In today’s interconnected world, Indian businesses are not limited to domestic funding. They can tap into international sources for loans—one key route being External Commercial Borrowings (ECBs)
What Are ECBs?
ECBs are loans taken by Indian companies from foreign lenders. These loans can be in Indian Rupees or any freely convertible foreign currency.
Who is the Regulator?
The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) governs ECBs under the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA), 1999, specifically through its Master Directions. These guidelines define who can borrow, from whom, and under what conditions among other conditions.
Two Routes to Raise ECBs
Who can borrow?
Entities eligible for Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) and others like:
Who Can Lend?
Recognised lenders include:
End use of funds – know the restrictions
Limits and Thresholds
Minimum Maturity Periods (MAMP) -
MAMP is the minimum weighted average time for which the loan must be held by the borrower.
Here’s a quick snapshot of minimum average maturity period based on loan classification:
| Purpose | Maturity |
|---|---|
| General ECBs | 3 years |
| Manufacturing companies (up to USD 50M) | 1 year |
| From foreign equity holders (for working capital/general) | 5 years |
| General ECBs | 3 years |
| Manufacturing companies (up to USD 50M) | 1 year |
| From foreign equity holders (for working capital/general) | 5 years |
| From others (for working capital/general purposes or on-lending by NBFCs) | 10 years |
| For repayment of rupee loans (capital expenditure) | 7 years |
| For repayment of rupee loans (non-capital expenditure) | 10 years |
Reporting & Compliance
The Currency Risk Trap
Let’s understand this through an example! ABC Ltd., an Indian company borrowed $1million from ABC Inc., a company based in the US.
What’s Changing?
On October 3, 2025, RBI proposed updates to simplify and expand the ECB framework. These are currently in draft stage, pending public comments and finalisation.
Why It Matters
These changes aim to make it easier for Indian entities to access global capital, boosting growth and competitiveness. Whether you are a startup in a SEZ or a large manufacturer, ECBs could be your ticket to international funding.
GAAR has been framed into the domestic law allowing tax authorities to counteract arrangements that are impermissible because their main purpose is to obtain a tax benefit and they lack commercial substance.
(i) Legislative Framework of GAAR under Income tax Act, 1961 has been provided below:
(ii) Supporting Circulars & Clarifications
B .Principal Purpose Test (PPT)
The Principal Purpose Test (PPT) is a broad anti-abuse rule embedded in India’s tax treaties through the Multilateral Instrument (MLI) to curb treaty-shopping and align with OECD BEPS Action 6. PPT is a minimum standard. Under PPT, treaty benefits must be denied if it is reasonable to conclude that obtaining such benefit was a principal purpose of any arrangement unless the taxpayer proves that granting the benefit is consistent with the object and purpose of the applicable treaty provision.
India has implemented the PPT via the MLI across most of its double taxation avoidance agreements (DTAAs) (covering over 90 treaties), and in some cases, through bilateral protocols - for instance with Hong Kong, Chile, Iran, etc.
C. Structures where GAAR and PPT can be applicable
We have highlighted below some of the structures where the provisions of GAAR and PPT might get triggered:
| Structure | Applicability of GAAR and PPT |
|---|---|
| Conduit Arrangements - Global group sets up an intermediate entity in Singapore to route investments into India for capital gains exemption. | GAAR: If entity lacks substance (no employees, no real decision-making), GAAR applies. PPT: Treaty benefit denied unless commercial rationale proved. |
| Round Trip Funding - If an Indian promoter indirectly invests into India through an offshore SPV (Mauritius) solely to claim treaty benefits without genuine offshore substance | GAAR: If the Mauritius entity is a shell with no employees, or decision-making power, GAAR applies - lacks commercial substance
PPT: Under MLI, treaty benefit denied if principal purpose is tax advantage and offshore SPV lacks substance. |
| Foreign EPC contractor splits a large project into multiple short-term contracts through related entities to avoid PE threshold. | GAAR: Recharacterize contracts as a single arrangement. PPT: Treaty benefit (e.g., lower WHT) denied since splitting was primarily for tax avoidance. |
| Indian company merges with a foreign entity incorporated in a low-tax jurisdiction, primarily to access treaty benefits for future capital gains. | GAAR: Trigger if Main purpose = tax benefit and lacks commercial substance. PPT: Treaty benefit (e.g., reduced withholding tax) denied if merger is for tax advantage without commercial rationale |
| Group demerges Intellectual property (IP) into a foreign subsidiary to reduce royalty withholding tax. | GAAR: If IP transfer lacks commercial substance, GAAR applies.
