying more on the long-term
2020. The cumulative mismatch in the less than
segment. Policy support aided in ameliorating the
one year bucket was better in March 2021 than
liquidity position of NBFCs, that was impacted
by COVID-19 and associated risk aversion. in March 2020. The deterioration in the one to
On account of the Liquidity Risk Management three year maturity bucket may be attributable
Framework, effective from December 2020, to the liquidity schemes in which many NBFCs
issues arising from lumpiness in income receipts availed funding by pledging three-year NCDs.
which can hamper debt repayments, especially The three to five year bucket, however, showed
in short-term buckets, were mitigated. In March an improvement in March 2021 (Chart VI.28).
Chart VI.28: Structural Liquidity Statement of NBFCs
(End- March/ September position)
Note: Mismatch is defined as inflows minus outflows.
Source: Supervisory Returns, RBI.
142NON-BANKING FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
Table VI.7: Financial Parameters of the NBFC Sector
(` crore)
Items 2019-20 2020-21 H1:2021-22
NBFCs NBFCs- NBFCs-D NBFCs NBFCs- NBFCs-D NBFCs NBFCs- NBFCs-D
ND-SI ND-SI ND-SI
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
A. Income 3,42,225 2,75,651 66,574 3,53,407 2,86,324 67,083 1,74,711 1,39,464 35,247
(11.1) (11.9) (8.3) (3.3) (3.9) (0.8) (-3.8) (-4.1) (-2.4)
B. Expenditure 2,85,808 2,34,347 51,460 2,94,358 2,38,837 55,522 1,38,325 1,08,239 30,085
(15.3) (15.3) (15.2) (3.0) (1.9) (7.9) (0.5) (-0.6) (4.4)
C. Net Profit 39,171 28,454 10,716 44,723 36,074 8,649 28,992 24,717 4,275
(4.9) (8.9) (-4.5) (14.2) (26.8) (-19.3) (-17.1) (-15.4) (-25.6)
D. Total Assets 30,81,276 25,94,456 4,86,820 34,75,335 29,57,352 5,17,983 35,10,671 29,78,006 5,32,665
(9.1) (8.0) (15.4) (12.8) (14.0) (6.4) (10.7) (11.5) (6.3)
E. Financial Ratios
(as per cent of Total Assets)
(i) Income 11.1 10.6 13.7 10.2 9.7 13.0 5.0 4.7 6.6
(ii) Expenditure 9.3 9.0 10.6 8.5 8.1 10.7 3.9 3.6 5.6
(iii) Net Profit 1.3 1.1 2.2 1.3 1.2 1.7 0.8 0.8 0.8
F. Cost to Income Ratio (Per cent) 78.5 80.1 72.5 78.2 78.2 78.4 73.1 70.6 82.2
Notes: 1. Data are provisional.
2. Figures in parenthesis indicate Y-o-Y growth in per cent.
Source: Supervisory Returns, RBI.
2.8 Financial Performance of NBFCs deposits reflected NBFCs-D preference for
public deposits. Operating expenses declined
VI.45 NBFCs’ income growth decelerated
during the year as NBFCs successfully reined
steeply, as both NBFCs-ND-SI and NBFCs-D
in administrative costs by leveraging technology.
reported lower incomes in 2020-21. However,
Provisions against NPAs, however, increased
the sector has leveraged technology to counter
significantly during the year reflective of NBFCs
the challenges posed by the pandemic through
bracing for a potential increase in impaired assets
rationalisation of expenditure. Net profits
after lifting of the asset classification standstill.
of NBFCs-ND-SI witnessed a significant
In 2021-22 so far, expenses increased marginally
improvement in the aftermath of the first wave
as interest burden on bank credit declined
of COVID-19 and their cost to income ratios
(Table VI.8).
dropped. Conversely, NBFCs-D experienced a
moderation in their income due to marginal 2.9 Profitability
growth in fund-based income. This, coupled
VI.47 Profitability indicators of NBFCs–
with rising interest payments, increasing cost to
return on equity (RoE) and net interest margin
income ratio and other expenditures, resulted in
(NIM)-were lower during 2020-21 than a year
a decline in their profits. Net profits of NBFCs
ago, reflecting the stress in the sector. Return
during H1:2021-22 declined on the back of fall in
on assets (RoA), on the other hand, remained
fund-based income (Table VI.7, Appendix Table
unchanged (Chart VI.29). The overall decline in
VI.5 and Appendix Table VI.6).
the profitability could be attributed to drop in the
VI.46 Total expenses of NBFCs moderated business in the wake of the ongoing pandemic.
during the year as interest expenses declined, In H1:2021-22, all profitability indicators of the
although an increase in interest paid on fixed sector moderated.
143Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Table VI.8: Expenses of NBFCs
(` Crore)
Items 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 H1:2021-22
1 2 3 4 5
1. Interest Expense and Other Financing Cost (a+b+c+d+e) 1,50,964 1,70,088 1,67,571 80,488
(a) Interest Paid on Fixed Deposits 2,822 3,180 4,668 2,469
(b) Interest on Inter-corporate Deposits 6,004 6,764 6,659 2,723
(c) Interest on Credits from Banks 50,075 58,915 60,206 27,616
(d) Interest on Credits from Financial Institutions 10,061 10,357 10,652 6,782
(e) Other Financing Charges 82,002 90,872 85,386 40,898
2. Bad Debts Written-off 14,194 25,426 29,678 8,854
3. Provisions against Non-Performing Assets 14,246 15,039 26,980 15,449
4. Operating Expenses (i+ii) 49,382 54,658 50,585 25,446
Of which; (i) Employee Costs 23,395 25,833 26,036 13,953
(ii) Other Administrative Costs 25,987 28,825 24,549 11,492
5. Other Expenses 19,175 20,597 19,544 8,087
Total Expenses 2,47,960 2,85,808 2,94,358 1,38,325
Note: Data are provisional. Source: Supervisory Returns, RBI.
VI.48 In case of NBFCs-D, there was a overall RoE of NBFCs-ND-SI declined. NIM was
deterioration in RoA and RoE in 2020-21 on lower for all entities, mirroring subdued credit
account of the pandemic-induced slowdown. off-take (Chart VI.30).
On the other hand, NIM improved during the
2.10 Asset Quality
same period, reflecting improvement in interest
VI.50 In 2020-21, NBFCs registered an
income along with lower expenses (Chart VI.29).
improvement in asset quality as the asset
VI.49 The profitability of NBFCs-ND-SI gauged classification standstill in view of the pandemic
in terms of RoA marginally increased in 2020-21 was in force. Resolution of a few accounts in the
due to an improvement in the RoA of IFCs. The infrastructure space during the year also helped.
Chart VI.29: Profitability Ratios of NBFCs Chart VI.30: Profitability Indicators of NBFCs-ND-SI
RoA: Return on Assets= Net Profits by Total Assets
RoE: Return on Equity= Net Profits by Shareholders’ Equity
NIM: Net Interest Margin=Net Interest Income by Total Average Assets
Note: Data are provisional. Note: Data are provisional.
Source: Supervisory Returns, RBI. Source: Supervisory Returns, RBI.
144NON-BANKING FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
Chart VI.31: Asset Quality of NBFCs Chart VI.32: Provision Coverage Ratio of NBFCs
(At end-March) (At end-March)
Note: Data are provisional. Note: Data are provisional.
Source: Supervisory Returns, RBI. Source: Supervisory Returns, RBI.
Both GNPA and NNPA ratios declined post March in 2021. The share of loans overdue for more
2020. The higher provision coverage ratio (PCR) than 60 days but less than 90 days doubled
during the period is reflective of adequate buffers (Chart VI.34).
to deal with likely headwinds (Chart VI.31). In
VI.54 In 2020-21, overall GNPA and NNPA
2021-22 (up to September), asset quality of the
ratios of NBFCs-ND-SI decreased but the quality
sector deteriorated to some extent. GNPA ratio
of assets declined in the ICC and NBFC-MFI
increased from 6.0 per cent to 6.8 per cent and
categories. On the other hand, asset quality of
NNPA ratio increased from 2.7 per cent to 3.0
per cent.
VI.51 In March 2021, NBFCs-MFI and IFCs Chart VI.33: Classification of NBFCs’ Assets
(At end March/ September)
had the highest PCRs. PCR of ICCs, though the
lowest, improved in 2021 as compared to 2020
(Chart VI.32).
VI.52 Based on the duration for which an asset
remains non-performing, NPAs can be categorised
into sub-standard, doubtful and loss assets. In
2020-21, a part of the sub-standard assets of a
large NBFC returned to being standard, which
led to a marginal improvement in asset quality
(Chart VI.33).
VI.53 Among performing loans of NBFCs, 87.6
per cent of loans were standard and rest were
overdue but not NPAs in March 2021. Loans
overdue in the first bucket viz., less than 30 Note: Data are provisional.
Source: Supervisory Returns, RBI.
days were the largest, but the position improved
145Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
overall delinquent assets of the sector. Within the
Chart VI.34: Performing Loans Overdue
industrial sector, loans to large industry have a
predominant share in NPAs. Vehicle loans have
the largest share in retail loans (Chart VI.36).
VI.56 Similarly, a sectoral snapshot of stressed
assets12 of NBFCs-ND-SI shows that industry,
which is the largest recipient of NBFC lending
traditionally, had the highest share of stressed
assets whereas agriculture contributed the
least (Chart VI.37). Retail and services sectors’
contributions to stressed assets, which were
similar till end-March 2020 diverged in 2021.
In the light of the pandemic, the Reserve Bank
had announced a six-month moratorium on
Note: Data are provisional. loan repayments till August 31, 2020 and
Source: Supervisory Returns, RBI.
subsequently a one-time debt restructuring plan,
which were geared to cushion the impact of the
IFCs has improved with declines in GNPA and
pandemic on the financial ecosystem. In the post
NNPA, reflective of better provisioning in the IFC
moratorium period, the asset quality of NBFCs-
segment (Chart VI.35). In H1:2021-22, the GNPA
ND-SI worsened in the retail loans category. By
and NNPA ratios of NBFCs-ND-SI rose.
end-September 2021, stressed assets in the
VI.55 The sectoral distribution of NPAs of NBFCs retail sector increased substantially while those
point to a preponderant share of industry in the in industry sector reduced.
Chart VI.35: NPAs of NBFCs-ND-SI
a. Gross NPAs/ Gross Advances b. Net NPAs/ Net Advances
Note: Data are provisional.
Source: Supervisory Returns, RBI.
12 NPAs+ restructured standard advances.
146NON-BANKING FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
Chart VI.36: Sectoral Distribution of NPAs of NBFCs Chart VI.38: Gross and Net NPA Ratios of NBFCs- D
(At end-March 2021) (At end- March)
Note: Data are provisional. Note: Data are provisional.
Source: Supervisory Returns, RBI. Source: Supervisory Returns, RBI.
VI.57 In the case of NBFCs-D, the GNPA ratio VI.58 Large borrowal accounts (exposure of
reduced marginally during the year. The NNPA `5 crore and above) constituted 52.8 per cent
ratio also showed a reduction, pointing to of NPAs and 44.9 per cent of total loans of
adequate provisioning (Chart VI.38). In 2021-22 NBFCs at end-March 2021. The large increase
so far (up to September), however, the GNPA and in restructured standard advances of NBFCs
NNPA ratios of NBFCs-D inched up. are indicative of proactive measures to arrest
the impact of the pandemic on loan books. In
the case of incipient stress as indicated by the
Chart VI.37: Stressed Assets of NBFCs-ND-SI by Sector
share of special mention accounts (SMA), SMA-
0 witnessed significant reduction while that of
SMA-1 remained at the same level (Chart VI.39).
SMA-2, which is on the brink of being classified
as NPAs, doubled during the year which is a
cause for concern.
2.11 Capital Adequacy
VI.59 NBFCs are well capitalised, with their
capital to risk-weighted asset ratio (CRAR) well
above the stipulated level of 15 per cent. During
2020-21, NBFCs’ CRARs improved further,
attributable to an increase in the level of Tier-I
Note: Data are provisional. capital, retained earnings and moderation in
Source: Supervisory Returns, RBI.
non-performing assets (Chart VI.40).
147Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Chart VI.39: Stress in Large Borrowal Accounts Chart VI.40: Capital Position of NBFC Sector
Note: RSA: Restructured standard advances;
SMA-0, where principal or interest payment was not overdue
for more than 30 days, but the account showed signs of
incipient stress;
SMA-1, where principal or interest payment was overdue for
31-60 days;
SMA-2, where principal or interest payment was overdue for
61-90 days. CRAR: Capital to Risk-weighted Assets Ratio= Tier I plus Tier II
Source: Central Repository of Information on Large Credits (CRILC) Capital by Risk- weighted assets
database. Source: Supervisory Returns, RBI.
VI.60 All categories of NBFCs-ND-SI except the 2.12 Exposure to Sensitive Sectors
NBFCs-MFI have shown improvement in CRARs,
VI.62 The Reserve Bank has categorised the
mainly aided by higher CRARs of IFCs (Chart
capital market, real estate, and commodities
VI.41 a). The marginal decline in the CRAR of
as sensitive sectors, as these assets are prone
the NBFCs-MFI is mainly due to capital erosion
to fluctuations in value, with implications for
and increase in their risk-weighted assets.
financial stability. NBFCs’ overall exposure to
VI.61 The CRAR of the NBFCs-D witnessed a sensitive sectors grew in 2020-21 mainly due to
sharp increase in 2020-21, mainly due to growth a low base (Chart VI.42).
in share capital and reserves (Chart VI.41 b).
Chart VI.41: CRAR of NBFCs by Category
a. NBFCs-ND-SI b. NBFCs-D
Note: Data are provisional.
Source: Supervisory Returns, RBI.
148NON-BANKING FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
with SCBs, provide housing credit in India.
Chart VI.42: Exposure to Sensitive Sectors
(At end-March) With transferring of regulation of HFCs to the
Reserve Bank by amendment of the NHB Act,
1987, effective August 9, 2019, HFCs are being
treated as a category of NBFCs for regulation
purposes.
VI.66 In recent times, HFCs have undergone
several legislative/regulatory changes to
harmonise the regulations between HFCs and
NBFCs in a phased manner. Based on a review,
a revised regulatory framework for HFCs
was issued on October 22, 2020 and again on
February 17, 2021.
CME: Capital Market Exposure; REE: Real Estate Exposure; SSE;
VI.67 HFCs’ credit to the housing sector
Sensitive Sector Exposure.
Note: Data are provisional. accelerated in 2020-21, primarily on account
Source: Supervisory Returns, RBI.
of low interest rates, availability of refinance
as well as special refinance facilities and the
2.13 Residuary Non-Banking Companies
additional special refinance facility of the NHB
(RNBC)
(which amounted to `13,917 crore) backed
VI.63 The principal business of RNBCs is by the Reserve Bank under the Aatmanirbhar
collecting deposits and deploying them in Bharat Abhiyaan. Bank credit to the housing
approved securities, as directed by the Reserve sector, however, decelerated in 2020-21 even
Bank. The number of RNBCs has consistently though it remained higher than HFCs’ credit
declined since 1998-99 and at end- March 2021, (Chart VI.43).
only one RNBC, which is not accepting any new
deposits, remained in operation.
Chart VI.43: Credit to Housing Sector by HFCs and SCBs
VI.64 In sum, the balance sheet of the NBFC
(At end- March)
sector expanded moderately in 2020-21, driven
by growth in both credit and investments of
NBFCs-ND-SI. Public deposits of NBFCs-D
increased as well, due to attractive returns.
The profit parameters of NBFCs registered a
decline due to the pandemic-induced economic
slowdown. As regards asset quality, the GNPA and
NNPA ratios fell, backed by strong provisions.
The substantial rise in capital of the sector, much
above the regulatory prescription, signals overall
resilience of the sector.
2.14 Housing Finance Companies (HFCs)
VI.65 Housing finance companies (HFCs) are Note: Data are provisional.
Source: Supervisory Returns, RBI.
specialised lending institutions which, along
149Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
VI.68 At the end of March 2021, there were Table VI.9: Ownership Pattern of HFCs
(At end-March)
10013 HFCs, of which only 16 were deposit taking
(` crore)
entities. Five of the latter need prior permission
Type 2020 2021
from NHB before accepting public deposits. Non- Number Asset Size Number Asset Size
government public limited companies dominate 1 2 4 5 7
A. Government 1 79,535 1 76,959
the segment, comprising 94.8 per cent of total
Companies
assets. The combined balance sheet of these B. Non-government 99 13,14,329 99 14,05,904
Companies (1+2)
entities experienced a growth in 2020-21 after 1. Public Ltd. 75 13,09,762 78 14,01,522
Companies
a deceleration in 2019-20. The asset size of the 2. Private Ltd. 24 4,568 21 4,382
Companies
lone government HFC contracted in 2020-21
Total (A+B) 100 13,93,865 100 14,82,863
(Table VI.9).
Note: Data are provisional.
Source: NHB.
2.14.1. Balance Sheet14
VI.69 The consolidated balance sheet of HFCs and reserves and surplus. On the asset side, loans
and advances registered a moderate growth while
grew in 2020-21 on account of steep growth in
investments registered an impressive growth. On
borrowings from NHB, inter-corporate borrowing
Table VI.10: Consolidated Balance Sheet of HFCs
(At end-March)
(` crore)
Items 2019 2020 2021 Percentage variation
2020 2021
1 2 3 4 5 6
1 Share capital 34,048 36,858 37,696 8.3 2.3
2 Reserves and surplus 1,51,706 1,45,053 1,70,359 -4.4 17.4
3 Public deposits 1,05,895 1,19,795 1,26,691 13.1 5.8
4 Debentures 4,66,689 3,97,949 3,97,816 -14.7 0.0
5 Bank borrowings# 2,98,943 3,53,214 3,29,835 18.2 -6.6
6 Borrowings from NHB # 42,118 49,673 67,341 17.9 35.6
7 Inter-corporate borrowings 35,627 6,206 19,182 -82.6 209.1
8 Commercial papers 79,059 46,631 54,554 -41.0 17.0
9 Borrowings from Government*** 0 1,282 19,313 0 -
10 Subordinated debts 18,320 17,348 19,168 -5.3 10.5
11 Other borrowings 25,103 1,49,404 1,31,818 495.2 -11.8
12 Current liabilities 13,740 20,446 8,100 48.8 -60.4
13 Provisions^ 8,569 7,499 64,303 -12.5 757.5
14 Other* 40,021 42,508 36,686 6.2 -13.7
15 Total Liabilities/ Assets 13,19,840 13,93,865 14,82,863 5.6 6.4
16 Loans and advances 1,163,148 11,83,561 12,77,653 1.8 7.9
17 Hire purchase and lease assets 0 33 10 - -70.4
18 Investments 88,640 97,931 1,29,961 10.5 32.7
19 Cash and bank balances 33,166 56,955 36,864 71.7 -35.3
20 Other assets** 34,885 55,384 38,375 58.8 -30.7
^The sudden increase in provisions is due to high provision reported by one major HFC.
*includes deferred tax liabilities and other liabilities.
**includes tangible & intangible assets, other assets, and deferred tax asset.
*** includes borrowings from foreign government also.
# Figures have been revised.
Notes: Data are provisional.
Source: NHB.
13 Excludes one HFC, which has surrendered its Certificate of Registration as it has been merged with a NBFC.
14 Two HFCs viz., Capital First Home Finance Ltd. and Gruh Finance Ltd. have been merged with IDFC Bank in December 2018
and Bandhan Bank in October 2019 respectively. Consequently, asset and liabilities of these two HFCs have been deducted from
HFCs’ consolidated data by the NHB. Therefore, data may not tally with earlier data.
150NON-BANKING FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
the other hand, cash and bank balances, and
Chart VI.45: Public Deposits with HFCs
other assets declined (Table VI.10). (At end-March)
2.14.2. Resource Profile of HFCs
VI.70 HFCs primarily rely on debentures
and bank borrowings for funds, which
constitute around 66 per cent of total resources
(Chart VI.44). The dependence of HFCs on bank
borrowings decelerated in 2020-21; however,
dependence on borrowings from NHB and public
deposits increased, reflecting their reliance on
long term-resources amidst risk averse market
conditions.
VI.71 Public deposits, another important
source of funding, decelerated in 2020-21 Note: Data are provisional.
Source: NHB.
(Chart VI.45). Furthermore, the share of deposits
in total liabilities of HFCs has been steadily
bracket due to the low interest rate environment
declining since 2015-16 till 2020-21 with the
(Chart VI.46). The maximum share of deposits is
exception of 2019-20.
in the maturity bracket of 24 to 48 months.
VI.72 The distribution of deposits with HFCs
2.14.3. Financial Performance
in 2020-21 shows that there is a concentration
of deposits in the 6-9 per cent interest rate VI.73 The consolidated income of HFCs
bracket. A significant growth has been observed decelerated in 2020-21 on account of moderation
in deposits in the below 6 per cent interest rate of fee income and stagnant fund income. Income
as a proportion to total assets decreased on
account of decrease in fund income (Chart VI.47).
Chart VI.44: Resources Mobilised by HFCs
(At end-March) VI.74 Furthermore, expenditure also decreased
mainly on account of deceleration in both
financial expenditure and operating expenditure.
As a result, there was a significant decrease in
the cost to income ratio in 2020-21. Meanwhile,
the RoA reached zero (Table VI.11).
2.14.4. Soundness Indicators
VI.75 The GNPA ratio of HFCs increased in
2020-21. However, the NNPA ratio decreased
in 2020-21 on account of significant increase
in provisioning. Two major HFCs registered
spikes in their GNPA and NNPA ratios in
2020-21. Excluding these two major HFCs,
Note: Data are provisional.
Source: NHB. GNPA and NNPA ratios stood at 3.1 per cent
151Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Chart VI.46: Distribution of HFCs’ Public Deposits
a. Interest Rate-wise Distribution b. Maturity- wise
(Share in per cent) (Share in per cent)
c. Interest Rate-wise Deposit Growth d. Maturity-wise Deposit Growth
Note: Data are provisional.
Source: NHB.
and 1.7 per cent, respectively, in 2020-21
VI.76 To sum up, in 2020-21, HFCs have been
(Chart VI.48a and b).
able to sustain momentum with moderate growth
in credit demand. After the outbreak of COVID-19,
Chart VI.47: Financial Parameters of HFCs several regulatory and liquidity measures were
Table VI.11: Financial Ratios of HFCs
(As per cent of Total Assets)
(At end-March)
Particulars 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
1 2 3 4 5 6
Total Income 10.0 9.0 9.9 10.2 8.7
1. Fund Income 9.8 8.8 9.7 10.1 8.6
2. Fee Income 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1
Total Expenditure 7.4 6.6 7.9 8.8 6.7
1. Financial Expenditure 6.4 5.6 6.4 6.4 5.4
2. Operating Expenditure 0.9 1.0 1.5 2.4 1.3
Tax Provision 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.9
Cost to Income Ratio (Total 73.6 73.6 79.3 86.2 76.4
Exp./Total Income)
Return on Assets (RoA) 2.1 2.0 1.4 -0.2 0.0
(PAT/Total Assets)
Note: Data are provisional. Note: Data are provisional.
Source: NHB. Source: NHB.
152NON-BANKING FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
Chart VI.48: HFCs: GNPA and NNPA Ratios
a: NPA Ratios of HFCs b: NPA Ratios without Two HFCs
Note: Data are provisional.
Source: NHB.
announced by the Reserve Bank, along with the Development Bank of India (SIDBI) and the
announcement of the Aatmanirbhar Bharat National Housing Bank (NHB), which play a
Abhiyaan by the Government, which resulted in critical role in meeting the long-term funding
an improvement in the liquidity position of HFCs. requirements of agriculture and the rural sector,
The recent uptick in sales of housing inventories small industries, housing finance companies,
on account of reopening of economy, the benign NBFCs and MFIs, respectively. The fourth AIFI
interest rate environment and incentives in stamp - Export Import Bank of India (EXIM Bank)-
duty reductions aided the sector. Furthermore, functions as the principal financial institution
HFCs took several proactive steps to counter
promoting the country’s international trade and
the impact of the pandemic on their business
providing financial assistance to exporters and
by adopting work-from-home processes which
importers. The Reserve Bank regulates and
helped in ensuring continuity of business even
supervises these four AIFIs.
during the lockdown and made them digitally
3.1 AIFIs’ Operations15
enabled for sourcing, processing, and disbursing
loans. Efforts towards digitisation also might have VI.78 In response to the pandemic, financial
contributed towards reducing their operating assistance sanctioned by AIFIs registered a
expenditure. robust growth during 2020-21 as compared with
the previous year. The increase was primarily
3. All India Financial Institutions
on account of a 65 per cent rise in sanctions by
VI.77 At end-March 2021, there were four NABARD. Disbursements too gained traction
all India financial institutions (AIFIs) viz., during 2020-21. NABARD recorded the highest
the National Bank for Agriculture and Rural disbursement growth, reflecting its thrust on
Development (NABARD), the Small Industries the agricultural and rural sector, production
15 The financial year for EXIM Bank, SIDBI and NABARD runs from April to March and for NHB, it is from July to June.
153Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Table VI.12: Financial Assistance Sanctioned & Table VI.13: AIFIs’ Balance Sheet
Disbursed by AIFIs (` crore)
Institutions Sanctions Disbursements Liabilities 2020 2021 Percentage
variation
2019-20 2020-21 2019-20 2020-21
2020-21
1 2 3 4 5
1 2 3 4
EXIM BANK 40,255 36,521 33,735 34,122
1. Capital 29,921 32,221 7.7
NABARD 2,78,883 4,59,849 2,81,811 3,50,022
(3.2) (3.0)
NHB 36,594 37,791 31,258 34,230
2. Reserves 63,522 71,025 11.8
SIDBI 1,09,826 1,05,588 98,354 98,115 (6.8) (6.6)
Total 4,65,558 6,39,748 4,45,159 5,16,489 3. Bonds & Debentures 2,63,425 3,27,427 24.3
(28.0) (30.4)
Note: Data are provisional.