PPT: Treaty benefit on royalties denied if principal purpose is tax savings. |
Key points to consider in Restructuring – from GAAR and PPT perspective
D.Judicial precedents – Substance over form
We have highlighted a few judicial precedents which provide that colourable structures would be disregarded and not eligible for tax benefits:
In addition to GAAR and PPT, both Income-tax Act and tax treaties use anti-abuse provisions like limitation of benefits clause, beneficial ownership clause, thin capitalization provisions etc.
In the post MLI and GAAR era, tax structuring must be purposeful and substantive. Structures that are form driven, short term, or conduit like are high risk under both PPT and GAAR; those with real business functions, long term presence, and documented rationale remain defensible.
The face of regulations in India for employers has taken a drastic turn since the notification of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as “DPDPA”) and the Labour codes. Prior to the DPDPA being notified, the single regulation guiding the processing of employee personal data in India was the Information Technology (Reasonable Security Practices and Procedures and Sensitive Personal Data/Information) Rules, 2011 (hereinafter referred to as “SPDI Rules”), wherein consent was the sole mechanism for processing “sensitive personal data”. However, the DPDPA has brought certain relief to employers in terms of processing personal data of its employees. In this article we discuss the key obligations of an employer and provide a roadmap for phased implementation of the same into the daily operations of companies.
Key Obligations:
Roadmap for Implementation:
Conclusion:
In conclusion, the DPDPA ushers in a transformative era for employee data governance in India, alleviating consent burdens whilst imposing robust obligations on employers as data fiduciaries. By embracing the outlined roadmap—from data inventory and policy formulation to ongoing audits and cultural integration—companies can mitigate risks, ensure compliance, and foster trust. Proactive adherence not only averts huge penalties but also positions organizations as leaders in ethical data stewardship amid evolving regulations.
Expanding into India is an exciting growth opportunity—but it’s not without its regulatory hurdles. One area that often trips up global businesses is pre-incorporation expenses—those costs incurred before your Indian subsidiary is officially registered.
Think office rentals, security deposits, consultancy fees, and legal charges. While these seem routine, they fall under the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA), 1999, which governs all cross-border financial dealings.
Ignoring FEMA compliance can lead to penalties, delays, and reputational risks. So, let’s break down what you need to know .
Why FEMA Compliance Matters
FEMA was designed to regulate foreign exchange transactions and maintain India’s financial stability. Any payment from a foreign entity to an Indian resident—even before incorporation—must comply with FEMA guidelines. Misclassification or improper reimbursement can result in violations, making proactive planning essential.
What are the common hurdles observed?
For overseas companies setting up shop in India, helping the new subsidiary cover initial expenses feels logical and straightforward. There is an obvious need to pay for office space, legal fees, and consultants before the business starts generating revenue.
But here’s the catch: in the chaos of incorporation and operational setup, FEMA compliance often gets sidelined. It doesn’t seem urgent—until the Indian entity tries to reimburse the foreign parent. That’s when the roadblock appears. Banks and regulators scrutinize these transactions, and if documentation or categorization isn’t right, reimbursements can be delayed or even rejected.
The lesson? Plan FEMA compliance from day one. Clear agreements, proper categorization of payments, and early engagement with your Authorized Dealer (AD) bank can save you from costly surprises later.
Quick checklist to keep in mind from the very beginning –
Small steps now = big savings later. Don’t let compliance derail your India entry strategy. Engage with the AD Bank from the start and have documentation with precise terms.
What are the different ways to reimburse an overseas entity?
If your Indian subsidiary isn’t generating enough revenue to settle pre-incorporation expenses, there’s another alternative—convert those payables into equity. This route often makes sense because, in most cases, the overseas parent already holds the majority stake. However, this isn’t just an accounting adjustment; it triggers FDI compliance requirements under FEMA.
Approvals, reporting timelines, and sectoral caps come into play, and you’ll need to follow RBI guidelines for capitalization. Done right, this approach strengthens the subsidiary’s balance sheet and avoids cash flow stress—while keeping your India entry fully compliant.
1. Direct Reimbursement
2. Capitalization into Equity
Final Thoughts
Pre-incorporation costs may look small, but mishandling them can derail your India entry strategy. Structuring agreements properly, maintaining documentation, and following RBI guidelines are non-negotiable for a smooth start. Ignore this, and you risk more than delayed reimbursements—foreign payables sitting on your balance sheet beyond prescribed timelines can trigger FEMA non-compliance. Best way to stay compliant is to assess every forex transaction from day one. It’s easier to plan upfront than to fix compliance gaps later.