4. Deposits 3,86,678 4,12,001 6.5
Source: Respective Financial Institutions.
(41.1) (38.3)
5. Borrowings 1,38,621 1,70,820 23.2
and marketing credit, the long term irrigation (14.7) (15.9)
6. Other Liabilities 58,105 62,023 6.7
fund and the micro irrigation fund. Increase in (6.2) (5.8)
the disbursements by NHB could be attributed Total Liabilities / Assets 9,40,271 10,75,516 14.4
1. Cash & Bank Balances 35,078 34,595 -1.4
to the support for the Pradhan Mantri Awas
(3.7) (3.2)
Yojana (PMAY). Disbursements by SIDBI 2. Investments 59,868 79,275 32.4
(6.4) (7.4)
remained stagnant during the year. Financial
3. Loans & Advances 8,25,620 9,44,318 14.4
(87.8) (87.8)
assistance sanctioned by EXIM Bank declined
4. Bills Discounted /Rediscounted 1,395 1,410 1.1
on account of slowdown in exports and subdued (0.1) (0.1)
5. Fixed Assets 1,221 1,273 4.3
macroeconomic conditions in partner countries
(0.1) (0.1)
(Table VI.12). Disbursements by EXIM Bank, 6. Other Assets 17,089 14,646 -14.3
(1.8) (1.4)
however, increased moderately (Appendix
Notes: Figures in parentheses are percentages of total liabilities/assets.
Table VI.7).
Data are provisional.
Source: Respective Financial Institutions.
3.2 Balance Sheet
AIFIs for a period of one year. Furthermore, in
VI.79 The consolidated balance sheet of AIFIs
consonance with the policy objective of nurturing
expanded in 2020-21 after decelerating in 2019-
still nascent growth impulses, fresh support
20 (Table VI.13). This was mainly on account
of `50,000 crore is allocated to the AIFIs for
of substantial growth in investments and loans
lending in 2021-22. Accordingly, NABARD is
and advances, particularly by NABARD. Loans
provided with a special liquidity facility (SLF) of
and advances constituted the largest share in the
total assets of AIFIs, followed by investments. On ` 25,000 crore to support agriculture and allied
the liabilities side, AIFIs’ reliance on bond and activities, the rural non-farm sector, and NBFC-
debentures increased in 2020-21. Borrowings MFIs. Similarly, NHB is allocated with ` 10,000
recorded a robust growth due to favourable base crore to cater to the needs of the housing sector
effect. This was mainly on account of the steep and SIDBI is allocated `15,000 crore to meet the
increase in borrowings by NABARD to finance its funding requirements of MSMEs.
enhanced credit disbursements and investment
VI.81 Further, in order to meet MSMEs’ short-
activities during the pandemic.
and medium-term credit needs to kick start the
VI.80 In the COVID-19 pandemic, special investment cycle, a Special Liquidity Facility
refinance facilities for a total amount of `75,000 of `16,000 crore was granted to SIDBI for on-
crore were provided during 2020-21 to all lending/refinancing.
154NON-BANKING FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
VI.82 Total resources raised by AIFIs (except Table VI.15: Resources Raised by AIFIs
for NABARD) decreased in 2020-21. EXIM Bank from the Money Market
(At end-March)#
resorted to higher short-term borrowings. Out
(` crore)
of total resources raised in 2020-21, NABARD
Instrument 2019-20 2020-21
mobilised the highest share, followed by NHB,
1 2 3
SIDBI and EXIM Bank. Putting together, NABARD
A. Total 1,20,294 99,068
and NHB accounted for 80 per cent of the total i) Term Deposits 1,298 3,396
resources. Except SIDBI, AIFIs largely rely on ii) Term Money 7,211 3,602
iii) Inter-corporate Deposits 8,177 -
short-term funds for financing their activities.
iv) Certificate of Deposits 46,240 21,275
NHB raises over 93 per cent of its resources via v) Commercial Paper 57,368 70,795
short term instruments (Table VI.14). Memo:
B. Umbrella Limit 1,17,538 1,34,662
VI.83 The NABARD and the EXIM Bank C. Utilization of Umbrella limit* 102.3 73.6
(A as percentage of B)
together constituted around 80 per cent of
#: End-June for NHB. *: Resources raised under A.
resources raised by AIFIs from the money Note: AIFIs are allowed to mobilise resources within the overall ‘umbrella
limit’, which is linked to the net owned funds (NOF) of the FI concerned
market. While resources raised through CDs
as per its latest audited balance sheet. The umbrella limit is applicable
decreased, resources raised through CPs for five instruments– term deposits; term money borrowings; certificates
of deposits (CDs); commercial paper (CPs); and inter-corporate deposits.
increased for AIFIs. The utilisation of borrowing Source: Respective Financial Institutions.
under umbrella limit remained lower in 2020-
past borrowings in resources mobilised increased
21 than a year ago (Table VI.15).
in 2020-21 as compared to the previous year
3.3 Sources and Uses of Funds (Table VI.16).
VI.84 Funds raised and deployed by the AIFIs Table VI.16: Pattern of AIFIs’ Sources and
Deployment of Funds
in 2020-21 registered a rapid growth although
(` crore)
there was marginal contraction in total fresh
Items 2019-20 2020-21 Percentage
deployment by AIFIs. The share of repayment of variation
1 2 3 4
Table VI.14: Resources Mobilised by
A. Sources of Funds
AIFIs in 2020-21
i. Internal 36,18,908 44,97,117 24.3
(` crore) (84.0) (80.2)
ii. External 5,65,094 8,82,814 56.2
Institution Total Resources Raised Outstand- (13.1) (15.8)
ing
iii. Others@ 1,24,634 2,25,134 80.6
Long- Short- Foreign Total
(2.9) (4.0)
Term Term Currency
Total (i+ii+iii) 43,08,636 56,05,065 30.1
1 2 3 4 5 6 (100) (100)
EXIM BANK 0 35,146 14,841 49,987 1,09,617 B. Deployment of Funds
NABARD 1,45,641 1,71,655 0 3,17,296 5,60,237 i. Fresh Deployment 8,05,090 8,03,936 -0.1
NHB* 9,879 1,30,975 0 1,40,854 78,028 (18.7) (14.3)
SIDBI** 40,450 24,270 0 64,720 1,63,008 ii. Repayment of Past 22,93,775 32,55,032 41.9
Borrowings (53.4) (58.1)
Total 1,95,970 3,62,046 14,841 5,72,857 9,10,890
iii. Other Deployment 11,95,171 15,46,098 29.4
Note: Long-term rupee resources comprise borrowings by way of (27.8) (27.6)
bonds/debentures; while short-term resources comprise CPs, term of which: 39,408 39,344 -0.2
deposits, ICDs, CDs and borrowings from the term money market. Interest Payments (0.9) (0.7)
Foreign currency resources largely comprise of borrowings by issuing
Total (i+ii+iii) 42,94,037 56,05,065 30.5
of bonds in the international market.
(100) (100)
* Short-term resources figure represents the borrowing through
transactions in the overnight triparty Repo Dealing and Settlement @: Includes cash and balances with banks and the Reserve Bank of
(TREPS) on a roll-over basis (gross amount on roll-over basis). India
**Short-Term under Total Resources Raised also include Short Term Note: Figures in parentheses are percentages of total. Data are
Loans from Banks. provisional.
Source: Respective Financial Institutions. Source: Respective Financial Institutions.
155Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Chart VI.49: Weighted Average Cost and Maturity of Rupee Resources Raised by AIFIs
a: Weighted Average Cost of AIFIs b: Weighted Average Maturity of AIFIs
Source: Respective Financial Institutions.
3.4 Maturity and Cost of Borrowings and 3.5 Financial Performance
Lending
VI.86 AIFIs registered a marginal growth in
VI.85 AIFIs were able to borrow at lower rates income during 2020-21, mainly on account of
as the weighted average cost (WAC) of rupee deceleration in interest income, which constitutes
resources decreased substantially in 2020-21 around 97 per cent of total income. Expenditure,
vis-à-vis the previous year due to accommodative on the other hand, contracted during 2020-21,
monetary policy. NHB recorded the highest primarily on account of contraction in interest
decline in its long-term prime lending rate (PLR)-
Table VI.17: Financial Performance of AIFIs
170 bps- followed by SIDBI (Chart VI.49a, Chart
(` crore)
VI.49b and Chart VI.50).
Type 2019-20 2020-21 Percentage
Variation
Chart VI.50: Long-term PLR Structure of Select AIFIs
2019-20 2020-21
1 2 3 4 5
A) Income 58,460 59,291 8.3 1.4
a) Interest Income 56,863 57,597 7.9 1.3
(97.3) (97.1)
b) Non-Interest Income 1,597 1,694 27.0 6.1
(2.7) (2.9)
B) Expenditure 44,499 42,913 5.7 -3.6
a) Interest Expenditure 41,236 39,829 4.9 -3.4
(92.7) (92.8)
b) Operating Expenses 3,263 3,084 17.0 -5.5
(7.3) (7.2)
of which Wage Bill 2,323 2,203 16.9 -5.2
C) Provisions for Taxation 2,244 2,409 -20.8 7.4
D) Profit
Operating Profit (PBT) 8,738 10,045 -19.4 15.0
Net Profit (PAT) 6,493 7,635 5.9 17.6
Notes: 1. Figures in parentheses are percentages of total income/
Note: EXIM Bank is using long-term minimum lending rate based expenditure.
on the base rate. 2. Data are provisional.
Source: Respective Financial Institutions. Source: Respective Financial Institutions.
156NON-BANKING FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
Chart VI.51: AIFIs’ Financial Ratios Chart VI.52: Select Financial Parameters of AIFIs
Notes: 1. As percentage of total average assets.
2. Data are provisional.
Source: Respective Financial Institutions. Source: Respective Financial Institutions.
expenditure and the wage bill. Consequently, improved, indicating efficient utilization of
net profits of AIFIs posted an impressive growth working funds; however, operating profits of
during 2020-21 (Table VI.17). NHB moderated during the year (Table VI.18).
VI.87 Under financial ratios, operating profit as VI.89 The RoA for all AIFIs marginally improved
a ratio of total average assets slightly increased in 2020-21 (for NABARD it remained the same)
during 2020-21. However, other financial ratios, (Chart VI.52). The CRAR for EXIM Bank and
SIDBI improved in 2020-21, while that of
except the ratio of spread to total average assets,
NABARD and NHB moderated.
provisions, and net profit, decreased year on
year (Chart VI.51). 3.6 Soundness Indicators
VI.88 Interest income as a ratio of average VI.90 AIFIs’ net NPAs ratios decreased during
working funds declined for all AIFIs. Operating 2020-21. NABARD and NHB reported zero per
profits of EXIM Bank, NABARD and SIDBI cent net NPAs (Chart VI.53).
Table VI.18: AIFIs’ Select Financial Parameters
Items Interest Income/ Non-interest Income/ Operating Profit/ Net Profit
Average Working Funds Average Working Funds Average Working Funds per Employee
(per cent) (per cent) (per cent) (` lakh)
2020 2021 2020 2021 2020 2021 2020 2021
EXIM Bank 7.2 6.4 0.4 0.5 1.8 2.3 35 73
NABARD 6.7 6.1 0.0 0.0 1.4 1.5 108 127
NHB 6.3 5.5 0.1 0.1 1.9 1.3 153 425
SIDBI 6.5 5.7 0.6 0.5 2.2 2.3 221 237
Note: Data are provisional.
Source: Respective Financial Institutions.
157Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
framework, exposure norms, significant
Chart VI.53: AIFIs’ Net NPAs
investments, classification, valuation and
operation of investment portfolio norms and
resource raising norms for AIFIs for public
comments.
VI.93 The consolidated balance sheet of AIFIs
expanded on account of ample liquidity support
by the Reserve Bank as well as higher borrowings
by them. AIFIs’ reliance on deposits and bonds
& debentures remained high. AIFIs’ net NPA
ratios decreased during the year and the ratio of
standard assets increased.
4. Primary Dealers
Source: Respective Financial Institutions. VI.94 As on March 31, 2021 there were 21
primary dealers (PDs), of which 14 function
VI.91 Overall, AIFIs’ stable asset quality as as bank departments and 7 as standalone PDs
reflected in the ratio of standard assets increased (SPDs), the latter registered as NBFCs under
in 2020-21 (Chart VI.54). section 45 IA of the RBI Act, 1934.
VI.92 In order to strengthen the financial 4.1 Operations and Performance of PDs
health of AIFIs, the Reserve Bank has released
VI.95 PDs are financial intermediaries mandated
draft Master Directions on October 22, 2021
to take part in the all-round development of the
on prudential regulations on Basel III capital
primary and secondary government securities
market, underwrite issuances of government
dated securities and participate in primary
Chart VI.54: AIFIs’ Assets Classification
auctions. They are also mandated to achieve
a minimum success ratio (bids accepted as a
proportion to bidding commitment) of 40 per
cent in primary auctions of T-bills and Cash
Management Bills (CMBs), assessed on a half-
yearly basis. In 2020-21, all PDs achieved their
minimum bidding commitments and subscribed
to 68.9 per cent of the notified amount of T-Bills
/ CMBs issued during the year. During the year,
the Government of India issued dated securities
with a face value of `13,70,324 crore (Notified
amount was `12, 85,000 crore) through auctions,
as against `7,10,000 crore issued during the
Note: Data are provisional. previous year. PDs’ share of allotment in the
Source: Respective Financial Institutions.
primary issuance of dated securities increased.
158NON-BANKING FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
In H1:2021-22, PDs achieved a success ratio of
Chart VI.55: Average Rate of Underwriting
62.50 per cent against their bidding commitment Commission of PDs
in T-Bills and CMBs. Also, against the total
notified amount of dated Government securities
of `6,57,000 crore, allotment to PDs stood at
46.5 per cent which was lower than 52.4 per cent
during H1: 2020-21 (Table VI.19).
VI.96 Partial devolvement on PDs took place
on fifteen instances amounting to `1,30,562
crore during 2020-21 as against two instances
amounting to `3,606 crore in 2019-20. The
underwriting commission paid to PDs during
2020-21 was considerably higher at `455 crore,
compared to `41 crores paid in the previous year.
The increase in the underwriting commission,
Source: Returns submitted by PDs.
being strongly co-related to market conditions,
can be attributed to the enlarged quantum of
VI.97 All PDs individually achieved the required
borrowing. During H1:2021-22, there were nine
minimum annual total turnover ratio (both
instances of devolvement aggregating to `75,802
in outright and repo transactions) for dated
crore. The underwriting commission paid to the
Government securities, set at 5 times the average
PDs during the half year amounted to `309 crore,
month-end stock of securities held by them.
which works out to 4.82p/`100 (Chart VI.55).
Similarly, the minimum ratio to be achieved
Table VI.19: Performance of PDs in the through outright transactions exclusively is 3
Primary Market times. For T-Bills, the corresponding minimum
(` crore)
targets are 10 times and 6 times, respectively.
Items 2019-20 2020-21 H1: 2021-22
4.2 Performance of Standalone PDs
1 2 3 4
Treasury Bills and CMBs VI.98 In the secondary market outright segment,
(a) Bidding commitment 13,83,666 17,35,783 7,88,880
the quantum of turnover of standalone primary
(b) Actual bids submitted 41,92,322 49,05,302 19,39,626
dealers (SPDs) decreased in comparison with
(c) Bid to cover ratio 3.0 2.8 2.5
(d) Bids accepted 8,51,816 10,24,732 4,92,935 the previous year. In the repo segment, the
(e) Success ratio (d) / (a) 61.6 59.0 62.5
quantum of turnover by SPDs increased over the
(in Per cent)
Central Government Dated Securities previous year. The share of SPDs in total market
(f) Notified amount 7,10,000 12,85,000 6,57,000
turnover decreased marginally during the year
(g) Actual bids submitted 15,31,570 24,54,253 13,25,625
(Table VI.20).
(h) Bid to cover ratio 2.16 1.91 2.02
(i) Bids of PDs accepted 3,40,610 6,80,763 3,26,815
4.3 Sources and Application of SPDs’ Funds
(j) Share of PDs (i) / (f) 48.0 49.7* 46.5**
(Per cent)
VI.99 Funds mobilised by SPDs rose on a year-
*Calculated with respect to the total accepted amount of `13,70,324
crore. on-year basis in 2020-21. Borrowings remained
**Calculated with respect to the total accepted amount of `7,02,357
the major source of SPDs’ funding. The quantum
crore.
Source: Returns filed by PDs. of secured loans increased marginally whereas
159Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Table VI.20: Performance of SPDs in the 4.4 Financial Performance of SPDs
G-secs Secondary Market
VI.100 A substantial increase was observed in the
(` crore)
SPDs’ profit after tax (PAT) in 2020-21 vis-à-vis
Items 2019-20 2020-21 H1: 2021-22
previous year on account of sharp contraction in
1 2 3 4
interest expenses. Trading profits also witnessed
Outright
Turnover of SPDs 36,56,472 24,71,523 14,00,727 a substantial increase. Income remained at almost
Market turnover 1,33,08,365 1,00,32,187 48,35,156 similar levels whereas expenditure decreased
Share of SPDs (Per cent) 27.5 24.6 29.0
in comparison with the previous year, resulting
Repo
in higher profits for the SPDs during 2020-
Turnover of SPDs 69,29,624 90,75,360 47,20,772
Market turnover 1,47,99,714 2,27,70,547 1,19,59,276 21. During H1: 2021-22, there was a decrease
Share of SPDs (Per cent) 46.8 39.9 39.5
in PAT on account of reduced trading profits
Total (Outright + Repo)
(Table VI.22 and Appendix Table VI.8).
Turnover of SPDs 1,05,86,096 1,15,46,883 61,21,499
Market turnover 2,81,08,079 3,28,02,734 1,67,94,432
VI.101 SPDs’ return on net worth increased
Share of SPDs (Per cent) 37.7 35.2 36.4
in 2020-21 vis-a-vis 2019-20. On account of
Source: Clearing Corporation of India Ltd.
increased trading profits and the sharp drop in
expenditure, the cost to income ratio decreased,
unsecured loans decreased. The largest share
reflecting improved operating efficiency
of investments of SPDs is held in the form of
(Table VI.23).
current assets (Table VI.21).
VI.102 The combined CRAR for all SPDs
Table VI.21: Sources and Applications of increased in 2020-21 and remained comfortably
SPDs’ Funds above the mandated 15 per cent. Capital buffers
(` crore)
Items 2019-20 2020-21 H1: Percentage Table VI.22: Financial Performance of SPDs
2021-22 variation (` crore)
2020-21
over
2019-20 Items 2019-20 2020-21 H1: Variation
2021-22 2020-21 over
1 2 3 4 5 2019-20
Sources of Funds 69,573 71,986 69,864 3.5
AmountPer cent
1. Capital 1,609 1,849 1,849 14.9
1 2 3 4 5 6
2. Reserves and surplus 5,154 7,011 7,336 36.0
3. Loans (a+b) 62,810 63,127 60,678 0.5 A. Income (i to iii) 5,367 5,386 2,493 19 0.3
(a) Secured 49,181 50,374 45,915 2.4 (i) Interest and 4,628 4,173 2,141 -455 -9.9
discount
(b) Unsecured 13,629 12,752 14,763 -6.4
(ii) Trading profits 682 1,008 248 326 47.8
Application of Funds 69,573 71,986 69,864 3.5
(iii) Other income 57 205 103 148 259.0
1. Fixed assets 44 44 41 2.0
B. Expenses (i to ii) 3,663 2,493 1,319 -1,170 -31.9
2. HTM investments 493 154 1,805 -68.8
(i) Interest 3,209 2,130 1,127 -1,079 -33.6
(a+b)
(ii) Other expenses 454 364 192 -90 -19.9
(a) Government 358 - 1,634 -100.0
securities including
establishment
(b) Others 135 154 171 13.7 and
3. Current assets 71,074 72,389 66,145 1.9 administrative
4. Loans and advances 809 1,986 4,931 145.5 costs
5. Current liabilities 2,847 2,616 3,050 -8.1 C. Profit before tax 1,687 2,582 1,031 895 53.0
6. Deferred tax 1 32.7 -6.8 3167.5 D. Profit after tax 1,276 1,938 766 662 51.9
7. Others -1 -3.2 -1.4 302.5
Note: Figures may not add up due to rounding-off.
Source: Returns submitted by PDs
Source: Returns submitted by PDs
160NON-BANKING FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
Table VI.23: SPDs’ Financial Indicators wherewithal to weather the shock and leverage
(` crore) on their grass root level reach to channelize
Indicators 2019-20 2020-21 H1: credit to productive sectors and revive growth.
2021-22
Many NBFCs have adopted strong credit risk
1 2 3 4
assessment frameworks to ensure the quality of
(i) Net profit 1,276 1,938 766
(ii) Average assets 69,631 77,357 80,256 credit creation. The Reserve Bank has introduced
(iii) Return on average assets (Per cent) 1.9 2.6 1.0 scale-based regulation to enhance the regulatory
(iv) Return on net worth (Per cent) 21.3 26.0 8.7
oversight over the sector effective October
(v) Cost to income ratio (Per cent) 21.0 11.2 14.0
2022. To further strengthen the supervisory
Source: Returns submitted by PDs
tools applicable to NBFCs, the Reserve Bank
issued Prompt Corrective Action Framework
of the SPDs improved substantially during the
for NBFCs effective October 2022. The recent
year (Chart VI.56 and Appendix Table VI.9).
amendment of the Factoring Regulation Act
can incentivise all NBFCs to boost the MSME
5. Overall Assessment
sector. Many NBFCs have used the pandemic
VI.103 The pandemic has tested the resilience
to reinvent their business models, realising the
of NBFCs, but so far, the sector has emerged
power of data analytics and Big Data in business
stronger with reasonable balance sheet growth,
applications. In this regard, many have tied up
increased credit intermediation, higher capital,
with FinTech firms to leverage on technological
lower delinquency ratio and enlarged liquidity innovations. NBFCs need to be better equipped
cushions. Various policies in the aftermath of the and focused on cyber fraud prevention. In this
pandemic ensured liquidity support, moratorium regard, the Reserve Bank has placed a report on
and asset classification standstill eased financial digital lending including lending through online
conditions and gave NBFCs adequate time and platforms and mobile apps on November 18,
Chart VI.56: Capital and Risk Weighted Asset Position of SPDs
Source: Returns submitted by PDs.
161Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
2021 in the public domain. The Reserve Bank’s finance has huge potential. The consolidated
recent act of superseding the boards of NBFCs balance sheet of AIFIs expanded at a fast pace
which failed to repay debts is evidence of the on account of ample liquidity support by the
vigil the regulator has on the sector in protecting Reserve Bank.
stakeholders’ interests and preventing adverse
VI.105 With increased pace of vaccinations
impacts on the financial system.
and the broadening revival of the economy, the
VI.104 HFCs also took several proactive steps NBFC sector is expected to remain buoyant.
to counter the impact of COVID-19 and ensure The financial system is maturing from a bank-
continuity of business during the lockdown dominated space to a hybrid system wherein non-
by resorting to digitally-enabled services for bank intermediaries are gaining prominence.
sourcing, processing, and disbursing loans. The developments in the sector in 2020-21 are a
Going forward, given the growing population and harbinger of even brighter prospects in the years
the under penetrated market, affordable housing ahead.
162APPENDIX TABLES
Appendix Table IV.1: Indian Banking Sector at a Glance
(Amount in ` crore)
Sr. Items Amount Outstanding Percentage Variation
No. (At end-March)
2020 2021(P) 2019-20 2020-21(P)
1 2 3 4 5 6
1 Balance Sheet Operations
1.1 Total Liabilities/Assets 1,80,14,425 1,95,94,617 8.5 8.8
1.2 Deposits 1,39,75,045 1,55,90,600 8.4 11.6
1.3 Borrowings 16,96,120 14,74,890 -0.8 -13.0
1.4 Net Loans and Advances 1,03,01,897 1,08,20,208 6.5 5.0
1.5 Investments 46,89,842 54,19,866 8.5 15.6
1.6 OBS Exposure
(Credit Equivalent) to Total Assets (On-balance Sheet) 125.6 118.7 - -
1.7 Total consolidated international claims 5,78,412 6,13,794 -8.1 6.1
2 Profitability
2.1 Net profit 10,911 1,21,998 - -
2.2 Return on Assets (RoA) (Per cent) 0.15 0.66 - -
2.3 Return on Equity (RoE) (Per cent) 0.8 7.7 - -
2.4 Net Interest Margin (NIM) (Per cent) 2.8 2.9 - -
3 Capital Adequacy
3.1 Capital to risk weighted assets ratio (CRAR) @ 14.8 16.3 - -
3.2 Tier I capital (as percentage of total capital) @ 85.5 86.8 - -
3.3 CRAR (tier I) (Per cent) @ 12.6 14.2 - -
4 Asset Quality
4.1 Gross NPAs 8,99,803 8,37,771 -3.9 -6.9
4.2 Net NPAs 2,89,370 2,58,228 -18.5 -10.8
4.3 Gross NPA ratio (Gross NPAs as percentage of gross advances) 8.2 7.3 - -
4.4 Net NPA ratio (Net NPAs as percentage of net advances) 2.8 2.4 - -
4.5 Provision Coverage Ratio (Without Write-Off adj) (Per cent)* 66.2 67.4 - -
4.6 Slippage ratio (Per cent)* 3.8 2.8 - -
5 Sectoral Deployment of Bank Credit
5.1 Gross bank credit 1,00,98,420 1,06,40,811 6.0 5.4
5.2 Agriculture 12,39,575 13,84,815 1.8 11.7
5.3 Industry 32,52,801 32,53,636 -1.2 0.0
5.4 Services 27,54,823 27,45,324 5.9 -0.3
5.5 Retail Loans 26,59,249 29,86,461 15.4 12.3
6 Technological Development
6.1 Total number of credit cards (in lakhs) 577 620 22.6 7.5
6.2 Total number of debit cards (in lakhs) 8,286 8,982 -8.5 8.4
6.3 Number of ATMs 2,10,760 2,13,575 4.2 1.3
7 Customer Services
7.1 Total number of complaints received during the year 3,06,704 3,41,747 66.0 11.4
7.2 Total number of complaints handled during the year 3,28,972 3,81,473# 60.6 15.9
7.3 Total number of complaints addressed 3,05,592 3,71,395 67.4 21.5
7.4 Percentage of complaints addressed 92.9 97.4 - -
8 Financial Inclusion
8.1 Credit-deposit ratio (Per cent) 73.7 69.4 - -
8.2 Number of new bank branches opened 4,334 3,064 9.3 -29.3
8.3 Number of banking outlets in villages (Total) 5,99,217 12,48,079^ 0.4 108.3
Notes: 1. P: Provisional.
2. @Figures are as per the Basel III framework.
3. ^: Significant increase in numbers is due to reclassification done by banks.
4. *: Based on off-site returns.
5. Percentage variations could be slightly different as figures have been rounded off to lakh/crore.
6. # Includes complaints brought forward from the previous year, complaints received as e-mail before March 31, 2020 but
registered as complaints after April 01, 2020 and complaints transferred from CEPCs on or later than April 01, 2020.
163Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Appendix Table IV.2: Off-Balance Sheet Exposure of Scheduled Commercial Banks in India
(Amount in ` crore)
Item Public Sector Private Sector Foreign Small Finance Payments Scheduled
Banks Banks Banks Banks Banks Commercial Banks
2020-21 Percentage 2020-21 Percentage 2020-21 Percentage 2020-21 Percentage 2020-21 Percentage 2020-21 Percentage
Variation Variation Variation Variation Variation Variation
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
1. Forward 30,41,423 43.9 60,31,711 -0.2 1,12,54,195 -3.5 0 - 0 - 2,03,27,329 2.6
exchange (25.9) (93.8) (890.0) (0.0) (0.0) (103.7)
contracts@
2. Guarantees 5,42,067 -0.8 4,63,240 1.1 1,74,474 7.5 740 -9.3 0 - 11,80,521 1.1
given (4.6) (7.2) (13.8) (0.5) (0.0) (6.0)
3. Acceptances, 7,98,360 9.2 2,72,478 9.1 6,74,867 1.8 691 -3.0 4 1,605.4 17,46,400 6.2
endorsements, (6.8) (4.2) (53.4) (0.4) (0.1) (8.9)
etc.
Contingent 43,81,850 29.2 67,67,429 0.2 1,21,03,536 -3.1 1,431 -6.4 4 1,605.4 2,32,54,250 2.7
Liabilities (37.4) (105.2) (957.1) (0.9) (0.1) (118.7)
Notes: 1. -: Nil/Negligible.
2. Figures in brackets are percentages to total liabilities of the concerned bank-group.
3. Due to rounding off of figures, the constituent items may not add up to totals.
4 Lakshmi Vilas Bank Ltd. amalgamated with DBS Bank India Ltd. w.e.f. November 27, 2020. To ensure comparability, the growth rates for 2020-21 for
Private sector banks and foreign banks are computed as follows: Lakshmi Vilas Bank is removed from the base period data for private sector banks
and is added in the base period data for Foreign Banks.
5. @:includes all derivative products (including interest rate swaps) as admissible.
Source: Annual accounts of respective banks.
164APPENDIX TABLES
Appendix Table IV.3: Kisan Credit Card Scheme: State-wise Progress (Continued)
(As at end-March 2021)
(Amount in ` Crore and number of cards issued in '000)
Sr. State/UT Co-operative Banks Regional Rural Banks
No.
Number of Amount outstanding Number of Amount outstanding
Operative KCCs under Operative KCCs Operative KCCs under Operative KCCs
2020 2021 2020 2021 2020 2021 2020 2021
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Northern Region 5,253 5,410 27,225.30 30,415.00 1,251 1,372 29,434.00 31,809.40
1 Haryana 1,187 1,179 10,602.00 11,436.20 269 276 7,388.00 7,697.00
2 Himachal Pradesh 103 111 1,614.10 1,742.00 55 63 706.1 829.7
2 Jammu & Kashmir 9 8 61 58.6 89 118 779.2 883.5
3 Ladakh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 New Delhi #$ 0 0 7.3 4.5 0 0 0 0
5 Punjab 958 961 7,308.20 7,162.70 152 155 5,089.40 5,306.90
6 Rajasthan 2,995 3,150 7,632.70 10,011.00 687 760 15,471.80 17,092.20
7 Chandigarh #$ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
North-Eastern Region 110 114 148.6 174.2 426 442 1,493.00 1,748.50
8 Assam 1 1 16.7 19.3 274 280 1,104.50 1,218.70
9 Arunachal Pradesh # 1 1 4.8 4.9 3 3 24.4 24.3
10 Meghalaya # 16 16 32 32 22 25 124.8 144.3
11 Mizoram # 1 1 5.9 5.7 10 14 56.4 153.1
12 Manipur # 1 2 3.5 17 9 10 30.9 38
13 Nagaland # 4 4 17.6 20.2 1 1 1.7 1.6
14 Tripura # 86 88 66.3 73.3 107 109 150.3 168.5
15 Sikkim #$ 1 1 1.7 1.8 0 0 0 0
Western Region 4,088 4,348 27,723.60 30,411.30 732 975 8,951.80 11,206.30
16 Gujarat 933 954 10,822.50 11,589.70 357 384 5,814.80 6,621.50
18 Maharashtra 3,153 3,392 16,883.30 18,806.00 375 591 3,136.90 4,584.90
19 Goa $ 2 2 17.7 15.6 0 0 0 0
20 Dadar & Nagar Haveli & Daman & Diu @#$ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Central Region 7,776 8,076 27,070.50 30,752.00 4,031 4,155 45,175.20 50,443.80
21 Uttar Pradesh 2,654 2,661 6,401.70 6,759.50 3,361 3,541 36,976.50 41,838.90
22 Uttarakhand 260 279 1,091.10 1,191.20 41 41 294.7 295.5
23 Madhya Pradesh 3,711 3,792 17,977.30 19,375.50 470 439 7,255.50 7,484.50
24 Chhattisgarh 1,152 1,344 1,600.40 3,425.80 158 134 648.5 825
Southern Region 6,871 7,245 38,566.70 38,185.80 3,204 3,317 35,947.30 38,160.10
25 Karnataka 2,742 2,925 13,593.40 17,172.70 536 606 11,146.20 9,777.20
26 Kerala 538 584 3,316.50 4,017.30 161 298 1,539.00 3,961.80
27 Andhra Pradesh 1,440 1,463 9,182.80 10,879.20 1,059 931 10,839.30 10,823.20
28 Tamil Nadu 1,330 1,373 8,637.90 1,360.20 33 34 282.3 311
29 Telangana 814 894 3,827.30 4,746.20 1,414 1,448 12,128.00 13,274.30
30 Lakshdweep @$ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
31 Puducherry # 6 6 8.8 10.3 1 1 12.7 12.7
Eastern Region 4,840 4,989 16,000.10 17,042.60 2,555 2,629 15,693.50 16,047.70
32 Odisha 2,877 3,000 11,306.70 12,216.60 477 440 2,441.60 2,298.70
33 West Bengal 1,703 1,732 4,223.00 4,355.10 299 391 1,324.00 1,751.10
34 Andaman and Nicobar Island@$ 5 6 14.1 16.3 0 0 0 0
35 Bihar 240 238 410.9 417.6 1,400 1,420 10,118.70 10,035.40
36 Jharkhand 14 13 45.4 37 379 379 1,809.20 1,962.50
Total 28,938 30,183 1,36,734.70 1,46,980.70 12,197 12,891 1,36,695.10 1,49,415.80
165Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Appendix Table IV.3: Kisan Credit Card Scheme: State-wise Progress (Concluded)
(As at end-March 2021)
(Amount in ` Crore and number of cards issued in '000)
Sr. State/UT Commercial Banks Total
No.
Number of Amount outstanding Number of Amount outstanding
Operative KCCs under Operative KCCs Operative KCCs under Operative KCCs
2020 2021 2020 2021 2020 2021 2020 2021
1 2 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Northern Region 4,188 5,847 1,41,667.65 1,36,112.69 10,692 12,629 1,98,326.95 1,98,337.09
1 Haryana 687 809 28,119.95 26,222.75 2,143 2,264 46,109.95 45,355.95
2 Himachal Pradesh 219 218 4,142.08 4,054.50 377 392 6,462.28 6,626.20
2 Jammu & Kashmir 371 883 4,459.68 5,575.98 469 1,009 5,299.88 6,518.08
3 Ladakh 0 30 0 281.02 0 30 0 281.02
4 New Delhi #$ 3 4 77.72 90.87 3 3.706 85.02 95.37
5 Punjab 860 1,128 46,349.10 42,056.38 1,970 2,244 58,746.70 54,525.98
6 Rajasthan 2,045 2,705 58,126.30 57,533.94 5,727 6,615 81,230.80 84,637.14
7 Chandigarh #$ 4 71 392.82 297.26 4 71 392.82 297.26
North-Eastern Region 607 585 4,054.65 3,176.83 1,143 1,141 5,696.25 5,099.53
8 Assam 465 456 3,171.36 2,517.09 740 737 4,292.56 3,755.09
9 Arunachal Pradesh # 8 5 49.37 32.82 12 9 78.57 62.022
10 Meghalaya # 26 20 160.79 113.99 64 61 317.59 290.29
11 Mizoram # 7 10 56.82 32.61 18 25 119.12 191.41
12 Manipur # 14 6 106.07 46.39 24 18 140.47 101.39
13 Nagaland # 23 23 121.66 125.22 28 28 140.96 147.02
14 Tripura # 58 59 351.71 276.58 251 256 568.31 518.38
15 Sikkim #$ 5 6 36.87 32.13 6 7 38.57 33.93
Western Region 3,424 4,453 66,510.20 66,274.16 8,244 9,776 1,03,185.60 1,07,891.76
16 Gujarat 1,176 1,554 34,043.23 33,909.45 2,466 2,892 50,680.53 52,120.65
18 Maharashtra 2,242 2,885 32,366.50 32,244.34 5,770 6,868 52,386.70 55,635.24
19 Goa $ 5 12 83.53 98.39 7 14 101.23 113.99
20 Dadar & Nagar Haveli & Daman & Diu @#$ 1 1 16.94 21.98 1 1 16.94 21.98
Central Region 6,777 7,697 1,25,689.73 1,20,761.57 18,584 19,928 1,97,935.43 2,01,957.37
21 Uttar Pradesh 4,633 5,079 73,031.08 69,467.22 10,648 11,281 1,16,409.28 1,18,065.62
22 Uttarakhand 216 286 4,792.21 5,624.07 517 606 6,178.01 7,110.77
23 Madhya Pradesh 1,716 2,043 43,619.37 41,367.31 5,897 6,274 68,852.17 68,227.31
24 Chhattisgarh 212 288 4,247.07 4,302.97 1,522 1,766 6,495.97 8,553.77
Southern Region 5,676 7,979 1,05,787.41 1,08,631.27 15,751 18,541 1,80,301.41 1,84,977.17
25 Karnataka 831 1,292 22,790.62 19,139.79 4,109 4,823 47,530.22 46,089.69
26 Kerala 381 981 14,430.12 18,766.03 1,080 1,863 19,285.62 26,745.13
27 Andhra Pradesh 2,024 2,211 29,517.39 30,576.42 4,523 4,605 49,539.49 52,278.82
28 Tamil Nadu 585 1,566 17,457.70 18,193.36 1,948 2,973 26,377.90 19,864.56
29 Telangana 1,851 1,918 21,422.80 21,800.90 4,079 4,260 37,378.10 39,821.40
30 Lakshdweep @$ 0 0 2.37 2.6452 0 0 2.37 2.65
31 Puducherry # 4 9 166.41 152.12 11 16 187.91 175.12
Eastern Region 3,472 4,136 26,433.90 21,779.82 10,867 11,754 58,127.50 54,870.12
32 Odisha 650 898 5,302.44 4,804.77 4,004 4,338 19,050.74 19,320.07
33 West Bengal 1,032 1,589 7,933.07 7,536.68 3,034 3,712 13,480.07 13,642.88
34 Andaman and Nicobar Island@$ 0 2 10.32 17.70 5 8 24.42 34.00
35 Bihar 1,161 1,113 9,865.11 6,931.67 2,801 2,771 20,394.71 17,384.67
36 Jharkhand 629 533 3,322.96 2,488.99 1,022 925 5,177.56 4,488.49
Total 24,144 30,696 4,70,143.54 4,56,736.33 65,279 73,770 7,43,573.34 7,53,132.83
Note: 1. -: Nil / Negligible.
2. #: StCBs function as Central Financing Agencies.
3. @: No Co-operative Banks in these UTs
4. $: No RRBs in these States/UTs.
5. Components may not add up to their respective totals due to rounding off.
Source: NABARD/Returns from Commercial Banks.
166APPENDIX TABLES
Appendix Table IV.4: Bank Group-wise Lending to the Sensitive Sectors
(Amount in ` crore)
Sector Public Private Foreign Small Scheduled
Sector Banks Sector Banks Banks Finance Banks Commercial Banks
2020-21 Percentage 2020-21 Percentage 2020-21 Percentage 2020-21 Percentage 2020-21 Percentage
Variation Variation Variation Variation Variation
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
1. Capital Market # 38,943 -8.7 81,129 2.1 10,942 15.9 112 -51.4 1,31,126 -0.5
(0.6) (2.1) (2.6) (0.1) (1.2)
2. Real Estate @ 13,75,815 6.6 10,00,277 10.1 1,30,072 6.9 18,508 39.8 25,24,671 8.2
(21.7) (25.4) (30.7) (17.0) (23.3)
3. Commodities - - - - - - - - - -
Total Advances to 14,14,757 6.1 10,81,406 9.5 1,41,013 7.6 18,620 38.3 26,55,797 7.7
Sensitive Sectors (22.3) (27.5) (33.3) (17.1) (24.5)
Notes: 1. - : Nil/Negligible.
2. #: Exposure to capital market is inclusive of both investments and advances.
3. @: Exposure to real estate sector is inclusive both direct and indirect lending.
4. Figures in brackets are percentages to total loans and advances of the concerned bank-group.
5. Lakshmi Vilas Bank Ltd. amalgamated with DBS Bank India Ltd. w.e.f. November 27, 2020. To ensure comparability, the growth rates for
2020-21 for Private sector banks and foreign banks are computed as follows: Lakshmi Vilas Bank is removed from the base period data for
private sector banks and is added in the base period data for Foreign Banks.
Source: Annual accounts of respective banks.
167Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Appendix Table IV.5: Shareholding Pattern of Domestic Scheduled Commercial Banks (Continued)
(As at end-March 2021)
Sr. Name of the Bank Total Financial Financial Other Other Total Total Total - Total- Non
No. Government Institutions Institutions- Corporates Corporates Individual Individual Resident Resident
& RBI - - Resident Non - Resident - Non - Resident - Non
Resident Resident Resident Resident
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Public Sector Banks
1 Bank of Baroda 64.0 9.2 - 9.7 6.9 9.9 0.3 92.8 7.2
2 Bank of India 89.1 5.0 0.6 0.4 - 4.8 0.1 99.3 0.7
3 Bank of Maharashtra 93.3 3.0 0.1 0.3 - 3.2 0.1 99.8 0.2
4 Canara Bank 69.3 13.6 - 1.8 4.6 10.5 0.2 95.2 4.8
5 Central Bank of India 89.8 4.3 0.1 0.4 - 5.4 0.1 99.9 0.1
6 Indian Bank 88.1 4.4 - 1.6 - 5.9 0.1 99.9 0.1
7 Indian Overseas Bank 95.8 1.6 0.1 0.2 - 2.3 0.1 99.9 0.1
8 Punjab and Sind Bank 97.1 1.1 - 0.2 - 1.7 - 100.0 -
9 Punjab National Bank 76.9 9.1 2.9 0.7 - 10.2 0.2 96.9 3.1
10 State Bank of India 56.9 24.1 9.8 1.0 1.3 6.6 0.3 88.7 11.3
11 UCO Bank 94.4 1.6 - 0.3 0.1 3.6 - 99.9 0.2
12 Union Bank of India 89.1 1.0 0.7 3.7 - 5.6 0.1 99.3 0.7
168APPENDIX TABLES
Appendix Table IV.5: Shareholding Pattern of Domestic Scheduled Commercial Banks (Continued)
(As at end-March 2021)
Sr. Name of the Bank Total Financial Financial Other Other Total Total Total - Total- Non
No. Government Institutions Institutions- Corporates Corporates Individual Individual Resident Resident
& RBI - - Resident Non - Resident - Non - Resident - Non
Resident Resident Resident Resident
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Private Sector Banks
1 Axis Bank Ltd. - 31.1 55.6 3 4.3 5.7 0.2 39.9 60.1
2 Bandhan Bank Ltd. - 6.1 34.9 51.7 - 6.8 0.6 64.5 35.5
3 CSB Bank Ltd. - 7.7 - 10.5 56.8 17.7 7.3 36.0 64.1
4 City Union Bank Ltd. - 39.1 18.0 4.1 - 37.7 1.2 80.8 19.2
5 DCB Bank Ltd. 0.2 37.7 - 9.0 27.1 24.8 1.2 71.7 28.4
6 Federal Bank Ltd. - 42.6 25.6 2.3 - 24.1 5.4 69.0 31.0
7 HDFC Bank Ltd. 0.2 17.1 72.1 1.8 - 8.7 0.1 27.8 72.3
8 ICICI Bank Ltd. 0.3 22.2 59.0 12.0 - 6.2 0.3 40.7 59.3
9 IDBI Bank Ltd. 45.5 50.9 - 0.6 - 2.9 0.1 99.9 0.1
10 IDFC First Bank Ltd. 4.6 3.4 11.9 49.4 8.3 20.9 1.5 78.4 21.6
11 IndusInd Bank Ltd. - 16.6 54.9 3.6 16.1 8.2 0.5 28.4 71.6
12 Jammu & Kashmir Bank Ltd. 68.2 2.8 3.6 2.2 - 22.2 1.1 95.3 4.7
13 Karnataka Bank Ltd. - 5.9 - 5.3 9.4 76.3 3.3 87.4 12.7
14 Karur Vysya Bank Ltd. - 20.3 - 4.1 21.3 53.3 1.0 77.7 22.3
15 Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. - 13.6 45.9 3.4 1.7 35.0 0.4 52.0 48.0
16 Nainital Bank Ltd. - 98.6 - - - 1.4 - 100.0 -
17 RBL Bank Ltd. 0.4 21.8 2.4 8.6 42.7 22.8 1.4 53.6 46.5
18 South Indian Bank Ltd. - 0.9 - 23.9 7.3 60.4 7.6 85.2 14.8
19 Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Ltd. - - - 6.7 24.9 67.5 0.9 74.2 25.8
20 The Dhanalaxmi Bank Ltd. - 4.1 - 10.2 11.5 55.2 19.1 69.4 30.6
21 Yes Bank Ltd. - 46.7 - 8.1 13.8 30.3 1.2 85.1 14.9
169Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Appendix Table IV.5: Shareholding Pattern of Domestic Scheduled Commercial Banks (Concluded)
(As at end-March 2021)
Sr. Name of the Bank Total Financial Financial Other Other Total Total Total - Total- Non
No. Government Institutions Institutions- Corporates Corporates Individual Individual Resident Resident
& RBI - - Resident Non - Resident - Non - Resident - Non
Resident Resident Resident Resident
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Small Finance Banks
1 Au Small Finance Bank - 10.8 32.1 17.1 3.2 36.1 0.8 63.9 36.1
Limited
2 Capital Small Finance Bank - 21.9 9.9 0.2 - 46.2 21.8 68.3 31.7
Limited
3 Equitas Small Finance Bank - 12.8 1.0 82.3 - 3.9 0.1 98.9 1.1
Limited
4 Esaf Small Finance Bank - 66.6 - 17.2 - 7.4 8.7 91.3 8.7
Limited
5 Fincare Small Finance Bank - 91.1 - 4.5 4.1 0.3 - 95.9 4.1
Limited
6 Jana Small Finance Bank - 5.8 48.3 45.1 - 0.9 - 51.8 48.3
Limited
7 North East Small Finance - - - 100.0 - - - 100.0 -
Bank Limited
8 Suryoday Small Finance Bank - 22.4 - 11.3 25.3 41.0 0.1 74.7 25.4
Limited
9 Ujjivan Small Finance Bank - 0.0 - 87.1 4.4 7.9 0.6 95.0 5.0
Limited
10 Utkarsh Small Finance Bank - - - 91.0 9.0 - - 91.0 9.0
Limited
Local Area Banks
1 Coastal Local Area Bank Ltd. - - - 25.0 - 55.7 19.3 80.7 19.3
2 Krishna Bhima Samruddhi - - - 24.7 - 75.3 - 100.0 0.0
Lab Ltd.
Note: -: Nil / Negligible.
Source: Off-site returns (domestic).
170APPENDIX TABLES
Appendix Table IV.6: Overseas Operations of Indian Banks
(At end-March)
Sr. Items Branch Subsidiary Representative Joint Other Total
No. Office Venture Offices *
Bank
2020 2021 2020 2021 2020 2021 2020 2021 2020 2021 2020 2021
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
I. Public Sector Banks 117 111 24 22 15 13 7 7 37 35 200 189
1 Bank of Baroda 36 33 9 7 - - 2 2 9 10 56 52
2 Bank of India 25 23 4 4 1 1 - - - - 30 28
3 Canara Bank 5 5+1# 1 1 1 1 - - - - 7 8
4 Indian Bank 3 3 - - - - - - - - 3 3
5 Indian Overseas Bank 4 4 - - - - - - 2 2 6 6
6 Punjab National Bank 2 2 2 2 - 2# 2 2 - - 6 8
7 State Bank of India 36 35 7 7 8 7 3 3 26 23 80 75
8 Syndicate Bank 1 - - - - - - - - - 1 -
9 UCO Bank 2 2 - - 1 1 - - - - 3 3
10 Union Bank of India 3 3 1 1 1 1 - - - - 5 6
11 United Bank of India - - - - 2 - - - - - 2 -
12 Oriental Bank of Commerce - - - - 1 - - - - - 1 -
II Private Sector Bank 20 15 3 3 20 21 - - 1 1 44 40
13 Axis Bank Ltd. 5 2 1 1 4 4 - - - - 10 7
14 HDFC Bank Ltd. 3 3 - - 3 3 - - - - 6 6
15 ICICI Bank Ltd. 10 8 2 2 5 6 - - 1 1 18 17
16 IDBI Bank Ltd.$ 1 1 - - - - - - - - 1 1
17 IndusInd Bank Ltd. - - - - 3 3 - - - - 3 3
18 Federal Bank Ltd. - - - - 2 2 - - - - 2 2
19 Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. 1 1 - - 1 1 - - - - 2 2
20 Yes Bank Ltd. - - - - 1 1 - - - - 1 1
21 South Indian Bank Ltd. - - - - 1 1 - - - - 1 1
All Banks 137 126 27 25 35 34 7 7 38 36 244 229
Notes: 1. *: Other Offices include marketing/sub-office, remittance centers, etc.
2. $: IDBI Bank Ltd has been categorised as Private Sector Bank.
3. #: Syndicate Bank merged with Canara Bank, Andhra Bank and Corporation bank merged with Union Bank of India, United
Bank of India and Oriental Bank of Commerce merged with Punjab National Bank, Allahabad Bank merged with Indian Bank
w.e.f. April 01, 2020.
Source: Reserve Bank of India.
171Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Appendix Table IV.7: Branches and ATMs of Scheduled Commercial Banks (Continued)
(At end-March 2021)
Sr. Name of the Bank Branches ATMs
No.
Rural Semi-urban Urban Metropolitan Total On-site Off-site Total
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Public Sector Banks 28,828 24,028 16,654 16,801 86,311 78,007 59,106 1,37,113
1 Bank of Baroda 2,851 2,087 1,482 1,794 8,214 8,663 2,970 11,633
2 Bank of India 1,835 1,455 803 932 5,025 2,388 3,163 5,551
3 Bank of Maharashtra 611 461 372 471 1,915 1,505 445 1,950
4 Canara Bank 3,072 3,141 2,103 2,130 10,446 9,128 4,324 13,452
5 Central Bank Of India 1,603 1,333 810 862 4,608 2,746 898 3,644
6 Indian Bank 1,940 1,589 1,259 1,214 6,002 4,239 686 4,925
7 Indian Overseas Bank 902 961 651 687 3,201 2,720 425 3,145
8 Punjab And Sind Bank 570 279 356 326 1,531 1,067 30 1,097
9 Punjab National Bank 3,900 2,680 2,257 1,931 10,768 8,610 5,171 13,781
10 State Bank of India 7,914 6,496 3,981 3,830 22,221 25,706 36,911 62,617
11 Uco Bank 1,074 818 609 555 3,056 2,146 215 2,361
12 Union Bank Of India 2,556 2,728 1,971 2,069 9,324 9,089 3,868 12,957
172APPENDIX TABLES
Appendix Table IV.7: Branches and ATMs of Scheduled Commercial Banks (Continued)
(At end-March 2021)
Sr. Name of the Bank Branches ATMs
No.
Rural Semi-urban Urban Metropolitan Total On-site Off-site Total
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Private Sector Banks 7,431 11,391 7,547 9,422 35,791 34,828 37,566 72,394
1 Axis Bank Ltd 756 1,409 1,098 1,446 4,709 5,598 11,445 17,043
2 Bandhan Bank Ltd 1,811 2,022 977 500 5,310 485 2 487
3 Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd 45 264 109 97 515 264 54 318
4 City Union Bank 116 271 138 168 693 1,079 645 1,724
5 DCB Bank Ltd 67 93 89 103 352 308 102 410
6 Dhanalakshmi Bank Ltd 19 106 62 58 245 206 51 257
7 Federal Bank Ltd 162 689 229 209 1,289 1,495 462 1,957
8 HDFC Bank Ltd 1,052 1,742 1,159 1,651 5,604 6,552 8,227 14,779
9 ICICI Bank Ltd 1,097 1,537 1,063 1,542 5,239 8,161 8,642 16,803
10 IDBI Ltd 406 587 466 427 1,886 2,214 1,174 3,388
11 IDFC Bank Ltd 47 160 218 329 754 507 170 677
12 Indusind Bank Ltd 290 430 513 628 1,861 1,393 1,479 2,872
13 Jammu And Kashmir Bank 504 174 107 166 951 820 612 1,432
14 Karnataka Bank Ltd 193 199 226 240 858 341 660 1,001
15 Karur Vysya Bank Ltd 133 300 160 226 819 1,292 944 2,236
16 Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd 256 292 341 715 1,604 1,325 1,273 2,598
17 Nainital Bank Ltd 50 33 44 32 159 - - -
18 RBL Bank Limited 63 73 61 232 429 325 87 412
19 South Indian Bank 110 461 172 192 935 824 491 1,315
20 Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Ltd 106 247 80 76 509 644 748 1,392
21 Yes Bank Ltd 148 302 235 385 1,070 995 298 1,293
173Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Appendix Table IV.7: Branches and ATMs of Scheduled Commercial Banks (Concluded)
(At end-March 2021)
Sr. Name of the Bank Branches ATMs
No.
Rural Semi-urban Urban Metropolitan Total On-site Off-site Total
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Foreign Banks 124 185 165 400 874 690 1,135 1,825
1 AB Bank Limited - - - 1 1 - - -
2 Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank (P.J.S.C.) - - - 1 1 - - -
3 American Express Banking Corp. - - - 1 1 - - -
4 Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited 1 - 1 1 3 - - -
5 Bank of America, National Association - - - 4 4 - - -
6 Bank of Bahrain & Kuwait B.S.C. - 1 - 3 4 - - -
7 Bank of Ceylon - - - 1 1 - - -
8 Bank of China Limited - - - 1 1 - - -
9 Bank of Nova Scotia - - - 2 2 - - -
10 Barclays Bank Plc - 1 - 2 3 - - -
11 BNP Paribas - - - 8 8 - - -
12 Citibank N.A - - 4 31 35 47 455 502
13 Co-operative Rabobank U.A. - - - 1 1 - - -
14 Credit Agricole Corporate and Investment Bank - - - 5 5 - - -
15 Credit Suisse Ag - - - 1 1 - - -
16 CTBC Bank Co., Ltd. - 1 - 1 2 - - -
17 DBS Bank India Limited* 116 179 127 179 601 480 540 1020
18 Deutsche Bank AG 1 - 5 11 17 13 19 32
19 Doha Bank Q.P.S.C. - - 1 2 3 - - -
20 Emirates NDB Bank (P.J.S.C.) - - - 1 1 - - -
21 First Abu Dhabi Bank (P.J.S.C.) - - - 1 1 - - -
22 Firstrand Bank Ltd - - - 1 1 - - -
23 Hongkong And Shanghai Banking Corpn.Ltd. - - 4 22 26 46 36 82
24 Industrial and Commercial Bank of China - - - 1 1 - - -
25 Industrial Bank of Korea - - - 1 1 - - -
26 JPMorgan Chase Bank National Association 2 - - 2 4 - - -
27 JSC VTB Bank - - - 1 1 - - -
28 KEB Hana Bank - 1 - 1 2 - - -
29 Kookmin Bank - - 1 - 1 - - -
30 Krung Thai Bank Public Company Limited - - - 1 1 - - -
31 Mashreq Bank PSC - - - 1 1 - - -
32 Mizuho Bank Ltd - 1 1 3 5 - - -
33 MUFG Bank, Ltd. 1 - - 4 5 - - -
34 Natwest Markets Plc - - - 1 1 - - -
35 PT Bank Maybank Indonesia Tbk - - - 1 1 - - -
36 Qatar National Bank (Q.P.S.C) - - - 1 1 - - -
37 Sberbank - - - 1 1 - - -
38 SBM Bank (India) Limited 1 - - 7 8 5 - 5
39 Shinhan Bank 1 - - 5 6 - - -
40 Societe Generale - - - 2 2 - - -
41 Sonali Bank - - 1 1 2 - - -
42 Standard Chartered Bank 1 1 19 79 100 99 85 184
43 Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation - - - 3 3 - - -
44 United Overseas Bank Ltd - - - 1 1 - - -
45 Woori Bank - - 1 2 3 - - -
Notes: (a) Population groups are defined as follows: ‘Rural’ includes centres with population of less than 10,000, ‘Semi-Urban’ includes centres with
population of 10,000 and above but less than of one lakh, ‘Urban’ includes centres with population of one lakh and above but less than of ten
lakhs, and ‘Metropolitan’ includes centres with population of 10 lakhs and above. All population figures are as per census 2011.
(b) Data on branches exclude ‘Administrative Offices’.
(c) -: nil.
(d) *: Includes branches and ATMs of amalgamated entity i.e. Lakshmi Vilas Bank Ltd. as on end-March 2021.
Source: Central Information System for Banking Infrastructure (erstwhile Master Office File system) database, RBI (position as on December 01, 2021).
Central Information System for Banking Infrastructure data are dynamic in nature and are updated based on information as received from banks and
processed at our end.
174APPENDIX TABLES
Appendix Table IV.8: Statement of Complaints Received at Banking Ombudsman Office (Continued)
(April to March 2020-21)
Sr. Name of the Bank Number of complaints in major categories for Public Sector Banks Others Total
No.
Deposit Loans ATM/ Mobile Levy of Pension Non- Failure on
Account and Debit Banking/ Charges Observance Commitments
Advances card/ Electronic Without of Fair and Failure of
Credit Banking Prior Practices Commitments
card Notice to BCSBI
Code
Public Sector Banks 5,597 10,878 49,268 27,436 7,789 4,833 15,871 23,974 29,328 1,74,974
1 Bank of Baroda 598 1,097 3,860 2,556 895 255 1,701 2,235 3,068 16,265
2 Bank of India 251 583 3,412 1,120 347 182 740 816 1,448 8,899
3 Bank of Maharashtra 57 114 842 299 150 13 132 165 426 2,198
4 Canara Bank 386 782 2,260 1,371 639 227 1,421 2,098 2,050 11,234
5 Central Bank of India 196 412 3,361 1,242 229 374 691 802 1,216 8,523
6 Indian Bank 277 554 2,405 1,176 324 211 919 1,066 1,212 8,144
7 Indian Overseas Bank 88 234 641 353 108 51 389 469 348 2,681
8 Punjab and Sind Bank 46 85 262 153 42 24 90 402 177 1,281
9 Punjab National Bank 931 1,369 7,199 3,960 907 811 1,725 3,939 4,157 24,998
10 State Bank of India 2,253 4,659 19,865 12,661 3,538 2,394 6,468 9,655 12,626 74,119
(excluding SBI card)
11 UCO Bank 103 223 826 520 116 71 316 364 533 3,072
12 Union Bank of India 411 766 4,335 2,025 494 220 1,279 1,963 2,067 13,560
175Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Appendix Table IV.8: Statement of Complaints Received at Banking Ombudsman Office (Continued)
(April to March 2020-21)
Sr. Name of the Bank Number of complaints in major categories for Private Sector Banks Others Total
No.
Deposit Loans ATM/ Mobile Levy of Pension Non- Failure on
Account and Debit Banking / Charges Observance Commitments
Advances card/ Electronic Without of Fair and Failure of
Credit Banking Prior Practices Commitment
card Notice to BCSBI
Code
Private Sector Banks 2,101 7,979 37,884 12,647 11,577 51 14,137 19,972 19,955 1,26,303
1 Axis Bank Limited 399 1,059 6,493 2,120 2,781 8 2,252 3,128 2,771 21,011
2 Bandhan Bank Limited 13 104 138 84 20 - 94 79 145 677
3 Catholic Syrian Bank Limited 4 2 15 3 22 - 31 18 13 108
4 City Union Bank Limited 5 23 56 64 20 1 53 42 54 318
5 DCB Bank Limited 20 167 32 34 89 - 129 198 165 834
6 Dhanlaxmi Bank Limited 2 8 11 8 8 - 29 7 17 90
7 Federal Bank Limited 34 76 314 147 73 - 162 87 161 1,054
8 HDFC Bank Limited 452 1,859 11,478 3,234 2,627 17 3,968 5,684 5,101 34,420
9 ICICI Bank Limited 462 2,312 6,740 3,481 2,926 9 3,209 4,383 4,543 28,065
10 IDBI Bank Limited 84 441 669 428 339 6 404 587 679 3,637
11 IDFC First Bank Limited 62 524 205 178 261 - 666 820 1,131 3,847
12 IndusInd Bank Limited 108 253 2,199 386 444 - 596 1,091 880 5,957
13 Jammu & Kashmir Bank 28 49 285 82 21 3 128 41 81 718
Limited
14 Karnataka Bank Limited 10 38 115 107 71 - 61 162 112 676
15 Karur Vysya Bank Limited 19 51 79 77 59 - 120 107 90 602
16 Kotak Mahindra Bank 221 557 2,656 1,492 971 6 1,079 1,582 2,193 10,757
Limited
17 Nainital Bank Limited - 6 11 5 1 - 16 10 22 71
18 RBL Bank Limited 61 153 5,601 298 438 - 571 910 973 9,005
19 South Indian Bank Limited 8 26 129 72 51 - 77 53 71 487
20 Tamilnadu Mercantile Bank 3 18 66 48 21 - 54 70 42 322
Limited
21 Yes Bank Limited 106 253 592 299 334 1 438 913 711 3,647
176APPENDIX TABLES
Appendix Table IV.8: Statement of Complaints Received at Banking Ombudsman Office (Continued)
(April to March 2020-21)
Sr. Name of the Bank Number of complaints in major categories for Foreign Banks Others Total
No.
Deposit Loans ATM/ Mobile Levy of Pension Non- Failure on
Account and Debit Banking / Charges Observance Commitments
Advances card/ Electronic Without of Fair and Failure of
Credit Banking Prior Practices Commitment
card Notice to BCSBI
Code
Foreign Banks 95 286 2,678 530 342 4 632 842 748 6,157
1 AB Bank Limited 1 1 3 - 2 - - - 1 8
2 Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank PJSC - - - - - - - - 2 2
3 American Express Banking
Corporation 1 3 255 1 31 - 33 54 26 404
4 Barclays Bank Plc - - 11 - - - 2 8 - 21
5 Bank of America National
Association - - 2 - - - - 1 1 4
6 Bank of Bahrain and Kuwait B.S.C - - - - - - - - 1 1
7 BNP Paribas - - - - - - - - 2 2
8 Citibank N.A. 25 37 955 184 68 - 160 214 165 1,808
9 DBS Bank India Limited 23 9 68 118 26 - 75 80 108 507
10 Deutsche Bank A.G., 7 14 7 10 9 - 33 41 30 151
11 First Abu Dhabi Bank PJSC - - - - - - - 1 - 1
12 FirstRand Bank Limited - - - - - - - - 1 1
13 Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking
Corporation Limited 10 29 282 38 15 - 53 90 56 573
14 Industrial & Commercial Bank of
China Limited - - 4 - - - - 1 - 5
15 JP Morgan Chase Bank N.A. - 1 - - - - - - - 1
16 Krung Thai Bank Public Co.
Limited - - 2 - - - - - - 2
17 Mashreqbank PSC - - - - - - - 1 2 3
18 Mizuho Bank Limited - - - - - - - - 1 1
19 MUFG Bank, Ltd. - - - - - - 1 - - 1
20 NatWest Markets Plc (erstwhile
The Royal Bank of Scotland PLC) - - 7 - - - - 3 1 11
21 SBM Bank (India) Limited - - 2 - - - - - 2 4
22 Shinhan Bank - 7 - 1 - - 7 3 - 18
23 Societe Generale India - - - - - - 1 - - 1
24 Standard Chartered Bank 28 185 1,079 178 190 4 267 345 348 2,624
25 United Overseas Bank Limited - - 1 - - - - - - 1
26 National Australia Bank - - - - 1 - - - - 1
27 Cooperatieve Rabobank U.A - - - - - - - - 1 1
177Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Appendix Table IV.8: Statement of Complaints Received at Banking Ombudsman Office (Concluded)
(April to March 2020-21)
Sr. Name of the Bank Number of complaints in major categories for Small Finance Banks Others Total
No.
Deposit Loans ATM/ Mobile Levy of Pension Non- Failure on
Account and Debit Banking / Charges Observance Commitments
Advances card/ Electronic Without of Fair and Failure of
Credit Banking Prior Practices Commitment
card Notice to BCSBI
Code
Small Finance Banks 85 204 174 120 125 - 201 316 416 1,641
1 Au Small Finance Bank Limited 17 110 22 25 52 - 60 91 196 573
2 Capital Small Finance Bank
Limited 2 4 3 2 5 - 2 17 13 48
3 Fincare Small Finance Bank
Limited 23 7 22 35 8 - 25 42 34 196
4 Equitas Small Finance Bank
Limited 10 26 7 13 24 - 37 43 51 211
5 ESAF Small Finance Bank
Limited 1 3 23 3 1 - 12 4 6 53
6 Suryoday Small Finance Bank
Limited 6 4 1 2 - - 3 5 5 26
7 Ujjivan Small Finance Bank
Limited 9 21 41 31 11 - 21 56 47 237
8 Utkarsh Small Finance Bank
Limited 6 10 11 5 2 - 11 11 14 70
9 North East Small Finance Bank
Limited - 1 - - - - - - 1 2
10 Jana Small Finance Bank Limited 11 18 44 4 22 - 30 47 49 225
Payments Banks 342 13 437 1,956 118 5 306 844 1,256 5,277
1 Aditya Birla Idea Payments Bank
Limited 1 4 2 2 - - - - 2 11
2 Airtel Payments Bank Limited 169 - 92 835 49 3 137 478 580 2,343
3 Fino Payments Bank Limited 30 5 72 43 5 - 11 24 65 255
4 India Post Payments Bank Limited 18 1 28 42 11 2 15 37 40 194
5 Jio Payments Bank Limited 2 - 1 14 - - 1 3 8 29
6 Paytm Payments Bank Limited 114 3 240 1,011 44 - 138 292 557 2,399
7 NSDL Payments Bank Limited 8 - 2 9 9 - 4 10 4 46
Others (SBI Cards+Primary
Urban Cooperative
Banks+RRBs+Others) 360 858 10,483 1,696 998 73 2,751 4,541 5,635 27,395
Note: Nil/negligible.
Source: RBI.
178APPENDIX TABLES
Appendix Table IV.9: International Liabilities of Banks in India – By Type of Instruments
(Amount in ` Crore)
Liability Type Amount Outstanding Percentage Variation
(At end-March)
2020 (PR) 2021 (P) 2019-20 2020-21
1 2 3 4 5
1. Loans and Deposits 11,67,576 11,42,402 2.4 -2.2
(78.4) (68.8)
a) Foreign Currency Non-resident (Bank) 1,69,103 1,33,986 8.6 -20.8
[FCNR (B)] Scheme (11.4) (8.1)
b) Foreign Currency Borrowings* 1,18,113 54,998 -26.7 -53.4
(7.9) (3.3)
c) Non-resident External (NRE) Rupee Accounts 6,63,387 7,20,626 8.1 8.6
(44.5) (43.4)
d) Non-resident Ordinary (NRO) Rupee Accounts 1,02,870 1,17,500 12.7 14.2
(6.9) (7.1)
2. Own Issues of Securities/ Bonds 6,119 2,468 672.7 -59.7
(0.4) (0.1)
3. Other liabilities 3,15,820 5,14,748 -19.8 63.0
(21.2) (31.0)
Of which:
a) ADRs/GDRs 48,357 86,860 -30.2 79.6
(3.2) (5.2)
b) Equities of Banks held by Non-residents 1,33,105 2,96,355 -34.2 122.6
(8.9) (17.9)
c) Capital / Remittable Profits of Foreign Banks 1,34,357 1,31,534 9.9 -2.1
in India and Other Unclassified International (9.0) (7.9)
Liabilities
Total International Liabilities 14,89,515 16,59,618 -3.0 11.4
(100.0) (100.0)
Notes: 1. In view of the incomplete data coverage from all the branches, the data reported under the locational banking statistics (LBS)
are not strictly comparable with those capturing data from all the branches.
2. PR: Partially Revised; P: Provisional
3. *: Inter-bank borrowings in India and from abroad and external commercial borrowings of banks.
4. Figures in parentheses are percentages to total.
5. Percentage variations could be slightly different as absolute numbers have been rounded off to ` crore.
Source: International Banking Statistics, RBI.
179Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Appendix Table IV.10: International Assets of Banks in India - By Type of Instruments
(Amount in ` Crore)
Asset Type Amount Outstanding Percentage
(At end-March) Variation
2020 (PR) 2021 (P) 2019-20 2020-21
1 2 3 4 5
1. Loans and Deposits 5,36,835 6,56,688 4.4 22.3
(93.3) (93.4)
Of which:
(a) Loans to Non-residents 85,464 1,49,800 2.0 75.3
(14.8) (21.3)
(b) Foreign Currency Loan to Residents 1,53,905 1,27,869 6.2 -16.9
(26.7) (18.2)
(c) Outstanding Export Bills 73,289 57,283 -28.9 -21.8
(12.7) (8.1)
(d) Foreign Currency in hand, Travelers Cheques, etc. 3,097 5,663 -4.5 82.8
(0.5) (0.8)
(e) NOSTRO Balances and Placements Abroad 2,21,080 3,16,074 23.4 43.0
(38.4) (45.0)
2. Holdings of Debt Securities 23,272 39,024 -15.0 67.7
(4.0) (5.6)
3. Other International Assets 15,421 7,293 -6.1 -52.7
(2.7) (1.0)
Total International Assets* 5,75,529 7,03,005 3.1 22.1
(100.0) (100.0)
Notes: 1. In view of the incomplete data coverage from all the branches, the data reported under the locational Banking statistics
(LBS) are not strictly comparable with those capturing data from all the branches.
2. PR: Partially Revised; P: Provisional
3. Figures in parentheses are percentages to total.
4. The sum of components may not add up due to rounding off.
Source: International Banking Statistics, RBI.
180APPENDIX TABLES
Table IV.11: Consolidated International Claims of Banks: Residual Maturity and Sector
(Amount in ` Crore)
Residual Maturity/Sector Amount Outstanding Percentage Variation
(At end-March)
2020 (PR) 2021 (P) 2019-20 2020-21
1 2 3 4 5
Total Consolidated International Claims 5,78,412 6,13,794 -8.1 6.1
(100) (100)
Residual Maturity
Short Term 4,42,971 4,81,320 -6.4 8.7
(76.6) (78.4)
Long Term 1,31,319 1,28,699 -13.4 -2
(22.7) (21.0)
Unallocated 4,122 3,774 -15.3 -8.4
(0.7) (0.6)
Sector
Banks 2,32,459 3,16,643 -2.2 36.2
(40.2) (51.6)
Official Sector 32,472 44,611 -11.6 37.4
(5.6) (7.3)
Non-Bank Financial Institutions 3,765 4,249 192.5 12.8
(0.7) (0.7)
Non-Financial Private 2,66,252 2,06,419 -16.1 -22.5
(46.0) (33.6)
Others 43,463 41,873 19.2 -3.7
(7.5) (6.8)
Notes: 1. PR: Partially Revised; P: Provisional.
2. Figures in parentheses are percentages to total.
3. The sum of components may not add up due to rounding off.
4. Residual Maturity ‘Unallocated’ comprises maturity not applicable (for example, for equities) and maturity information not
available.
5. The official sector includes official monetary authorities, general government and multilateral agencies.
6. Non-financial private sector includes non-financial corporations and households including non-profit institutions serving
households (NPISHs).
7. Others include non-financial public sector undertakings and the unallocated sector.
8. Percentage variation could be slightly different as absolute numbers have been rounded off to ` crore.
Source: International Banking Statistics, RBI.
181Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Appendix Table IV.12: Consolidated International Claims of Banks on Countries other than India
(Amount in ` Crore)
Country Amount Outstanding Percentage Variation
(At end-March)
2020 (PR) 2021 (P) 2019-20 2020-21
1 2 3 4 5
Total Consolidated 5,78,412 6,13,794 -8.1 6.1
International Claims
o f which
1. United States of America 1,55,634 1,94,023 -7.3 24.7
(26.9) (31.6)
2. United Kingdom 56,836 67,652 -10.6 19.0
(9.8) (11.0)
3. Hong Kong 21,384 35,828 -35.3 67.5
(3.7) (5.8)
4. Singapore 40,940 45,049 8.8 10.0
(7.1) (7.3)
5. United Arab Emirates 83,661 79,446 5.0 -5.0
(14.5) (12.9)
6. Germany 15,353 27,116 17.5 76.6
(2.7) (4.4)
Notes: 1. PR: Partially Revised; P: Provisional.
2. Figures in parentheses are percentages to total.
3. Percentage variation could be slightly different as absolute numbers have been rounded off to ` crore.
Source: International Banking Statistics, RBI.
182APPENDIX TABLES
Appendix Table IV.13: Progress of Microfinance Programmes
(At end-March)
Item Self Help Groups
Number (` lakh) Amount (` crore)
2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Loans Disbursed by Banks 19.0 22.6 27.0 31.5 28.9 38,781 47,186 58,318 77,659 58,071
(9.9) (13.8) (17.8) (22.1) (17.0) (20,012.0) (27,479.3) (36,818.5) (55,589.9) (31,755.1)
Loans Outstanding with Banks 48.5 50.2 50.8 56.8 57.8 61,581 75,599 87,098 1,08,075 1,03,290
(28.1) (30.8) (35.1) (39.6) (36.0) (34,127.7) (43,575.9) (58,431.6) (73,183.9) (61,393.1)
Savings with Banks 85.8 87.4 100.1 102.4 112.2 16,114 19,592 23,325 26,152 37,478
(42.9) (46.1) (60.2) (62.6) (70.1) (8,679.6) (11,784.8) (14,481.6) (15,836.3) (21,308.4)
Microfinance Institutions
Number Amount (` crores)
Loans Disbursed by Banks 2,314.0 1,922.0 1,933.0 4,762.0 28,562.0 19,304 25,515 14,626 20,226 12,739
Loans Outstanding with Banks 5,357.0 5,073.0 5,488.0 15,197.0 61,181.0 29,225 32,306 17,761 29,289 22,602
Joint Liability Groups
Number (` in lakhs) Amount (` crores)
Loans Disbursed by Banks 7.0 10.2 16.0 41.8 41.3 9,511 13,955 30,947 83,103 58,312
(During the FY)
Notes: 1. Figures in brackets give the details of SHGs covered under the National Rural Livelihoods Mission (NRLM) and the National Urban Livelihoods Mission
(NULM) for 2016-17, 2017-18, 2018-19, 2019-20 and 2020-21 respectively.
2. Actual number of MFIs availing loans from banks would be less than the number of accounts, as most of MFIs avail loans several times from the same
bank and also from more than one bank.
Source: NABARD.
183Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Appendix Table IV.14: Major Financial Indicators of Regional Rural Banks- State-wise (Continued)
(Amount in ` Crore)
Region/State 2019-20 2020-21P
No. of Profit Earning Loss Incurring Net No. of Profit Earning Loss Incurring Net
RRBs Profit/ RRBs Profit/
Loss Loss
Mar-20 No. Amount No. Amount Mar-21 No. Amount No. Amount
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Central Region 9 4 281 5 1,294 -1,013 7 5 468 2 224 245
Chhattisgarh 1 1 10 - - 10 1 1 12 - - 12
Madhya Pradesh 2 - - 2 759 -759 2 - - 2 224 -224
Uttar Pradesh 5 3 271 2 455 -184 3 3 454 - - 454
Uttarakhand 1 - - 1 79 -79 1 1 2 - - 2
Eastern Region 8 2 42 6 1,769 -1,727 8 3 112 5 1,116 -1,004
Bihar 2 - - 2 630 -630 2 - - 2 432 -432
Jharkhand 1 1 42 - - 42 1 1 32 - - 32
Odisha 2 - - 2 535 -535 2 - - 2 623 -623
West Bengal 3 1 1 2 604 -603 3 2 80 1 61 19
North Eastern Region 7 4 175 3 194 -19 7 4 246 3 121 124
Arunachal Pradesh 1 1 3 - - 3 1 1 6 - - 6
Assam 1 - - 1 188 -188 1 - - 1 114 -114
Manipur 1 - - 1 3 -3 1 - - 1 5 -5
Meghalaya 1 1 1 - - 1 1 1 1 - - 1
Mizoram 1 1 13 - - 13 1 1 39 - - 39
Nagaland 1 - - 1 3 -3 1 - - 1 2 -2
Tripura 1 1 158 - - 158 1 1 200 - - 200
Northern Region 7 5 198 2 166 31 7 5 435 2 49 386
Haryana 1 1 3 - - 3 1 1 18 - - 18
Himachal Pradesh 1 1 1 - - 1 1 1 9 - - 9
Jammu & Kashmir 2 - - 2 166 -166 2 - - 2 49 -49
Punjab 1 1 51 - - 51 1 1 53 - - 53
Rajasthan 2 2 143 - - 143 2 2 355 - - 355
Southern Region 10 8 1,446 2 656 790 10 10 2,117 - - 2,117
Andhra Pradesh 3 3 483 - - 483 3 3 566 - - 566
Karnataka 2 1 19 1 605 -586 2 2 21 - - 21
Kerala 1 - - 1 51 -51 1 1 33 - - 33
Puducherry 1 1 6 - - 6 1 1 9 - - 9
Tamil Nadu 1 1 150 - - 150 1 1 185 - - 185
Telangana 2 2 789 - - 789 2 2 1,304 - - 1,304
Western Region 4 3 62 1 333 -271 4 3 172 1 357 -185
Gujarat 2 2 34 - - 34 2 2 119 - - 119
Maharashtra 2 1 27 1 333 -305 2 1 54 1 357 -304
All India 45 26 2,203 19 4,411 -2,208 43 30 3,550 13 1,867 1,682
184APPENDIX TABLES
Appendix Table IV.14: Major Financial Indicators of Regional Rural Banks- State-wise (Concluded)
Region/State Gross NPA (%) CRAR (%)
Mar-20 Mar-21 Mar-20 Mar-21
1 14 15 16 17
Central Region 14.7 10.4 10.0 9.9
Chhattisgarh 5.5 3.1 22.0 20.4
Madhya Pradesh 22.7 19.7 1.4 -0.1
Uttar Pradesh 13.8 8.8 11.0 11.4
Uttarakhand 7.3 7.9 6.1 6.2
Eastern Region 21.6 23.1 2.4 0.6
Bihar 24.2 29.3 4.0 1.9
Jharkhand 9.1 9.2 11.3 10.9
Odisha 26.8 26.5 -3.5 -10.8
West Bengal 17.1 14.7 0.3 1.7
North Eastern Region 20.7 19.0 12.1 13.1
Arunachal Pradesh 5.6 5.6 10.2 10.6
Assam 37.1 33.5 4.0 1.8
Manipur 19.8 28.7 6.1 2.4
Meghalaya 11.6 11.0 14.6 13.9
Mizoram 5.2 6.1 9.8 9.5
Nagaland 4.1 4.1 2.0 -2.9
Tripura 8.9 8.3 21.9 26.8
Northern Region 7.2 5.6 11.3 11.4
Haryana 11.6 9.3 13.6 13.6
Himachal Pradesh 5.8 5.4 9.0 10.1
Jammu & Kashmir 11.3 8.9 0.8 -1.7
Punjab 8.5 7.5 15.7 15.5
Rajasthan 4.3 3.1 10.0 10.8
Southern Region 4.8 5.2 13.2 13.4
Andhra Pradesh 1.6 1.5 15.8 15.4
Karnataka 11.5 14.0 11.7 11.2
Kerala 4.3 3.6 7.2 6.6
Puducherry 1.9 2.0 12.1 12.0
Tamil Nadu 2.4 2.2 14.2 12.2
Telangana 1.3 1.4 14.8 17.2
Western Region 7.3 7.3 7.5 5.9
Gujarat 3.9 3.5 10.1 10.8
Maharashtra 11.4 11.4 4.4 0.6
All India 10.4 9.4 10.3 10.2
Notes: 1. Components may not add up to the exact total due to rounding off.
2. Data for 2020-21 are provisional.
Source: NABARD.
185Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Appendix Table IV.15: RRBs- PSL Target and Achievement-2020-21
Sector/Sub Sector Target (%) Achievement (%) RRBs not Meeting Target/Sub-target
Overall Priority Sector 75 92.0 Arunachal Pradesh Rural Bank (74.9 %), Meghalaya Rural Bank (68.5%),
Nagaland Rural Bank (50.0%)
Agriculture 18 50.0 Arunachal Pradesh Rural Bank (17.2 %), Nagaland Rural Bank (13.0%)
Small and Marginal Farmers 8 31.4 -
Non-Corporate Farmers 12.1 83.5 -
Micro Enterprises 7.5 15.1 -
Weaker Sections 15 70.3 -
Note: Target and Achievement are as a percentage of ANBC as on corresponding date of previous year.
Source: NABARD.
186APPENDIX TABLES
Appendix Table IV.16: Frauds in Various Banking Operations Based on Date of Reporting (Continued)
(Amount in ` crore)
Area of Operation 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10
No. Amount No. Amount No. Amount No. Amount No. Amount No. Amount
Advances 1,564 672 1,525 1,162 1,734 1,055 1,750 721 1,977 1,402 2,190 1,263
Card/Internet 26 3 144 6 491 11 679 15 1,036 37 1,215 35
Deposits 374 28 325 28 384 49 458 79 599 66 666 195
Off-balance sheet 6 33 7 25 4 4 6 8 9 22 10 370
Foreign exchange transactions 16 14 10 30 28 7 25 30 15 14 16 28
Cash 75 4 89 16 87 7 99 5 141 36 143 14
Cheques/demand drafts, etc. 108 15 110 9 141 10 192 17 234 15 202 17
Inter-branch accounts 31 6 36 7 18 1 22 3 16 5 18 2
Clearing, etc. accounts 20 2 23 4 35 12 30 9 52 45 51 7
Non-resident accounts 11 2 9 0 17 1 9 4 26 2 13 2
Others 204 16 148 29 88 51 97 26 146 39 146 64
Grand Total 2,435 795 2,426 1,316 3,027 1,208 3,367 917 4,251 1,683 4,670 1,997
187Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Appendix Table IV.16: Frauds in Various Banking Operations Based on Date of Reporting (Continued)
(Amount in ` crore)
Area of Operation 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
No. Amount No. Amount No. Amount No. Amount No. Amount No. Amount
Advances 2,382 2,740 1,953 3,552 2,087 6,530 1,985 8,334 2,256 17,123 2,120 17,367
Card/Internet 763 21 629 23 793 49 978 54 845 52 1,191 40
Deposits 790 583 857 219 791 291 774 331 875 437 759 809
Off-balance sheet 10 212 5 373 18 1,527 15 1,088 10 699 4 132
Foreign exchange transactions 19 148 22 130 10 98 9 144 16 899 17 51
Cash 154 20 173 20 140 23 145 24 153 43 160 22
Cheques/demand drafts, etc. 184 27 172 40 141 22 180 19 254 26 234 25
Inter-branch accounts 10 1 24 8 6 3 7 1 4 0 4 10
Clearing, etc. accounts 34 11 38 31 36 7 36 24 29 7 17 87
Non-resident accounts 9 2 11 3 17 3 38 10 23 8 8 9
Others 179 56 207 98 197 112 135 64 179 162 176 146
Grand Total 4,534 3,822 4,091 4,497 4,236 8,665 4,302 10,093 4,644 19,456 4,690 18,698
188APPENDIX TABLES
Appendix Table IV.16: Frauds in Various Banking Operations Based on Date of Reporting (Concluded)
(Amount in ` crore)
Area of Operation 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
No. Amount No. Amount No. Amount No. Amount No. Amount
Advances 2,320 20,556 2,525 22,558 3,603 64,539 4,608 1,81,942 3,501 1,37,023
Card/Internet 1,372 42 2,059 110 33 5,538 34 2,445 23 535
Deposits 693 903 691 457 13 695 8 54 4 129
Off-balance sheet 5 63 20 16,288 1,866 71 2,677 129 2,545 119
Foreign exchange transactions 16 2,201 9 1,426 593 148 530 616 504 434
Cash 239 37 218 40 3 0 2 0 2 0
Cheques/demand drafts, etc. 235 40 207 34 274 56 371 63 329 39
Inter-branch accounts 1 0 6 1 189 34 201 39 163 85
Clearing, etc. accounts 27 6 37 6 24 209 22 7 14 4
Non-resident accounts 10 3 6 5 3 0 8 1 1 0
Others 153 77 138 242 197 244 242 172 277 54
Grand Total 5,071 23,928 5,916 41,167 6,798 71,534 8,703 1,85,468 7,363 1,38,422
Notes: 1. Refers to frauds of `1 lakh and above
2. The figures reported by banks and financial institutions are subject to change based on revisions filed by them.
3. Frauds reported in a year could have occurred several years prior to year of reporting.
4. Amounts involved are as reported and do not reflect the amount of loss incurred. Depending on recoveries, the loss incurred gets reduced.
Further, the entire amount involved in loan accounts is not necessarily diverted.
Source: NABARD.
189Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Appendix Table V.1: Select Financial Parameters of Scheduled UCBs (Continued)
(As on March 31, 2021)
(Per cent)
Sr. Bank Name Average Average Net Net Non- Return on CRAR Business Profit per
No. Cost of Yield on Interest Interest Interest Assets per Employee
Deposits Advances Income to Income to Income to (ROA) Employee (` Crores)
Total Working Working (` Crores)
Assets Funds Funds
(Spread)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
1 Abhyudaya Co-operative Bank 5.62 9.53 1.83 1.79 1.85 0.03 12.01 5.99 0.00
Limited, Mumbai
2 Ahmedabad Mercantile Co-opera- 5.79 9.47 3.51 3.35 0.48 1.60 29.19 9.45 0.12
tive Bank Limited
3 Akola Janata Commercial 5.01 10.40 2.27 2.21 1.14 0.31 22.13 4.80 0.01
Co-operative Bank Limited, Akola
4 Akola Urban Co-operative Bank 4.69 10.66 3.72 3.56 0.54 0.41 13.36 4.46 0.01
Limited, Akola
5 Amanath Co-operative Bank 1.75 1.77 0.24 1.88 4.87 0.30 21.05 1.25 0.03
Limited, Bangalore
6 Andhra Pradesh Mahesh 6.42 11.56 3.17 3.05 0.38 1.02 20.11 7.33 0.06
Co-operative Urban Bank Limited
7 Apna Sahakari Bank Limited 5.97 10.24 2.46 2.62 1.03 -0.79 9.25 8.93 -0.05
8 Bassein Catholic Co-operative 6.19 10.28 2.73 2.69 0.50 1.89 18.58 20.07 0.30
Bank Limited
9 Bharat Co-operative Bank 6.45 9.45 1.98 1.96 2.31 0.25 13.32 13.51 0.02
(Mumbai) Limited, Mumbai
10 Bharati Sahakari Bank Limited 4.85 8.98 2.09 2.20 0.48 0.12 18.63 8.39 0.01
11 Bombay Mercantile Co-operative 3.60 10.20 4.00 3.67 1.94 0.46 17.94 3.27 0.01
Bank Limited
12 Citizen Credit Co-operative Bank 4.97 8.56 2.20 2.42 0.75 0.37 22.08 9.85 0.03
Limited, Mumbai
13 Cosmos Co-operative Bank 5.81 9.09 1.90 2.00 3.77 0.28 12.54 10.28 0.02
Limited
14 Dombivli Nagari Sahakari Bank 5.36 9.09 1.93 2.09 3.90 0.70 13.38 8.54 0.05
Limited
15 Goa Urban Co-operative Bank 5.52 8.92 3.01 2.95 0.42 0.85 17.70 5.66 0.04
Limited
16 Gopinath Patil Parsik Janata 5.19 10.35 2.17 3.14 0.42 0.19 21.10 7.68 0.02
Sahakari Bank Limited, Thane
17 Greater Bombay Co-operative 5.49 10.10 2.84 2.79 1.27 0.16 15.14 9.12 0.01
Bank Limited
18 Indian Mercantile Co-operative 4.91 5.41 2.69 3.07 1.46 -7.38 19.27 1.38 -0.13
Bank Limited, Lucknow
19 Jalgaon Janata Sahakari Bank 5.20 10.39 2.99 3.16 1.18 0.63 12.85 8.39 0.04
Limited
20 Jalgaon People’s Co-operative 4.78 10.24 2.79 2.79 0.76 0.19 12.98 6.86 0.01
Bank Limited
21 Janakalyan Sahakari Bank 5.43 9.22 2.67 2.64 0.51 0.05 10.83 9.08 0.00
Limited, Mumbai
22 Janalaxmi Co-operative Bank 6.08 7.00 1.00 2.03 0.74 -1.05 29.36 1.24 -0.03
Limited, Nashik
23 Janata Sahakari Bank Limited, 5.88 9.84 2.29 2.12 3.51 0.00 12.61 11.59 0.00
Pune
24 Kallappanna Awade Ichalkaranji 6.41 10.56 2.52 2.49 0.43 0.37 13.23 7.09 0.02
Janata Sahakari Bank Limited
25 Kalupur Commercial Co-operative 5.49 9.07 3.12 2.94 0.92 1.47 18.63 16.30 0.17
Bank Limited
26 Kalyan Janata Sahakari Bank 5.62 10.19 2.26 2.24 1.14 0.42 12.25 10.22 0.03
Limited, Kalyan
27 Kapol Co-operative Bank Limited, 3.46 2.81 -0.61 -0.61 0.33 -4.28 -278.06 3.47 -0.16
Mumbai
190APPENDIX TABLES
Appendix Table V.1: Select Financial Parameters of Scheduled UCBs (Concluded)
(As on March 31, 2021)
(Per cent)
Sr. Bank Name Average Average Net Net Non- Return on CRAR Business Profit per
No. Cost of Yield on Interest Interest Interest Assets per Employee
Deposits Advances Income to Income to Income to (ROA) Employee (` Crores)
Total Working Working (` Crores)
Assets Funds Funds
(Spread)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
28 Karad Urban Co-operative Bank 6.04 10.61 3.05 3.03 1.17 0.66 16.41 5.61 0.03
Limited
29 Khamgaon Urban Co-operative 4.72 10.44 3.46 3.61 0.73 0.56 18.88 4.71 0.02
Bank Limited, Khamgaon
30 Mahanagar Co-operative Bank 5.66 10.53 3.33 3.51 0.69 0.75 15.11 6.72 0.04
Limited, Mumbai
31 Mehsana Urban Co-operative 6.35 10.61 3.30 2.99 0.59 1.29 14.06 22.05 0.18
Bank Limited
32 Nagar Urban Co-operative Bank 6.18 7.56 1.53 1.87 0.78 -6.04 1.08 3.85 -0.21
Limited, Ahmednagar
33 Nagpur Nagrik Sahakari Bank 3.21 6.18 1.48 2.37 0.75 0.42 13.42 6.32 0.03
Limited
34 Nasik Merchant’s Co-operative 4.85 9.78 3.39 3.36 1.30 0.74 38.00 4.63 0.03
Bank Limited
35 New India Co-operative Bank 5.76 10.50 2.01 1.79 1.40 0.88 11.23 13.27 0.08
Limited, Mumbai
36 NKGSB Co-operative Bank 5.95 9.70 1.76 1.90 0.89 0.15 13.43 10.26 0.01
Limited, Mumbai
37 Nutan Nagarik Sahakari Bank 6.05 8.98 1.51 1.40 1.29 0.60 15.96 11.41 0.05
Limited, Ahmedabad
38 Pravara Sahakari Bank Limited 6.26 10.98 2.91 2.86 1.68 0.24 12.91 4.73 0.01
39 Punjab & Maharashtra Co-opera- 5.44 3.41 -3.40 -3.51 0.13 -5.09 -337.55 11.66 -0.32
tive Bank Limited
40 Rajarambapu Sahakari Bank 6.88 10.42 2.33 2.23 0.60 0.52 12.40 9.70 0.03
Limited
41 Rajkot Nagrik Sahakari Bank 5.79 10.27 2.40 2.28 1.26 1.31 15.74 8.26 0.07
Limited
42 Rupee Co-operative Bank Limited 1.86 0.50 0.90 2.48 2.35 0.64 -539.27 5.98 0.07
43 Sangli Urban Co-operative Bank 6.22 10.09 2.18 2.36 1.09 -0.02 13.08 5.92 0.00
Limited, Sangli
44 Saraswat Co-operative Bank 5.37 8.96 1.88 1.85 1.33 0.58 14.26 15.80 0.06
Limited, Bombay
45 SBPP Co-operative Bank Limited, 4.75 9.66 3.59 3.43 1.92 0.51 18.67 8.48 0.03
Killa Pardi
46 Shamrao Vithal Co-operative 5.69 9.64 2.55 2.84 0.99 0.74 13.89 12.35 0.06
Bank Limited
47 Shikshak Sahakari Bank Limited, 5.64 9.69 1.22 1.59 1.01 -0.60 11.26 4.63 -0.03
Nagpur
48 Solapur Janata Sahakari Bank 6.57 11.73 2.42 2.70 0.47 -0.31 12.66 8.27 -0.02
Limited
49 Surat Peoples Co-operative Bank 6.81 9.32 1.28 1.26 1.36 0.55 13.86 21.94 0.08
Limited
50 Thane Bharat Sahakari Bank 5.30 10.75 3.23 3.40 0.96 0.20 12.83 7.82 0.01
Limited
51 TJSB Sahakari Bank 5.38 10.13 3.12 2.98 0.91 1.25 16.16 12.21 0.11
52 Vasai Vikas Sahakari Bank 6.01 10.20 2.55 0.21 0.04 0.95 13.14 9.83 0.07
Limited
53 Zoroastrian Co-operative Bank 5.62 9.91 2.28 2.27 0.34 0.45 24.22 7.54 0.03
Limited, Bombay
Note: 1. Data are provisional.
2. Data as reported by UCBs in off-site returns.
191Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Appendix Table V.2: Indicators of Financial Performance: Scheduled UCBs (Continued)
(As per cent to total assets)
Sr. Name of the Banks Interest Income Operating Profit Net Profit after Taxes
No.
2019-20 2020-21 2019-20 2020-21 2019-20 2020-21
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1 Abhyudaya Co-operative Bank Limited, Mumbai 7.5 6.5 0.4 0.3 0.1 0.0
2 Ahmedabad Mercantile Co-operative Bank Limited 7.9 7.4 2.3 2.3 1.2 1.5
3 Akola Janata Commercial Co-operative Bank Limited, Akola 7.1 6.2 1.3 0.5 0.7 0.3
4 Akola Urban Co-operative Bank Limited, Akola 7.7 7.1 0.4 1.4 0.4 0.4
5 Amanath Co-operative Bank Limited, Bangalore 1.4 0.4 0.8 0.3 0.8 0.3
6 Andhra Pradesh Mahesh Co-operative Urban Bank Limited 8.7 8.2 2.0 1.6 1.3 1.0
7 Apna Sahakari Bank Limited 7.5 7.5 0.3 1.0 0.0 -0.8
8 Bassein Catholic Co-operative Bank Limited 7.8 7.5 2.1 1.9 0.8 1.8
9 Bharat Co-operative Bank (Mumbai) Limited, Mumbai 8.3 7.3 1.2 0.9 0.4 0.2
10 Bharati Sahakari Bank Limited 6.7 6.4 0.6 0.6 0.2 0.1
11 Bombay Mercantile Co-operative Bank Limited 5.2 4.9 0.4 0.6 0.1 0.3
12 Citizen Credit Co-operative Bank Limited, Mumbai 7.3 6.6 0.8 1.0 0.4 0.4
13 Cosmos Co-operative Bank Limited 7.2 6.6 1.6 2.3 -0.2 0.3
14 Dombivli Nagari Sahakari Bank Limited 8.3 6.9 1.8 2.5 0.8 0.8
15 Goa Urban Co-operative Bank Limited 8.1 7.1 1.7 1.3 0.3 0.8
16 Gopinath Patil Parsik Janata Sahakari Bank Limited, Thane 8.0 7.4 1.6 1.3 0.8 0.3
17 Greater Bombay Co-operative Bank Limited 7.7 7.3 1.2 1.6 0.2 0.1
18 Indian Mercantile Co-operative Bank Limited, Lucknow 7.8 6.2 0.5 1.4 3.2 -7.7
19 Jalgaon Janata Sahakari Bank Limited 7.7 7.5 1.6 2.2 0.6 0.6
20 Jalgaon People’s Co-operative Bank Limited 8.5 6.9 2.5 1.1 0.7 0.2
21 Janakalyan Sahakari Bank Limited, Mumbai 8.2 7.2 0.6 0.8 0.4 0.0
22 Janalaxmi Co-operative Bank Limited, Nashik 3.1 3.2 -0.3 -1.1 -0.3 -1.1
23 Janata Sahakari Bank Limited, Pune 7.3 6.6 1.3 2.2 0.0 0.0
24 Kallappanna Awade Ichalkaranji Janata Sahakari Bank Limited 7.1 7.4 0.6 1.2 0.3 0.3
25 Kalupur Commercial Co-operative Bank Limited 6.5 6.5 2.3 2.2 1.2 1.3
26 Kalyan Janata Sahakari Bank Limited, Kalyan 7.8 7.2 1.0 0.8 0.7 0.4
27 Kapol Co-operative Bank Limited, Mumbai 2.6 1.8 -4.0 -3.4 -6.7 -4.5
28 Karad Urban Co-operative Bank Limited 8.2 7.8 1.4 1.8 0.6 0.6
29 Khamgaon Urban Co-operative Bank Limited, Khamgaon 7.8 7.1 1.4 2.0 0.5 0.6
30 Mahanagar Co-operative Bank Limited, Mumbai 8.3 7.8 1.9 1.7 0.7 0.7
31 Mehsana Urban Co-operative Bank Limited 8.5 7.9 2.2 2.6 1.1 1.2
32 Nagar Urban Co-operative Bank Limited, Ahmednagar 8.4 5.7 1.3 -0.2 -2.5 -6.4
33 Nagpur Nagrik Sahakari Bank Limited 7.3 6.8 1.3 0.7 0.2 0.7
34 Nasik Merchant’s Co-operative Bank Limited 8.8 7.9 3.2 2.5 1.5 0.7
35 New India Co-operative Bank Limited, Mumbai 7.8 6.2 0.9 0.9 0.2 0.8
36 NKGSB Co-operative Bank Limited, Mumbai 7.6 7.6 0.5 0.8 0.0 0.2
37 Nutan Nagarik Sahakari Bank Limited, Ahmedabad 7.2 6.2 1.2 1.0 0.7 0.6
38 Pravara Sahakari Bank Limited 8.5 8.1 1.3 1.9 0.2 0.2
39 Punjab & Maharashtra Co-operative Bank Limited -23.7 2.4 -31.2 -3.0 -52.2 -3.0
40 Rajarambapu Sahakari Bank Limited 8.3 7.8 1.1 1.3 0.4 0.5
41 Rajkot Nagrik Sahakari Bank Limited 7.5 6.9 1.6 2.1 1.3 1.2
42 Rupee Co-operative Bank Limited 2.5 2.2 0.9 1.1 0.9 0.8
43 Sangli Urban Co-operative Bank Limited, Sangli 7.3 7.1 0.3 1.1 -0.5 0.0
44 Saraswat Co-operative Bank Limited, Bombay 6.2 5.7 1.3 1.4 0.5 0.5
45 SBPP Co-operative Bank Limited, Killa Pardi 7.0 6.6 1.3 2.7 0.5 0.5
46 Shamrao Vithal Co-operative Bank Limited 7.1 6.7 1.0 1.1 0.7 0.7
47 Shikshak Sahakari Bank Limited, Nagpur 6.0 5.5 0.5 -0.4 0.4 -0.7
48 Solapur Janata Sahakari Bank Limited 8.2 7.8 1.4 1.1 -0.1 -0.3
49 Surat Peoples Co-operative Bank Limited 7.8 6.9 1.2 0.7 0.5 0.5
50 Thane Bharat Sahakari Bank Limited 8.8 7.6 1.8 1.5 0.2 0.2
51 TJSB Sahakari Bank 7.5 7.0 1.4 1.5 0.8 1.1
52 Vasai Vikas Sahakari Bank Limited 7.9 7.4 1.9 1.0 0.3 0.9
53 Zoroastrian Co-operative Bank Limited, Bombay 7.7 6.9 0.7 0.6 0.2 0.4
Note: Data for 2020-21 are provisional.
192APPENDIX TABLES
Appendix Table V.2: Indicators of Financial Performance: Scheduled UCBs (Concluded)
(As per cent to total assets)
Sr. Name of the Banks Interest Expended Non-Interest Expenses Provisions and
No. Contingencies
2019-20 2020-21 2019-20 2020-21 2019-20 2020-21
1 2 9 10 11 12 13 14
1 Abhyudaya Co-operative Bank Limited, Mumbai 5.2 4.7 3.0 3.3 0.3 0.3
2 Ahmedabad Mercantile Co-operative Bank Limited 4.5 4.1 1.6 1.5 0.3 0.3
3 Akola Janata Commercial Co-operative Bank Limited, Akola 4.4 4.1 2.7 2.7 0.2 0.2
4 Akola Urban Co-operative Bank Limited, Akola 4.5 3.8 4.1 2.4 0.0 1.1
5 Amanath Co-operative Bank Limited, Bangalore 0.3 0.2 0.8 0.6 0.0 0.0
6 Andhra Pradesh Mahesh Co-operative Urban Bank Limited 5.3 5.1 2.0 1.8 0.1 0.4
7 Apna Sahakari Bank Limited 5.3 5.1 2.7 2.4 0.3 1.9
8 Bassein Catholic Co-operative Bank Limited 5.3 4.8 1.3 1.2 0.7 0.1
9 Bharat Co-operative Bank (Mumbai) Limited, Mumbai 6.1 5.4 2.9 3.2 0.6 0.6
10 Bharati Sahakari Bank Limited 4.9 4.3 1.7 1.9 0.3 0.4
11 Bombay Mercantile Co-operative Bank Limited 2.5 2.2 3.3 3.5 0.3 0.3
12 Citizen Credit Co-operative Bank Limited, Mumbai 4.9 4.2 2.1 2.1 0.2 0.3
13 Cosmos Co-operative Bank Limited 5.3 4.8 3.4 3.1 1.9 1.8
14 Dombivli Nagari Sahakari Bank Limited 5.9 4.7 2.4 3.8 1.0 1.7
15 Goa Urban Co-operative Bank Limited 4.7 4.2 2.0 2.0 0.9 0.1
16 Gopinath Patil Parsik Janata Sahakari Bank Limited, Thane 4.8 4.2 2.4 2.3 0.5 0.7
17 Greater Bombay Co-operative Bank Limited 5.1 4.6 2.5 2.3 0.8 1.3
18 Indian Mercantile Co-operative Bank Limited, Lucknow 4.6 3.4 3.0 2.7 -3.0 9.0
19 Jalgaon Janata Sahakari Bank Limited 4.8 4.4 2.5 2.0 0.6 1.2
20 Jalgaon People’s Co-operative Bank Limited 5.4 4.2 2.4 2.4 1.7 0.9
21 Janakalyan Sahakari Bank Limited, Mumbai 5.2 4.6 2.9 2.4 0.1 0.8
22 Janalaxmi Co-operative Bank Limited, Nashik 2.0 2.1 1.6 2.6 0.0 0.0
23 Janata Sahakari Bank Limited, Pune 5.4 4.7 2.3 2.9 1.2 2.1
24 Kallappanna Awade Ichalkaranji Janata Sahakari Bank Limited 5.4 5.1 2.2 1.5 0.3 0.6
25 Kalupur Commercial Co-operative Bank Limited 4.1 3.8 1.4 1.3 0.7 0.4
26 Kalyan Janata Sahakari Bank Limited, Kalyan 5.5 5.0 2.4 2.5 0.0 0.3
27 Kapol Co-operative Bank Limited, Mumbai 3.0 2.5 3.8 3.1 2.8 1.2
28 Karad Urban Co-operative Bank Limited 5.6 5.0 2.6 2.2 0.5 0.9
29 Khamgaon Urban Co-operative Bank Limited, Khamgaon 4.5 3.7 2.6 2.1 0.8 0.8
30 Mahanagar Co-operative Bank Limited, Mumbai 4.9 4.5 2.5 2.2 0.6 0.6
31 Mehsana Urban Co-operative Bank Limited 5.6 4.9 1.1 1.0 0.6 0.9
32 Nagar Urban Co-operative Bank Limited, Ahmednagar 5.2 4.1 2.9 2.5 3.4 6.3
33 Nagpur Nagrik Sahakari Bank Limited 4.4 4.4 2.9 2.4 0.5 0.0
34 Nasik Merchant’s Co-operative Bank Limited 5.8 4.6 2.4 2.1 1.7 1.2
35 New India Co-operative Bank Limited, Mumbai 6.0 4.4 2.5 2.2 1.1 0.2
36 NKGSB Co-operative Bank Limited, Mumbai 5.9 5.5 2.3 2.3 0.4 0.5
37 Nutan Nagarik Sahakari Bank Limited, Ahmedabad 5.3 4.8 1.8 1.7 0.1 0.3
38 Pravara Sahakari Bank Limited 5.0 5.3 2.7 2.5 1.1 1.7
39 Punjab & Maharashtra Co-operative Bank Limited 6.0 4.4 1.9 1.1 22.5 0.0
40 Rajarambapu Sahakari Bank Limited 6.2 5.6 1.5 1.5 0.7 0.8
41 Rajkot Nagrik Sahakari Bank Limited 5.1 4.6 1.3 1.3 0.2 0.5
42 Rupee Co-operative Bank Limited 1.3 1.1 1.2 1.1 -0.1 0.3
43 Sangli Urban Co-operative Bank Limited, Sangli 5.7 5.0 2.4 2.1 0.7 1.1
44 Saraswat Co-operative Bank Limited, Bombay 4.4 4.1 1.5 1.5 0.5 0.5
45 SBPP Co-operative Bank Limited, Killa Pardi 3.9 3.4 2.1 2.3 0.4 1.9
46 Shamrao Vithal Co-operative Bank Limited 4.9 4.4 2.1 2.1 0.2 0.2
47 Shikshak Sahakari Bank Limited, Nagpur 4.0 4.2 2.5 2.6 0.0 0.3
48 Solapur Janata Sahakari Bank Limited 5.8 5.3 1.8 1.8 1.1 1.2
49 Surat Peoples Co-operative Bank Limited 6.0 5.7 1.2 1.9 0.4 0.2
50 Thane Bharat Sahakari Bank Limited 5.6 4.4 2.7 2.5 1.5 1.1
51 TJSB Sahakari Bank 4.8 4.3 2.0 2.1 0.1 0.1
52 Vasai Vikas Sahakari Bank Limited 5.5 4.9 1.8 1.9 1.9 0.1
53 Zoroastrian Co-operative Bank Limited, Bombay 5.2 4.6 2.1 2.0 0.3 0.2
Notes: Data for 2020-21 are provisional.
193Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Appendix Table V.3: Indicators of Financial Health of State Co-operative Banks
(At end-March)
(Amount in ` Lakh)
Sr. Region/State Amount of Profit/Loss NPAs as Percentage of Recovery to Demand
No Loans Outstanding (%)
2018-19 2019-20 31-Mar-19 31-Mar-20 30-Jun-18 30-Jun-19
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Northern Region 17,168 22,210 2.2 2.1 96.2 98.8
1 Chandigarh 394 341 5.7 6.2 81.9 80.7
2 Delhi 2,225 2,072 1.6 1.4 85.8 97.0
3 Haryana 3,188 5,150 0.0 0.1 100.0 100.0
4 Himachal Pradesh 4,109 5,049 9.2 8.0 54.5 51.2
5 Jammu & Kashmir 138 1,489 4.4 5.1 34.0 79.5
6 Punjab 1,777 2,269 1.1 1.0 99.6 99.6
7 Rajasthan 5,337 5,840 0.2 0.2 90.3 98.8
North-Eastern Region 6,298 5,956 8.9 8.6 46.7 46.9
8 Arunachal Pradesh -39 -1,550 49.3 54.2 9.1 1.8
9 Assam 1,141 736 7.2 6.8 62.4 25.9
10 Manipur 65 200 32.6 29.5 6.1 44.7
11 Meghalaya 1,025 1,128 8.6 7.4 31.6 22.1
12 Mizoram 960 1,262 8.8 5.6 40.6 67.8
13 Nagaland 915 1,272 13.1 13.7 57.3 62.0
14 Sikkim 672 1,132 3.5 4.2 10.1 38.9
15 Tripura 1,559 1,775 3.5 3.8 81.0 86.9
Eastern Region 6,033 17,051 4.3 4.7 95.5 93.2
16 Andaman & Nicobar Islands 1,057 367 16.7 48.1 73.0 38.4
17 Bihar 4,731 4,885 4.8 4.9 96.0 77.7
18 Jharkhand -9,673 264 52.4 51.6 40.4 64.3
19 Odisha 9,281 8,181 1.6 1.4 98.1 98.3
20 West Bengal 638 3,354 5.1 4.2 89.1 91.6
Central Region 8,534 19,918 6.3 5.6 92.7 91.3
21 Chhattisgarh 899 2,576 3.2 3.0 69.1 93.9
22 Madhya Pradesh 2,124 12,789 6.3 5.4 92.0 92.9
23 Uttar Pradesh 4,202 4,328 8.0 5.9 94.9 83.3
24 Uttarakhand 1,309 225 4.0 9.3 98.6 97.2
Western Region 32,891 40,115 6.6 8.6 86.2 82.8
25 Goa 3,462 4,442 8.6 10.4 86.4 85.9
26 Gujarat 4,294 3,173 2.0 1.3 96.7 94.8
27 Maharashtra 25,135 32,500 8.1 10.8 82.0 79.3
Southern Region 45,686 67,152 2.6 8.6 97.6 98.5
28 Andhra Pradesh 10,041 9,991 1.3 1.2 98.4 99.7
29 Karnataka 5,000 5,100 4.3 3.7 98.3 97.2
30 Kerala 22,488 37,475 3.2 15.3 96.2 98.4
31 Puducherry - 4,980 2,343 20.3 16.3 87.1 87.1
32 Tamil Nadu 8,605 9,017 2.1 2.7 99.7 99.6
33 Telangana 4,532 3,226 0.2 0.2 95.5 98.6
All India 116,611 172,401 4.3 6.7 93.9 94.4
Notes: 1. Components may not add up to total due to rounding off.
2. Recovery for a financial year is as on 30th June.
3. During the year 2019-20, 13 of 14 DCCBs in Kerala (except Mallapuram DCCB) amalgamated with Kerala StCB.
Source: NABARD
194APPENDIX TABLES
Appendix Table V.4: Indicators of Financial Health of District Central Co-operative Banks
(At end-March)
(Amount in ` Lakh)
Sr. Region/State 2018-2019 2019-20 2019 2020
No.
No. Profit Loss No. Profit Loss NPA Recov- NPA Recov-
of of to ery to to ery to
DC- No. Amt. No of Amt. DC- No. Amt. No of Amt. loans Demand loans Demand
CBs of DC- CBs of DC- ratio (%) ratio (%)
DC- CBs DC- CBs (%) (At (%) (At
CBs CBs end- end-
June)* June)*
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Northern region 73 58 12,132 15 14,329 73 58 15,599 15 16,950 9.2 68.5 10.8 75.1
1 Haryana 19 17 3,302 2 1,485 19 17 5,289 2 867 6.3 65.5 6.3 65.2
2 Himachal Pradesh 2 1 423 1 4,516 2 1 712 1 4,033 22.9 69.0 25.2 74.2
3 Jammu & Kashmir 3 0 - 3 3,195 3 0 - 3 4,276 29.9 43.6 37.2 39.2
4 Punjab 20 11 1,598 9 5,134 20 12 2,185 8 7,563 9.9 73.0 10.3 76.7
5 Rajasthan 29 29 6,809 0 - 29 28 7,412 1 211 5.2 67.8 8.9 83.5
Eastern region 57 45 21,607 12 3,679 58 51 24,682 7 5,711 9.3 71.0 9.3 67.3
6 Bihar 22 13 573 9 2,312 23 16 1,415 7 5,711 22.1 39.2 17.7 29.7
7 Jharkhand 1 1 4 0 - 1 1 219 0 - 78.0 14.6 63.4 17.2
8 Odisha 17 16 13,805 1 78 17 17 14,791 0 - 6.6 71.2 7.3 67.1
9 West Bengal 17 15 7,225 2 1,289 17 17 8,258 0 - 10.2 78.8 9.8 76.9
Central region 104 81 29,880 23 21,608 104 73 25,754 31 29,547 19.3 62.3 21.2 55.4
10 Chattisgarh 6 6 7,286 0 - 6 6 6,465 0 - 11.9 72.1 14.5 70.2
11 Madhya Pradesh 38 28 10,671 10 14,613 38 25 6,699 13 19,686 23.6 59.0 26.7 47.7
12 Uttar Pradesh 50 37 7,201 13 6,995 50 32 8,289 18 9,861 15.8 61.8 13.9 62.6
13 Uttarakhand 10 10 4,723 0 - 10 10 4,301 0 - 8.7 79.6 12.1 75.0
Western region 49 41 55,224 8 53,164 49 45 75,883 4 47,935 16.0 64.6 16.2 61.9
14 Gujarat 18 18 18,401 0 - 18 18 18,093 0 - 5.4 89.8 5.4 90.5
15 Maharashtra 31 23 36,823 8 53,164 31 27 57,790 4 47,935 19.4 53.9 20.1 49.7
Southern region 80 78 51,012 2 5,807 67 64 46,738 3 3,922 7.6 88.4 6.9 87.7
16 Andhra Pradesh 13 13 4,743 0 - 13 12 4,773 1 1,411 4.9 90.9 5.8 90.8
17 Karnataka 21 20 12,724 1 3,634 21 20 14,152 1 1,788 6.3 90.2 6.1 88.1
18 Kerala 14 13 8,720 1 2,173 1 1 315 0 - 10.4 87.3 15.5 77.8
19 Tamil Nadu 23 23 21,149 0 - 23 23 24,641 0 - 7.0 86.2 7.1 85.6
20 Telangana 9 9 3,676 0 - 9 8 2,857 1 723 5.3 87.6 7.5 87.0
All India 363 303 169,856 60 98,588 351 291 188,656 60 104,066 11.8 72.0 12.6 70.2
Notes: 1. Components may not add up to the total /s due to rounding off.
2. Recovery for a financial year is taken as on 30th June.
3. During the year 2019-20, 13 of 14 DCCBs in Kerala (except Mallapuram DCCB) amalgamated with Kerala StCB and Supaul DCCB was formed
in Bihar.
Source: NABARD.
195Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Appendix Table V.5: Primary Agricultural Credit Societies
(Amount in `crore)
Item As at end-March Percentage Variation
2019 2020 2018-19 2019-20
1 2 3 4 5
A. Liabilities
1. Total Resources (2+3+4) 3,14,128 3,47,788 12.63 10.72
2. Owned Funds (a+b) 42,196 43,741 36.37 3.66
a. Paid-up Capital 22,817 22,994 61.34 0.78
of which, Government Contribution 1,323 649 63.94 -50.94
b. Total Reserves 19,379 20,747 15.35 7.06
3. Deposits 1,33,010 1,65,476 11.18 24.41
4. Borrowings 1,38,922 1,38,571 8.25 -0.25
5. Working Capital 2,96,554 3,25,322 21.76 9.70
Assets
1. Total Loans Outstanding (a+b) 1,15,048 2,12,360 -32.18 84.58
a) Short-Term 93,919 1,86,249 -22.27 98.31
b) Medium-Term 21,129 26,111 -56.71 23.58
Note: Y-o-Y variations could be slightly different because absolute numbers have been rounded off to ` Crore
Source: NAFSCOB
196APPENDIX TABLES
Appendix Table V.6: Select Indicators of Primary Agricultural Credit Societies-State-wise (Continued)
(At end-March 2020)
(Amount in ` Lakh)
Sr. State Number of Deposits Working Loans and Advances Societies in Profit
No. PACS Capital Outstanding
Agriculture Non-Agri- Number Amount
culture
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Northern region 14,072 17,14,856 51,15,374 14,07,189 94,946 9,817 1,79,039
1 Chandigarh 17 0 6 0 0 13 0
2 Haryana 769 99,076 12,88,770 5,66,994 28,174 218 1,234
3 Himachal Pradesh 2,175 6,25,074 7,84,050 1,51,960 23,523 1,876 67
4 Jammu & Kashmir* 620 323 3,772 4,659 670 484 58
5 Punjab 3,922 7,37,177 16,14,134 6,83,576 42,579 2,124 6,849
6 Rajasthan 6,569 2,53,206 14,24,642 N.A. N.A. 5,102 1,70,832
North-Eastern region 3,556 12,722 46,351 5,503 938 817 8,934
7 Arunachal Pradesh* 34 0 1,940 0 0 13 452
8 Assam* 766 0 11,123 575 20 309 7,639
9 Manipur* 261 162 682 48 31 131 26
10 Meghalaya* 179 1,565 4,344 2,636 45 53 93
11 Mizoram 153 1,908 461 621 361 27 314
12 Nagaland* 1,719 6,419 11,245 197 357 N.A. N.A.
13 Sikkim 176 426 2,451 1,254 68 91 21
14 Tripura 268 2,241 14,105 172 57 193 390
Eastern region 18,627 3,79,452 15,68,757 7,10,831 44,148 4,271 8,408
15 Andaman & Nicobar Islands 58 114 1,285 179 0 17 21
16 Bihar* 8,463 17,533 50,816 0 0 1,180 604
17 Jharkhand N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.
18 Odisha* 2,701 1,53,769 10,23,078 5,64,749 14,672 727 4,417
19 West Bengal* 7,405 2,08,036 4,93,578 1,45,903 29,476 2,347 3,366
Central region 15,709 2,70,213 16,26,830 7,58,323 51,309 8,065 24,777
20 Chhattisgarh* 1,617 63,145 5,49,825 2,06,713 10,435 842 9,041
21 Madhya Pradesh* 4,457 81,731 6,45,546 3,39,959 11,892 2,153 13,124
22 Uttarakhand 706 1,18,517 3,05,532 1,31,621 28,982 534 838
23 Uttar Pradesh* 8,929 6,820 1,25,927 80,031 0 4,536 1,774
Western region 29,052 1,23,820 36,56,694 22,81,853 3,15,296 15,162 10,786
24 Goa 78 9,607 15,452 1,503 3,141 48 268
25 Gujarat 8,823 91,156 15,57,674 12,72,623 42,095 6,375 9,912
26 Maharashtra 20,151 23,057 20,83,568 10,07,727 2,70,061 8,739 607
Southern region 14,493 1,40,46,542 2,05,18,177 37,46,895 15,91,973 8,895 4,21,159
27 Andhra Pradesh* 1,992 2,30,027 13,60,941 8,68,742 1,91,062 1,358 3,05,258
28 Telangana* 799 39,876 5,72,499 4,22,881 29,309 502 14,031
29 Karnataka 5,481 12,90,269 29,34,583 14,08,485 6,38,816 3,966 3,938
30 Kerala 1,643 1,15,90,200 1,30,12,397 N.A. N.A. 964 78,897
31 Puducherry 53 17,260 24,429 1,018 16,242 15 165
32 Tamil Nadu 4,525 8,78,911 26,13,328 10,45,769 7,16,544 2,090 18,871
All India 95,509 1,65,47,604 3,25,32,183 89,10,595 20,98,610 47,027 6,53,104
n.a.: not applicable. N.A.: Not Available.
Notes: 1. *: Data relate to previous year
2. Components may not add up to the exact total /s due to rounding off.
Source: NAFSCOB
197Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Appendix Table V.6: Select Indicators of Primary Agricultural Credit Societies-State-wise (Concluded)
(At end-March 2020)
(Amount in ` lakhs)
Sr. State Societies in Loss Viable Potentially Dormant Defunct Others
No. viable
Number Amount
1 2 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Northern Region 3,698 59,939 5,159 1,702 265 270 6,676
1 Chandigarh 4 0 13 0 0 4 0
2 Haryana 512 2,561 657 73 26 0 13
3 Himachal Pradesh 220 7 512 1,528 46 53 36
4 Jammu & Kashmir* 105 2 458 48 12 91 11
5 Punjab 1,440 5,188 3519 53 181 122 47
6 Rajasthan 1,417 52,182 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 6,569
North-Eastern Region 773 11,528 1,857 496 690 429 84
7 Arunachal Pradesh* 19 717 20 5 4 5 0
8 Assam* 419 9,909 709 57 0 0 0
9 Manipur* 99 40 122 71 23 45 0
10 Meghalaya* 126 756 116 55 8 0 0
11 Mizoram 5 13 29 40 0 0 84
12 Nagaland* N.A. N.A. 457 228 655 379 0
13 Sikkim 30 4 136 40 0 0 0
14 Tripura 75 89 268 0 0 0 0
Eastern Region 9,845 27,996 14,173 2,864 587 413 590
15 Andaman &Nicobar Island 27 115 41 12 3 2 0
16 Bihar* 3,962 94 8,463 0 0 0 0
17 Jharkhand N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A.
18 Odisha* 1,878 26,358 1,721 604 10 1 365
19 West Bengal* 3,978 1,429 3,948 2,248 574 410 225
Central Region 4,759 25,683 12,545 2,473 390 168 133
20 Chhattisgarh* 491 7,610 1,178 439 0 0 0
21 Madhya Pradesh* 2,129 17,824 3,663 720 4 0 70
22 Uttarakhand 171 96 589 45 4 5 63
23 Uttar Pradesh* 1,968 153 7,115 1,269 382 163 0
Western Region 13,437 17,551 20,937 7,148 488 315 164
24 Goa 14 20 69 4 4 1 0
25 Gujarat 1,754 16,787 5,449 2,480 430 300 164
26 Maharashtra 11,669 743 15,419 4,664 54 14 0
Southern Region 4,857 6,89,812 10,438 2,701 463 60 831
27 Andhra Pradesh* 634 3,63,883 1,498 330 28 3 133
28 Telangana 289 17,322 744 54 1 0 0
29 Karnataka 1,381 1,158 3,920 1,016 285 46 214
30 Kerala 632 1,86,138 1,643 0 0 0 0
31 Puducherry 38 2,575 15 38 0 0 0
32 Tamil Nadu 1,883 1,18,736 2,618 1,263 149 11 484
All India 37,369 8,32,507 65,109 17,384 2,883 1,655 8,478
n.a. : not applicable. N.A.: Not Available.
Notes: 1. *:Data relate to previous year.
2. Components may not add up to the exact total /s due to rounding off.
Source: NAFSCOB.
198APPENDIX TABLES
Appendix Table V.7: Details of Members and Borrowers of Primary Agricultural Credit Societies
(Numbers in thousands)
All India Members Borrowers
2019 2020 2019 2020
1 2 3 4 5
Scheduled Castes 14,732 15,886 4,255 4,044
Scheduled Tribes 9,080 9,087 2,958 2,572
Small Farmers 37,491 35,959 13,923 12,449
Rural Artisans 3,355 2,996 1,081 762
Others and Marginal Farmers 67,371 74,230 28,841 32,728
Source: NAFSCOB.
199Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Appendix Table V.8: Liabilities and Assets of State Co-operative Agriculture and
Rural Development Banks
(Amount in ` Crore)
Item As at End-March Percentage Variation
2019 2020P 2018-19 2019-20
1 2 3 4 5
Liabilities
1. Capital 939 939 -0.6 -0.1
(3.3) (3.4)
2. Reserves 3,550 3,921 5.7 10.5
(12.6) (14.4)
3. Deposits 2,434 2,409 4 -1
(8.6) (8.8)
4. Borrowings 15,098 13,710 -2 -9.2
(53.9) (50.5)
5. Other Liabilities 5,976 6,125 -14 2.5
(21.3) (22.5)
Assets
1. Cash and Bank Balances 257 174 -6.5 -32.2
(0.9) (0.6)
2. Investments 3,302 2,499 -6.6 -24.3
(11.7) (9.2)
3. Loans and Advances 20,651 20,700 -0.7 0.2
(73.7) (76.3)
4.Accumulated Losses 568 547 13 -3.8
(2) (2)
5. Other Assets 3,219 3,183 -17.3 -1.1
(11.4) (11.7)
Total Liabilities/Assets 27,997 27,104 -3.4 -3.2
(100) (100)
Notes: 1. Figures in parentheses are proportion to total liabilities/assets (in per cent).
2. Y-o-Y variations could be slightly different because absolute numbers have been rounded off to `1 Crore in the Table.
3. Components may not add up to the total due to rounding off
4. P- Provisional
Source: NABARD
200APPENDIX TABLES
Appendix Table V.9: Financial Performance of State Co-operative Agriculture and
Rural Development Banks
(Amount in ` Crore)
Sr. Item As during Percentage Variation
No.
2018-19 2019-20P 2018-19 2019-20
1 2 3 4 5 6
A Income (i+ii) 2,510 2,586 5.3 3.0
(100.00) (100.00)
i Interest Income 2,427 2,378 6.1 -2.0
(96.6) (91.9)
ii Other Income 83 208 -14.2 150.0
(3.3) (8)
B Expenditure (i+ii+iii+iv) 2,559 2,334 6.9 -8.8
i Interest Expended 1,376 1,296 -8.4 -5.8
(53.7) (55.5)
ii Provisions and Contingencies 394 437 -12.8 10.7
(15.4) (18.7)
iii Operating Expenses 454 397 13.1 -12.5
(17.7) (17)
Of which, Wage Bill 377 339 9.8 -10.2
(14.7) (14.5)
iv Other Expenditure 335 204 792.6 -39.0
(13) (8.7)
C Profits
i Operating Profits 345 689 -22.0 99.6
ii Net Profits/Loss -49 252
Notes: 1. Figures in parentheses are proportion to total income/expenditure (in per cent).
2. Y-o-Y variations could be slightly different because absolute numbers have been rounded off to `1 Crore in the Table
3. Components may not add up to the total due to rounding off
4. P- Provisional
Source: NABARD
201Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Appendix Table V.10: Asset Quality of State Co-operative Agriculture and Rural Development Banks
(Amount in ` Crore)
Item As at end- March Percentage Variation
2019 2020P 2018-19 2019-20
1 2 3 4 5
A. Total NPAs (i+ii+iii) 5,477 6,836 5.2 24.8
i) Sub-standard 2,118 2,518 8.9 18.9
(38.6) (36.8)
ii) Doubtful 3,325 4,285 2.2 28.9
(60.7) (62.6)
iii) Loss 34 34 279.7 -0.8
(0.6) (0.4)
B. NPAs to Loans Ratio (%) 26.5 33.0 - -
C. Recovery to Demand Ratio (%) 46.1 43.1 - -
Notes: 1. Figures in parentheses are proportions to total NPAs.
2. Y-o-Y variations could be slightly different because absolute numbers have been rounded off to `1 Crore.
3. Components may not add up to the total due to rounding off.
4. P- Provisional
Source: NABARD
202APPENDIX TABLES
Appendix Table V.11: Major Financial Indicators of State Co-operative Agriculture and
Rural Development Banks
(At end-March)
(Amount ` Lakh)
Sr. Region/State Branches Profit / Loss NPAs to Loans ratio Recovery Ratio (%)
No. (%) (at End-June)
2020 2019 2020P 2019 2020P 2018 2019
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Northern region
1 Haryana @ 19 -7,638 6,350 83.5 81.0 10.7 16.7
2 Himachal Pradesh # 51 23 -1,210 25.5 33.0 47.6 33.3
3 Jammu & Kashmir* 51 -1,193 -2,237 27.0 32.1 30.4 38.4
4 Punjab @ 89 120 227 17.1 27.7 67.8 54.1
5 Rajasthan @ 7 4,420 2,971 44.2 51.0 38.4 28.8
North-eastern region
6 Assam* - - - - - - -
7 Tripura* 5 -12 85 99.0 98.2 40.5 16.9
Eastern region
8 Bihar* - - - - - - -
9 Odisha @ - - - - - - -
10 West Bengal # 11 323 358 23.9 24.0 41.3 35.7
Central region
11 Chhattisgarh @ - - - - - - -
12 Madhya Pradesh @ - - - - - - -
13 Uttar Pradesh* 323 -8,451 9,770 38.4 72.1 25.3 27.1
Western region
14 Gujarat* 176 2,102 2,525 54.8 56.1 32.7 34.6
15 Maharashtra @ - - - - - - -
Southern region
16 Karnataka @ 25 76 76 29.3 31.4 32.6 25.9
17 Kerala @ 14 2,566 2,868 2.2 5.8 95.4 88.0
18 Puducherry* 1 -44 -25 8.4 7.6 93.0 92.8
19 Tamil Nadu @ 19 2,762 3,440 15.7 12.1 85.6 86.2
All India 791 -4,946 25,198 26.5 33.0 46.1 43.1
@ : Federal structure. # : Mixed structure. * : Unitary structure. -: Not applicable.
Notes: 1. Components may not add up to the exact total/s due to rounding off.
2. In Chhattisgarh the Short-Term coop credit structure merged with Long Term during 2014-15. Also, Assam, Bihar, Odisha,
Madhya Pradesh and Maharashtra are no longer functional SCARDBs.
3. *Recovery for the financial year is taken as on 30th June.
4. P-Provisional
Source: NABARD
203Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Appendix Table V.12: Liabilities and Assets of Primary Co-operative Agriculture and
Rural Development Banks
(Amount in ` Crore)
Item As at end-March Percentage Variation
2019 2020P 2018-19 2019-20
1 2 3 4 5
Liabilities
1. Capital 1,068 1,056 1.4 -1.1
(3.5) (3.3)
2. Reserves 1,741 2,616 -22.1 50.3
(5.7) (8.3)
3. Deposits 1,303 1,372 -0.2 5.3
(4.3) (4.3)
4. Borrowings 16,101 16,643 -1.5 3.4
(53.4) (53.1)
5. Other Liabilities 9,894 9,650 3 -2.5
(32.8) (30.7)
Assets
1. Cash and Bank Balances 441 378 1.2 -14.3
(1.4) (1.2)
2. Investments 2,019 2,065 -11.7 2.3
(6.7) (6.5)
3. Loans and Advances 15,594 15,819 -1.4 1.4
(51.7) (50.4)
4. Accumulated Losses 4,844 5,479 9.7 13.1
(16) (17.4)
5. Other Assets 7,209 7,595 -5 5.3
(23.9) (24.2)
Total Liabilities/Assets 30,108 31,337 -1.4 4.1
(100) (100)
Notes: 1. Figures in parentheses are proportion to total liabilities/assets (in per cent).
2. Y-o-Y variations could be slightly different because absolute numbers have been rounded off to `1Crore in the Table.
3. Components may not add up to the total due to rounding off.
4. Provisional Data for 2020.
Source: NABARD.
204APPENDIX TABLES
Appendix Table V.13: Financial Performance of Primary Co-operative Agriculture and
Rural Development Banks
(Amount in ` Crore)
Item As during Percentage Variation
2018-19 2019-20P 2018-19 2019-20
1 2 3 4 5
A. Income (i+ii) 2,523 2,659 2.4 5.4
(100) (100)
i. Interest Income 1,953 2,020 -2 3.5
(77.3) (75.9)
ii. Other Income 570 638 20.8 12
(22.6) (24)
B. Expenditure (i+ii+iii) 2,964 3,230 -0.4 8.9
i. Interest Expended 1,725 1,733 -3.4 0.5
(53.3) (53.6)
ii. Provisions and Contingencies 771 1,013 3.1 31.3
(23.8) (31.3)
iii. Operating Expenses 469 484 6.2 3.3
(14.5) (14.9)
Of which, Wage Bill 319 274 -3.5 -13.9
(9.8) (8.4)
C. Profits
i. Operating Profit 330 442 39.1 34.16
ii. Net Profit -442 -571
Notes: 1. Figures in parentheses are proportion to total income/expenditure (in per cent).
2. Y-o-Y variations could be slightly different because absolute numbers have been rounded off to `1 Crore in the Table
3. Components may not add up to the total due to rounding off.
4. Provisional Data for 2020
Source: NABARD.
205Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Appendix Table V.14: Asset Quality of Primary Co-operative Agriculture and
Rural Development Banks
(Amount in ` Crore)
Item As at end-March Percentage Variation
2019 2020P 2018-19 2019-20
1 2 3 4 5
A. Total NPAs (i+ii+iii) 6,121 6,815 1.0 11.3
i) Sub-standard 3,137 3,531 -6.8 12.5
(51.2) (51.8)
ii) Doubtful 2,940 3,263 10.4 11.0
(48) (47.8)
iii) Loss 44 21 52.9 -52.4
(0.7) (0.3)
B. NPAs to Loans Ratio (%) 39 43 - -
C. Recovery to Demand Ratio (%) 41 44 - -
Notes: 1. Figures in parentheses are proportions to total NPAs.
2. Y-o-Y variations could be slightly different because absolute numbers have been rounded off to `1 Crore.
3. Components may not add up to the total due to rounding off.
4. Provisional Data for 2020.
5. Recovery for the financial year is taken as on 30th June.
Source: NABARD
206APPENDIX TABLES
Appendix Table V.15: Major Financial Indicators of Primary Co-operative Agriculture and
Rural Developments Banks – State-wise
(Amount in ` Lakh)
State 2018-19 2019-20P NPAs to Recovery Ratio
Loans ratio (per cent)
(per cent)
Profit Loss Profit Loss (at End-June)
Number Amount Number Amount Number Amount Number Amount 2019 2020 2019 2020
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Northern Region 42 1,893 103 38,143 42 2,815 103 27,331 63 68 23 25
Haryana 0 0 19 19,885 4 264 15 9,411 79 82 10 22
Himachal Pradesh 0 0 1 231 0 0 1 442 33 51 58 49
Punjab 25 1,467 64 11,737 18 1,131 71 12,750 65 73 25 25
Rajasthan 17 426 19 6,289 20 1,419 16 4,728 41 45 34 30
Central Region - - - - - - - - - - - -
Chhattisgarh - - - - - - - - - - - -
Madhya Pradesh - - - - - - - - - - - -
Eastern Region 9 1,551 15 2,647 8 527 16 2,089 35 34 40 36
Odisha - - - - - - - - - - - -
West Bengal 9 1,551 15 2,647 8 527 16 2,089 35 34 40 36
Western Region - - - - - - - - - - - -
Maharashtra - - - - - - - - - - - -
Southern Region 220 6,883 213 13,703 177 5,235 256 36,239 26 32 65 67
Karnataka 25 696 153 10,890 41 1,709 137 10,444 25 25 43 40
Kerala 52 3,227 23 2,391 18 554 57 25,030 28 37 65 64
Tamil Nadu 143 2,960 37 422 118 2,973 62 765 14 10 87 93
All India 271 10,327 331 54,493 227 8,578 375 65,659 39 43 41 44
Notes: 1. Components may not add up to the exact total due to rounding off.
2. In Chhattisgarh, the Short-term co-operative credit structure merged with Long-term during 2014-15.
3. Also Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh and Odisha structures are no longer functional.
4. Recovery for the financial year is taken as on 30th June.
5. Data for 2019-20 are Provisional.
Source: NABARD
207Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Appendix Table VI.1 : Consolidated Balance Sheet of NBFCs
(Amount in ` crore)
Item End-March End-March End-March End-March End-March End- Percentage
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 September variation
2021 2020-21
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1. Share Capital 84,583 94,807 1,03,244 1,23,924 1,26,154 1,26,638 1.8
2. Reserves & Surplus 3,10,973 3,90,222 4,45,614 4,89,887 6,50,060 6,85,924 32.7
3. Public Deposits 30,210 30,129 40,057 50,022 62,262 66,443 24.5
4. Total Borrowings (A+B) 12,97,189 16,84,663 20,02,808 21,69,849 23,45,668 23,23,778 8.1
A. Secured Borrowings 6,70,434 9,19,538 11,06,917 12,55,000 13,28,811 12,73,723 5.9
A.1. Debentures 3,34,380 4,90,070 5,21,003 5,12,914 5,54,040 5,60,197 8.0
A.2. Borrowings from Banks 2,69,650 3,53,415 4,89,732 5,71,474 6,19,129 5,62,144 8.3
A.3. Borrowings from FIs 21,717 22,885 29,027 57,262 45,472 44,453 -20.6
A.4. Interest Accrued 18,330 20,692 16,958 17,718 21,786 20,430 23.0
A.5. Others 26,357 32,476 50,196 95,632 88,384 86,498 -7.6
B. Un-Secured Borrowings 6,26,755 7,65,125 8,95,891 9,14,849 10,16,857 10,50,053 11.2
B.1. Debentures 2,86,112 3,36,171 3,40,905 3,91,741 4,30,408 4,28,144 9.9
B.2. Borrowings from Banks 37,690 59,746 1,19,964 1,22,444 1,56,362 1,68,596 27.7
B.3. Borrowings from FIs 7,320 8,318 9,700 5,871 10,729 11,409 82.8
B.4. Borrowings from Relatives 1,748 2,324 1,994 2,642 3,638 3,342 37.7
B.5. Inter-Corporate Borrowings 40,535 54,100 72,103 77,032 76,839 87,189 -0.3
B.6. Commercial Paper 1,22,341 1,36,072 1,42,966 64,877 70,631 71,990 8.9
B.7. Interest Accrued 20,163 21,165 17,598 18,935 19,069 18,768 0.7
B.8. Others 1,10,846 1,47,228 1,90,661 2,31,308 2,49,180 2,60,617 7.7
5. Current Liabilities & Provisions 1,23,256 1,55,439 2,33,415 2,47,595 2,91,191 3,07,890 17.6
Total Liabilities/ Total Assets 18,46,211 23,55,260 28,25,139 30,81,276 34,75,335 35,10,671 12.8
1. Loans & Advances 14,69,568 19,43,494 22,95,371 24,60,552 26,98,689 26,61,782 9.7
1.1. Secured 11,65,249 15,00,477 15,52,453 18,56,733 19,68,000 19,85,488 6.0
1.2. Un-Secured 3,04,319 4,43,017 6,07,573 6,03,819 7,30,689 6,76,294 21.0
2. Investments 1,93,659 2,19,795 2,59,008 2,93,903 4,19,319 4,69,945 42.7
2.1. Govt. Securities 10,722 10,330 17,328 31,235 48,848 54,813 56.4
2.2. Equity Shares 93,350 1,10,412 1,35,395 1,34,961 2,42,544 2,66,074 79.7
2.3. Preference Shares 6,853 7,479 6,644 6,434 5,907 6,365 -8.2
2.4. Debentures & Bonds 30,593 40,865 35,446 30,010 26,533 31,183 -11.6
2.5. Units of Mutual Funds 36,800 31,608 44,421 64,133 65,767 72,488 2.5
2.6. Commercial Paper 1,298 2,135 1,390 1,052 1,449 690 37.7
2.7. Other Investments 14,042 16,965 18,384 26,077 28,271 38,332 8.4
3. Cash & Bank Balances 72,324 67,429 96,030 1,30,956 1,56,260 1,62,029 19.3
3.1. Cash in Hand 2,322 3,367 6,770 6,255 3,601 3,913 -42.4
3.2. Deposits with Banks 70,002 64,062 89,260 1,24,702 1,52,659 1,58,116 22.4
4. Other Current Assets 87,039 98,803 1,24,170 1,47,981 1,56,871 1,60,835 6.0
5. Other Assets 23,621 25,739 50,560 47,884 44,195 56,081 -7.7
Memo Items
1. Capital Market Exposure 1,44,002 1,61,874 1,39,965 1,49,107 1,72,144 1,78,151 15.4
of which: Equity Shares 60,389 59,876 70,611 81,631 84,895 1,01,062 4.0
2. CME as per cent to Total Assets 7.8 6.9 5.0 4.8 5.0 5.1
3. Leverage Ratio 3.7 3.9 4.1 4.0 3.5 3.3
Notes: 1. Data are provisional.
2. Including Group companies.
3. Excluding Core Investment Companies (CICs).
4. Percentage figures are rounded-off.
Source: Quarterly returns of NBFCs, RBI.
208APPENDIX TABLES
Appendix Table VI.2 : Consolidated Balance Sheet of NBFCs-ND-SI
(Amount in ` crore)
Item End-March End-March End-March End-March End-March End- Percentage
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 September variation
2021 2020- 21
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1. Share Capital 81,468 91,545 98,041 1,16,735 1,17,691 1,17,820 0.8
2. Reserves & Surplus 2,73,087 3,39,179 3,83,655 4,11,309 5,58,068 5,89,116 35.7
3. Public Deposits - - - - - -
4. Total Borrowings (A+B) 11,27,539 14,72,716 17,32,680 18,75,467 20,59,551 20,40,367 9.8
A. Secured Borrowings 5,35,189 7,52,488 8,85,800 10,01,438 10,81,315 10,33,677 8.0
A.1. Debentures 2,68,040 4,07,105 4,23,738 4,13,362 4,60,460 4,62,461 11.4
A.2. Borrowings from Banks 2,10,372 2,83,386 3,83,654 4,47,436 5,04,622 4,56,914 12.8
A.3. Borrowings from FIs 18,646 19,430 24,051 49,194 32,825 32,683 -33.3
A.4. Interest Accrued 14,111 15,499 13,839 14,390 14,633 17,262 1.7
A.5. Others 24,020 27,067 40,518 77,056 68,774 64,357 -10.7
B. Un-Secured Borrowings 5,92,350 7,20,228 8,46,880 8,74,030 9,78,236 10,06,689 11.9
B.1. Debentures 2,85,959 3,35,698 3,39,013 3,87,956 4,25,286 4,22,953 9.6
B.2. Borrowings from Banks 35,831 58,420 1,19,813 1,22,094 1,56,047 1,68,305 27.8
B.3. Borrowings from FIs 7,320 8,318 9,700 5,871 10,729 11,409 82.8
B.4. Borrowings from Relatives 1,651 2,223 1,909 2,561 3,569 3,285 39.4
B.5. Inter-Corporate Borrowings 39,161 48,905 64,713 68,502 68,933 77,929 0.6
B.6. Commercial Paper 1,07,545 1,17,899 1,24,854 57,399 62,109 60,369 8.2
B.7. Interest Accrued 15,991 16,969 13,953 15,444 18,113 17,900 17.3
B.8. Others 98,891 1,31,796 1,72,926 2,14,203 2,33,450 2,44,540 9.0
5. Current Liabilities & Provisions 89,527 1,10,709 1,88,933 1,90,945 2,22,042 2,30,704 16.3
Total Liabilities/ Total Assets 15,71,622 20,14,150 24,03,310 25,94,456 29,57,352 29,78,006 14.0
1. Loans & Advances 12,25,544 16,34,294 19,16,352 20,42,745 22,74,622 22,22,579 11.4
1.1. Secured 9,54,150 12,44,815 12,48,919 15,27,825 16,76,205 16,43,737 9.7
1.2. Un-Secured 2,71,395 3,89,479 5,34,309 5,14,920 5,98,417 5,78,842 16.2
2. Investments 1,80,949 2,07,838 2,35,117 2,54,752 3,73,282 4,23,116 46.5
2.1. Govt. Securities 6,369 5,392 11,790 22,117 31,115 32,489 40.7
2.2. Equity Shares 91,030 1,07,302 1,28,494 1,24,618 2,32,041 2,55,009 86.2
2.3. Preference Shares 6,850 6,784 6,419 6,169 5,623 6,362 -8.8
2.4. Debentures & Bonds 29,432 39,197 34,091 29,514 26,239 30,940 -11.1
2.5. Units of Mutual Funds 33,235 31,272 39,615 48,830 54,569 64,282 11.8
2.6. Commercial Paper 918 1,641 533 200 938 545 369.0
2.7. Other Investments 13,115 16,250 14,175 23,304 22,757 33,490 -2.3
3. Cash & Bank Balances 63,633 58,634 86,244 1,13,681 1,22,096 1,29,667 7.4
3.1. Cash in Hand 1,985 3,041 6,323 6,115 3,224 3,478 -47.3
3.2. Deposits with Banks 61,648 55,593 79,920 1,07,566 1,18,873 1,26,188 10.5
4. Other Current Assets 79,346 89,371 1,16,638 1,38,487 1,46,727 1,50,712 5.9
5. Other Assets 22,150 24,013 48,959 44,792 40,625 51,934 -9.3
Memo Items
1. Capital Market Exposure 1,39,584 1,53,542 1,30,334 1,39,082 1,59,883 1,63,012 15.0
of which: Equity Shares 60,250 59,439 70,095 76,117 79,147 95,228 4.0
2. CME as per cent to Total Assets 8.9 7.6 5.4 5.4 5.4 5.5
3. Leverage Ratio 3.4 3.7 4.0 3.9 3.4 3.2
Notes: 1. Data are provisional.
2. Including Group companies.
3. Excluding Core Investment Companies (CICs).
4. Percentage figures are rounded-off.
Source: Quarterly returns of NBFCs-ND-SI, RBI.
209Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Appendix Table VI.3: Consolidated Balance Sheet of NBFCs-D
(Amount in ` crore)
Item End-March End-March End-March End-March End-March End- Percentage
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 September variation
2021 2020- 21
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1. Share Capital 3,115 3,262 5,202 7,189 8,463 8,817 17.7
2. Reserves & Surplus 37,886 51,043 61,959 78,577 91,992 96,809 17.1
3. Public Deposits 30,210 30,129 40,057 50,022 62,262 66,443 24.5
4. Total Borrowings (A+B) 1,69,650 2,11,947 2,70,128 2,94,382 2,86,117 2,83,411 -2.8
A. Secured Borrowings 1,35,245 1,67,050 2,21,117 2,53,562 2,47,496 2,40,046 -2.4
A.1. Debentures 66,340 82,964 97,265 99,553 93,579 97,736 -6.0
A.2. Borrowings from Banks 59,278 70,029 1,06,079 1,24,038 1,14,507 1,05,230 -7.7
A.3. Borrowings from FIs 3,071 3,455 4,976 8,068 12,647 11,770 56.8
A.4. Interest Accrued 4,219 5,193 3,119 3,328 7,153 3,168 115.0
A.5. Others 2,337 5,408 9,678 18,576 19,610 22,141 5.6
B. Un-Secured Borrowings 34,405 44,897 49,010 40,820 38,621 43,364 -5.4
B.1. Debentures 153 473 1,892 3,785 5,122 5,192 35.3
B.2. Borrowings from Banks 1,859 1,326 151 350 316 291 -9.8
B.3. Borrowings from FIs - - - - - -
B.4. Borrowings from Relatives 97 101 86 82 68 57 -16.1
B.5. Inter-Corporate Borrowings 1,373 5,195 7,390 8,529 7,906 9,259 -7.3
B.6. Commercial Paper 14,796 18,173 18,112 7,478 8,523 11,621 14.0
B.7. Interest Accrued 4,171 4,197 3,645 3,491 956 868 -72.6
B.8. Others 11,955 15,432 17,736 17,104 15,730 16,077 -8.0
5. Current Liabilities & Provisions 33,728 44,729 44,482 56,650 69,149 77,186 22.1
Total Liabilities/ Total Assets 2,74,589 3,41,110 4,21,829 4,86,820 5,17,983 5,32,665 6.4
1. Loans & Advances 2,44,024 3,09,199 3,79,019 4,17,807 4,24,068 4,39,203 1.5
1.1. Secured 2,11,099 2,55,662 3,03,533 3,28,907 2,91,795 3,41,751 -11.3
1.2. Un-Secured 32,925 53,538 73,264 88,899 1,32,273 97,452 48.8
2. Investments 12,710 11,957 23,891 39,151 46,037 46,829 17.6
2.1. Govt. Securities 4,353 4,938 5,538 9,118 17,733 22,325 94.5
2.2. Equity Shares 2,320 3,111 6,901 10,343 10,502 11,064 1.5
2.3. Preference Shares 3 695 225 265 284 3 7.1
2.4. Debentures & Bonds 1,161 1,668 1,355 496 294 243 -40.8
2.5. Units of Mutual Funds 3,566 336 4,807 15,302 11,198 8,207 -26.8
2.6. Commercial Paper 380 494 857 852 511 145 -40.0
2.7. Other Investments 927 714 4,209 2,773 5,514 4,842 98.8
3. Cash & Bank Balances 8,691 8,795 9,786 17,275 34,164 32,363 97.8
3.1. Cash in Hand 336 326 447 139 377 435 171.3
3.2. Deposits with Banks 8,355 8,469 9,339 17,136 33,786 31,928 97.2
4. Other Current Assets 7,693 9,432 7,531 9,494 10,145 10,123 6.9
5. Other Assets 1,472 1,727 1,601 3,093 3,570 4,147 15.4
Memo Items
1. Capital Market Exposure 4,417 8,331 9,630 10,025 12,261 15,139 22.3
of which: Equity Shares 140 437 516 5,514 5,747 5,833 4.2
2. CME as per cent to Total Assets 1.6 2.4 2.3 2.1 2.4 2.8
3. Leverage Ratio 5.7 5.3 5.3 4.7 4.2 4.0
Notes: 1. Data are provisional.
2. Percentage figures are rounded-off.
Source: Quarterly returns of NBFC-D, RBI.
210APPENDIX TABLES
Appendix Table VI.4: Credit to Various Sectors by NBFCs
(Amount in ` crore)
Items End- March End- March End- March End- Percentage
2019 2020 2021 September variation
2021 2020- 21
1 2 3 4 5 6
I. Gross Advances (II + III) 22,95,371 24,60,552 26,98,689 26,61,782 9.7
II. Food Credit 200 75 274 10 265.9
III. Non-Food Credit (1 to 5) 22,95,171 24,60,477 26,98,415 26,61,772 9.7
1. Agriculture and Allied Activities 62,722 49,012 37,892 37,737 -22.7
2. Industry (2.1 to 2.4) 9,30,704 9,66,456 10,61,284 10,63,631 9.8
2.1 Micro and Small 37,360 36,441 44,294 36,156 21.5
2.2 Medium 16,020 13,931 15,037 15,169 7.9
2.3 Large 4,65,137 7,95,275 8,55,386 8,84,217 7.6
2.4 Others 4,12,186 1,20,809 1,46,567 1,28,090 21.3
3. Services (3.1 to 3.10) 4,10,764 3,56,624 3,29,320 3,27,550 -7.7
3.1 Transport Operators 41,427 63,963 65,312 66,935 2.1
3.2 Computer Software 1,351 1,391 1,704 1,708 22.5
3.3 Tourism, Hotel and Restaurants 7,869 7,030 8,444 7,561 20.1
3.4 Shipping 433 165 140 168 -15.2
3.5 Professional Services 13,896 14,664 16,391 16,896 11.8
3.6 Trade 44,695 42,183 33,540 33,842 -20.5
3.6.1 Wholesale Trade (other than Food Procurement) 7,463 7,142 6,902 8,238 -3.4
3.6.2 Retail Trade 37,232 35,041 26,638 25,604 -24.0
3.7 Commercial Real Estate 1,35,153 1,01,452 80,568 79,337 -20.6
3.8 NBFCs 29,555 26,535 28,554 30,206 7.6
3.9 Aviation 1,004 801 956 951 19.3
3.10 Other Services 1,35,381 98,440 93,712 89,945 -4.8
4. Retail Loans (4.1 to 4.10) 5,98,835 7,03,094 7,86,518 7,62,232 11.9
4.1 Housing Loans (incl. Priority Sector Housing) 18,446 19,480 21,478 21,497 10.3
4.2 Consumer Durables 19,613 19,171 18,336 19,854 -4.4
4.3 Credit Card Receivables 19,843 24,606 25,991 1,076 5.6
4.4 Vehicle/Auto Loans 3,04,148 3,32,449 3,56,551 3,48,671 7.2
4.5 Education Loans 7,642 9,049 9,274 11,464 2.5
4.6 Advances against Fixed Deposits (incl. FCNR(B), etc.) 7 44 31 29 -29.5
4.7 Advances to Individuals against Shares, Bonds, etc. 15,723 7,940 8,298 9,341 4.5
4.8 Advances to Individuals against Gold - 34,678 94,840 1,14,013 173.5
4.9 Micro finance loan/SHG Loan - 43,802 57,270 60,008 30.7
4.10 Other Retail Loans 2,13,411 2,11,875 1,94,448 1,76,280 -8.2
5. Other Non-food Credit 2,92,146 3,85,291 4,83,401 4,70,621 25.5
Notes: 1. Data are provisional.
2. Including Group companies.
3. Excluding Core Investment Companies (CICs).
4. Percentage figures are rounded-off.
Source: Quarterly returns of NBFCs, RBI.
211Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Appendix Table VI.5: Financial Performance of NBFCs - NDSI
(Amount in ` crore)
2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 H1: 2020-21
A. Total Income 2,46,441 2,75,651 2,86,324 1,39,464
(i) Fund Based Income 2,31,082 2,58,821 2,69,100 1,32,665
(93.8) (93.9) (94.0) (95.1)
(ii) Fee Based Income 8,619 8,671 8,333 3,265
(3.5) (3.1) (2.9) (2.3)
B. Expenditure 2,03,285 2,34,347 2,38,837 1,08,239
(i) Financial Expenditure 1,24,731 1,42,789 1,39,775 67,187
(61.4) (60.9) (58.5) (62.1)
of which, Interest payment 63,436 67,596 68,750 33,284
(31.2) (28.8) (28.8) (30.8)
(ii) Operating Expenditure 37,786 42,144 39,193 18,947
(18.6) (18.0) (16.4) (17.5)
(iii) Others 40,767 49,414 59,868 22,106
(20.1) (21.1) (25.1) (20.4)
C. Tax Provisions 17,027 12,849 11,413 6,508
D. Profit Before Tax 43,157 41,303 47,487 31,224
E. Net Profit 26,130 28,454 36,074 24,717
F. Total Assets 24,03,310 25,94,456 29,57,352 29,78,006
G. Financial Ratios (as Per cent of Total Assets)
(i) Income 10.3 10.6 9.7 4.7
(ii) Fund Income 9.6 10.0 9.1 4.5
(iii) Fee Income 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.1
(iv) Expenditure 8.5 9.0 8.1 3.6
(v) Financial Expenditure 5.2 5.5 4.7 2.3
(vi) Operating Expenditure 1.6 1.6 1.3 0.6
(vii) Tax Provision 0.7 0.5 0.4 0.2
(viii) Net Profit 1.1 1.1 1.2 0.8
H. Cost to Income (percentage) 76.4 80.1 78.2 70.6
Note: 1. Data are provisional.
2. Total income includes non-financial income as well, which is not reported in the table.
3. Excluding Core Investment Companies (CICs).
4. Figures in parentheses are share (in per cent) to respective total.
5. Percentage figures are rounded-off.
Source: Quarterly returns of NBFCs-NDSI, RBI.
212APPENDIX TABLES
Appendix Table VI.6 Financial Performance of NBFCs - Deposit Taking
(Amount in ` crore)
2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 H1: 2020-21
A. Total Income 61,468 66,574 67,083 35,247
(i) Fund Based Income 59,912 64,277 65,540 34,350
(97.5) (96.6) (97.7) (97.5)
(ii) Fee Based Income 1,555 131 107 83
(2.5) (0.2) (0.2) (0.2)
B. Expenditure 44,676 51,460 55,522 30,085
(i) Financial Expenditure 26,233 27,300 27,797 13,302
(58.7) (53.0) (50.1) (44.2)
of which, Interest payment 5,526 11,620 13,435 6,306
(12.4) (22.6) (24.2) (21.0)
(ii) Operating Expenditure 11,595 12,513 11,391 6,499
(26.0) (24.3) (20.5) (21.6)
(iii) Others 6,848 11,647 16,334 10,285
(15.3) (22.6) (29.4) (34.2)
C. Tax Provisions 5,566 4,398 2,912 887
D. Profit Before Tax 16,792 15,114 11,561 5,162
E. Net Profit 11,226 10,716 8,649 4,275
F. Total Assets 4,21,829 4,86,820 5,17,983 5,32,665
G. Financial Ratios (as Per cent of Total Assets)
(i) Income 14.6 13.7 13.0 6.6
(ii) Fund Income 14.2 13.2 12.7 6.4
(iii) Fee Income 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0
(iv) Expenditure 10.6 10.6 10.7 5.6
(v) Financial Expenditure 6.2 5.6 5.4 2.5
(vi) Operating Expenditure 2.7 2.6 2.2 1.2
(vii) Tax Provision 1.3 0.9 0.6 0.2
(viii) Net Profit 2.7 2.2 1.7 0.8
H. Cost to Income (percentage) 70.0 72.5 78.4 82.2
Note: 1. Data are provisional.
2. Total income includes non-financial income as well, which is not reported in the table.
3. Excluding Core Investment Companies (CICs).
4. Figures in parentheses are share (in per cent) to respective total.
5. Percentage figures are rounded-off.
Source: Quarterly returns of NBFCs-D, RBI.
213Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Appendix Table VI.7: Financial Assistance Sanctioned and Disbursed
by Financial Institutions (Continued)
(Amount in ` crore)
Institutions Loans*
2019-20 2020-21 Apr-Sep 2020 Apr-Sep 2021
S D S D S D S D
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
A. All India financial 4,55,116 4,28,975 6,40,518 5,23,957 1,85,752 1,90,454 2,00,380 2,03,380
institutions (1 to 4)
1. NABARD 2,78,371 2,81,341 4,59,205 3,49,470 1,28,388 1,16,617 1,18,766 1,27,551
2. SIDBI 1,08,289 96,718 1,04,852 97,542 33,671 35,063 43,206 42,530
3. EXIM Bank 40,255 33,735 36,521 34,122 9,313 13,828 30,046 19,452
4. NHB 28,200 17,180 39,940 42,823 14,380 24,947 8,362 13,847
B. Specialised financial 477 485 469 457 257 185 174 124
institutions (5, 6 and 7)
5. IVCF 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
6. ICICI venture - - - - - - - -
7. TFCI 477 483 469 457 257 185 174 124
C. Investment institutions (8 4,000 11 13 0 0 0 .. ..
and 9)
8. LIC 4,000 11 13 0 0 0 .. ..
9. GIC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
D. Financial Institutions 4,59,593 4,29,470 6,41,000 5,24,415 1,86,009 1,90,639 2,00,554 2,03,504
(A+B+C)
E. State level institutions (10 2,973 2,320 5,150 4,619 .. .. .. ..
and 11)
10. SFCs^ 2,973 2,320 5,150 4,619 .. .. .. ..
11. SIDCs .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
F. Total assistance by all 4,62,566 4,31,790 6,46,150 5,29,034 1,86,009 1,90,639 2,00,554 2,03,504
financial institutions (D+E)
S: Sanctions. D: Disbursements. _: Nil. .. : Not Available. n.m.: Not Meaningful.
* : Loans include rupee loans and foreign currency loans.
# : Others include guarantees.
^ : Data pertains to nine SFCs.
Notes: 1. Data are provisional.
2. Components may not add up to the total due to rounding off.
3. Due to unavailiability of data of LIC for the period April-September 2021, its data pertaining to the period April-September 2020 has also been
excluded from the totals of financial institutions (rows D and F) to ensure comparability.
Source: The respective financial institutions.
214APPENDIX TABLES
Appendix Table VI.7: Financial Assistance Sanctioned and Disbursed
by Financial Institutions (Continued)
(Amount in ` crore)
Institutions Underwriting and Direct Subscription
2019-20 2020-21 Apr-Sep 2020 Apr-Sep 2021
S D S D S D S D
1 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
A. All India financial 1,532 1,631 731 573 299 199 310 456
institutions (1 to 4)
1. NABARD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2. SIDBI 1,532 1,631 731 573 299 199 310 456
3. EXIM Bank 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4. NHB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
B. Specialised financial 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
institutions (5, 6 and 7)
5. IVCF 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6. ICICI venture - - - - - - - -
7. TFCI 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
C. Investment institutions (8 95,622 79,024 1,23,128 42,182 45,098 23,120 .. ..
and 9)
8. LIC 95,622 79,024 1,23,128 42,182 45,098 23,120 .. ..
9. GIC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
D. Financial Institutions 97,154 80,655 1,23,859 42,755 299 199 310 456
(A+B+C)
E. State level institutions (10 0 0 0 0 .. .. .. ..
and 11)
10. SFCs^ 0 0 0 0 .. .. .. ..
11. SIDCs .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
F. Total assistance by all 97,154 80,655 1,23,859 42,755 299 199 310 456
financial institutions (D+E)
S: Sanctions. D: Disbursements. _: Nil .. : Not Available. n.m.: Not Meaningful.
* : Loans include rupee loans and foreign currency loans.
# : Others include guarantees.
^ : Data pertains to five SFCs.
Notes: 1. Data are provisional.
2. Components may not add up to the total due to rounding off.
3. Due to unavailiability of data of LIC for the period April-September 2021, its data pertaining to the period April-September 2020 has also been
excluded from the totals of financial institutions (rows D and F) to ensure comparability.
Source: The respective financial institutions.
215Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Appendix Table VI.7: Financial Assistance Sanctioned and Disbursed
by Financial Institutions (Continued)
(Amount in ` crore)
Institutions Others#
2019-20 2020-21 Apr-Sep 2020 Apr-Sep 2021
S D S D S D S D
1 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
A. All India financial 6,324 3,413 7,071 3,623 1,648 1,530 2,305 2,120
institutions (1 to 4)
1. NABARD 512 470 644 552 145 144 155 160
2. SIDBI 5 5 5 0 3 3 3 3
3. EXIM Bank 5,807 2,938 6,422 3,071 1,501 1,383 2,147 1,957
4. NHB 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
B. Specialised financial 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
institutions (5, 6 and 7)
5. IVCF 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
6. ICICI venture - - - - - - - -
7. TFCI 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
C. Investment institutions (8 1,250 131 200 192 0 42 .. ..
and 9)
8. LIC 1,250 131 200 192 0 42 .. ..
9. GIC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
D. Financial Institutions 7,574 3,544 7,271 3,815 1,648 1,530 2,305 2,120
(A+B+C)
E. State level institutions (10 0 0 0 0 .. .. .. ..
and 11)
10. SFCs^ 0 0 0 0 .. .. .. ..
11. SIDCs .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
F. Total assistance by all 7,574 3,544 7,271 3,815 1,648 1,530 2,305 2,120
financial institutions (D+E)
S: Sanctions. D: Disbursements. _: Nil .. : Not Available. n.m.: Not Meaningful.
* : Loans include rupee loans and foreign currency loans.
# : Others include guarantees.
^ : Data pertains to five SFCs.
Notes: 1. Data are provisional.
2. Components may not add up to the total due to rounding off.
3. Due to unavailiability of data of LIC for the period April-September 2021, its data pertaining to the period April-September 2020 has also been
excluded from the totals of financial institutions (rows D and F) to ensure comparability.
Source: The respective financial institutions.
216APPENDIX TABLES
Appendix Table VI.7: Financial Assistance Sanctioned and Disbursed
by Financial Institutions (Concluded)
(Amount in ` crore)
Institutions Total Percentage variation
2019-20 2020-21 Apr-Sep 2020 Apr-Sep 2021 2020-21 Apr-Sep
2021 (Y-o-Y)
S D S D S D S D S D S D
1 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37
A. All India financial 4,62,971 4,34,018 6,48,320 5,28,153 1,87,699 1,92,183 2,02,995 2,05,955 40.0 21.7 8.1 7.2
institutions
(1 to 4)
1. NABARD 2,78,883 2,81,811 4,59,849 3,50,022 1,28,533 1,16,761 1,18,921 1,27,710 64.9 24.2 -7.5 9.4
2. SIDBI 1,09,826 98,354 1,05,588 98,115 33,973 35,265 43,519 42,988 -3.9 -0.2 28.1 21.9
3. EXIM Bank 46,062 36,673 42,943 37,193 10,814 15,211 32,193 21,409 -6.8 1.4 197.7 40.8
4. NHB 28,200 17,180 39,940 42,823 14,380 24,947 8,362 13,847 41.6 149.3 -41.9 -44.5
B. Specialised 477 485 469 457 257 185 174 124 -1.7 -5.7 -32.3 -32.9
financial
institutions
(5, 6 and 7)
5. IVCF 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.m. -100.0 n.m. n.m.
6. ICICI venture - - - - - - - - - - - -
7. TFCI 477 483 469 457 257 185 174 124 -1.7 -5.4 -32.3 -32.9
C. Investment 1,00,872 79,166 1,23,341 42,374 45,098 23,162 .. .. 22.3 -46.5 n.m. n.m.
institutions
(8 and 9)
8. LIC 1,00,872 79,166 1,23,341 42,374 45,098 23,162 .. .. 22.3 -46.5 .. ..
9. GIC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n.m. n.m. n.m. n.m.
D. Financial 5,64,320 5,13,669 7,72,130 5,70,984 1,87,956 1,92,369 2,03,169 2,06,080 36.8 11.2 8.1 7.1
Institutions
(A+B+C)
E. State level 2,973 2,320 5,150 4,619 .. .. .. .. 73.2 99.1 .. ..
institutions
(10 and 11)
10. SFCs^ 2,973 2,320 5,150 4,619 .. .. .. .. 73.2 99.1 .. ..
11. SIDCs .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
F. Total assistance 5,67,293 5,15,989 7,77,280 5,75,604 1,87,956 1,92,369 2,03,169 2,06,080 37.0 11.6 8.1 7.1
by all financial
institutions (D+E)
S: Sanctions. D: Disbursements. _: Nil .. : Not Available. n.m.: Not Meaningful.
* : Loans include rupee loans and foreign currency loans.
# : Others include guarantees.
^ : Data pertains to five SFCs.
Notes: 1. Data are provisional.
2. Components may not add up to the total due to rounding off.
3. Due to unavailiability of data of LIC for the period April-September 2021, its data pertaining to the period April-September 2020 has also been
excluded from the totals of financial institutions (rows D and F) to ensure comparability.
Source: The respective financial institutions.
217Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Appendix Table VI.8: Financial Performance of Primary Dealers (Continued)
(Amount in ` crore)
Sl. Name of the Primary Dealers Year Income
No.
Interest income Trading Other Total
(including discount profit income income
income)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1 STCI Primary Dealer Ltd. 2019-20 583 174 30 787
2020-21 449 173 7 629
H1: 2021-22 277 64 -1 339
2 SBI DFHI Ltd. 2019-20 661 59 2 723
2020-21 730 32 16 779
H1: 2021-22 299 23 10 332
3 ICICI Securities Primary Dealership Ltd. 2019-20 1,214 164 15 1,393
2020-21 999 554 70 1,624
H1: 2021-22 544 270 43 857
4 PNB Gilts Ltd. 2019-20 766 72 4 843
2020-21 779 272 21 1,072
H1: 2021-22 471 18 15 504
5 Morgan Stanley India Primary Dealer Pvt. Ltd. 2019-20 717 11 3 732
2020-21 607 -12 54 650
H1: 2021-22 293 -89 9 213
6 Nomura Fixed Income Securities Pvt. Ltd. 2019-20 487 185 1 673
2020-21 452 -6 17 462
H1: 2021-22 167 -21 9 154
7 Goldman Sachs (India) Capital markets Pvt. Ltd. 2019-20 199 16 1 216
2020-21 157 -6 19 170
H1: 2021-22 91 -16 18 93
8 Total 2019-20 4,628 682 57 5,367
2020-21 4,173 1,008 205 5,386
H1: 2021-22 2,141 248 103 2,493
Notes: All amounts are rounded off to the nearest crore.
Source: Returns submitted by the Primary Dealers.
218APPENDIX TABLES
Appendix Table VI.8: Financial Performance of Primary Dealers (Concluded)
(Amount in ` crore)
Sl. Name of the Primary Dealers Year Expenditure Profit Profit Return
No. before after on
Interest Other Total tax tax networth
expenses expenses expenditure (per
cent)
1 2 3 8 9 10 11 12 13
1 STCI Primary Dealer Ltd. 2019-20 454 31 485 303 239 43.0
2020-21 294 28 322 307 228 33.4
H1: 2021-22 198 12 211 129 96 12.4
2 SBI DFHI Ltd. 2019-20 459 84 542 231 171 16.5
2020-21 379 42 421 346 251 22.5
H1: 2021-22 156 25 181 144 107 9.0
3 ICICI Securities Primary Dealership Ltd. 2019-20 840 120 960 434 331 28.9
2020-21 504 118 622 762 569 40.2
H1: 2021-22 286 66 352 381 284 18.7
4 PNB Gilts Ltd. 2019-20 519 114 633 249 186 18.8
2020-21 395 41 436 617 464 35.3
H1: 2021-22 241 15 255 166 122 8.8
5 Morgan Stanley India Primary Dealer Pvt. Ltd. 2019-20 493 34 527 246 187 17.2
2020-21 291 60 350 278 204 11.5
H1: 2021-22 134 32 166 125 92 4.2
6 Nomura Fixed Income Securities Pvt. Ltd. 2019-20 325 42 366 171 121 14.0
2020-21 204 39 243 217 181 17.3
H1: 2021-22 74 24 98 54 40 3.6
7 Goldman Sachs (India) Capital markets Pvt. Ltd. 2019-20 119 30 150 53 40 7.1
2020-21 63 35 98 55 41 6.8
H1: 2021-22 39 18 57 33 25 3.9
8 Total 2019-20 3,209 454 3,663 1,687 1,276 21.3
2020-21 2,130 364 2,493 2,582 1,938 26.0
H1: 2021-22 1,127 192 1,319 1,031 766 8.7
Notes: All amounts are rounded off to the nearest crore.
Source: Returns submitted by the Primary Dealers.
219Report on Trend and Progress of Banking in India 2020-21
Appendix Table VI.9: Select Financial Indicators of Primary Dealers (Continued)
(Amount in ` crore)
Sr. Name of the Primary Dealers Capital funds CRAR (Per cent)
No. (Tier I + Tier II+ Eligible Tier III)
H1: H1:
2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
1 STCI Primary Dealer Ltd. 500 493 1,208 1,461 807 34 23 57 29 34
2 SBI DFHI Ltd. 900 954 2,159 2,488 2,485 69 67 71 33 36
3 ICICI Securities Primary 1,400 1,453 1,456 3,464 1,940 24 28 39 44 45
Dealership Ltd.
4 PNB Gilts Ltd. 900 886 2,006 2,626 2,763 67 37 65 46 35
5 Morgan Stanley India Primary 600 919 1,118 2,105 2,111 51 62 81 52 82
Dealer Pvt. Ltd
6 Nomura Fixed Income 700 797 919 1,077 1,123 58 40 41 60 47
Securities Pvt. Ltd.
7 Goldman Sachs (India) Capital 500 547 1,164 625 652 144 133 170 109 116
Markets Pvt. Ltd.
8 Total 5,500 6,049 10,029 13,846 11,881 43 40 41 43 44
Note: All amounts are rounded off to the nearest crore.
Source: Returns submitted by the Primary Dealers.
220APPENDIX TABLES
Appendix Table VI.9: Select Financial Indicators of Primary Dealers (Concluded)
(Amount in ` crore)
Sr. Name of the Primary Dealers Stock of government securities and treasury bills Total assets
No. (Market value) (Net of current liabilities and provisions)
H1: H1:
2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
1 STCI Primary Dealer Ltd. 3,600 8,219 7,151 11,230 12,721 7,700 9,361 8,187 11,423 11,691
2 SBI DFHI Ltd. 2,000 4,955 7,892 6,840 8,665 5,600 7,152 11,328 9,958 11,555
3 ICICI Securities Primary 6,600 7,723 14,748 14,044 8,441 16,500 11,431 15,815 18,099 11,067
Dealership Ltd.
4 PNB Gilts Ltd. 3,200 6,584 10,664 9,316 17,383 5,200 9,141 13,207 11,190 19,132
5 Morgan Stanley India Primary 2,000 9,891 10,821 10,564 3,872 7,600 10,264 11,655 13,029 7,417
Dealer Pvt. Ltd
6 Nomura Fixed Income 1,200 3,938 3,997 2,737 3,221 3,500 5,248 5,704 4,452 6,054
Securities Pvt. Ltd.
7 Goldman Sachs (India) Capital 1,100 2,411 2,616 3,457 1,012 1,700 2,535 3,675 3,836 1,110
Markets Pvt. Ltd.
8 Total 19,700 43,722 57,888 58,187 55,316 47,800 55,133 69,573 71,986 68,026
Note: All amounts are rounded off to the nearest crore.
Source: Returns submitted by the Primary Dealers.
221