Regulations as a Determinant for Valuation Judgments
Determining the optimal valuation methodology requires a rigorous alignment of the company’s business continuity, financial health, and the economic environment in which it operates. Based on these factors, the valuer decides on the application of either the Income Approach, Market Approach, or Asset Approach to determine a company’s valuation.
The Income Approach serves as a forward-looking lens, best suited for stable, cash-generating businesses where value is derived based on future earnings capability. The Market Approach provides a practical benchmark by comparing the company against peers operating in similar active markets. Asset Approach works where business continuity is uncertain or focusing on underlying assets is more important than considering speculative growth.
Selecting the appropriate valuation approach is therefore not just about following the conventional rules, but it also depends on the business situation and regulatory environment.
Regulatory Landscape as a Valuation Sensitivity
While valuers generally factor in historical performance, business outlook, capex and borrowing plans, regulatory developments often remain underweighted despite their ability to materially alter valuation outcomes. Regulatory changes can directly impact cost structures, revenue drivers, operational flexibility, and investor risk perception — all of which flow into valuation assumptions.
In regulated industries, failure to anticipate regulatory shifts or assess compliance readiness can result in optimistic projections that may quickly become unsustainable. Let’s look at a few examples below:
1.IndiGo: Regulatory Preparedness and Earnings Visibility
Consider the example of IndiGo, India’s largest airline by market share. The revised Civil Aviation Requirements (CAR) relating to Flight Duty Time Limitations (FDTL) issued by the DGCA materially altered operational realities in Indigo’s case.
Following the implementation deadline, IndiGo faced widespread flight cancellations driven by pilot availability constraints and scheduling challenges. Despite a transition window of nearly two years, operational preparedness proved insufficient, leading to network disruption and adverse market reaction. Analysts responded by materially revising earnings expectations downward, reflecting heightened uncertainty around execution capability and cost escalation.
The impact of this was clearly visible on the market price of Indigo’s share.
Source: NSE
This episode demonstrates how regulatory preparedness materially affects earnings visibility and the risk assumptions embedded in valuation models.
2.Paytm Payments Bank: Regulatory Non-Compliance and Going-Concern Risk
While some regulatory changes lead to downward valuation adjustments, others fundamentally challenge business continuity. Paytm Payments Bank (PPBL) provides a compelling illustration. Persistent compliance shortcomings culminated in the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) imposing severe operational restrictions in early 2024, including a prohibition on accepting new deposits.
The regulatory action had immediate spillover effects on its parent entity, One97 Communications, with the stock declining sharply within days, erasing substantial market cap.
Source: NSE
The restriction on deposit inflows materially impaired the bank’s revenue engine and raised concerns regarding the sustainability of its business model. From a valuation standpoint, such intervention introduces material uncertainty around the entity’s ability to continue as a going concern. Businesses that could earlier be valued using Income or Market approaches may now need reassessment under the Asset Approach, where recoverability of tangible assets takes precedence over uncertain future cash flows.
3.Online Real Money Gaming: Industry-Wide Regulatory Shifts
Regulatory risk is not limited to individual companies; it can reshape entire industries. For instance, India’s Online Real Money Gaming (ORMG) sector, once a fast-growing market with hundreds of start-ups and a significant share of investor funding, faced severe disruption following the introduction of the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act (PROGA), 2025.
The revised regulatory framework curtailed real-money gaming activities, leading to operational shutdowns, lay-offs, and erosion of enterprise value across the sector. An industry which was projected to grow rapidly over the medium term instead faced severe uncertainty around business continuity and future viability due to regulatory interventions.
For instance, this change curtailed the operations of Pokerbaazi considerably, and the impact of this change was clearly visible on stock prices of Nazara Technologies, who was one among the major investors.
Source: NSE
Such developments make historical growth trajectories and comparable market multiples largely irrelevant, forcing valuers to reassess assumptions, increase risk premiums, and, in certain cases, reconsider the choice of valuation methodology altogether.
Regulatory Influence on Valuation Approach Selection
Above examples reinforce that regulatory developments influence not only valuation outcomes, but also the appropriateness of valuation approaches:
Conclusion: Regulatory Landscape as a Core Valuation Variable
Ultimately, valuation outcomes are shaped not only by business strategy, historical performance, and capital investment, but also by the regulatory landscape and the target company’s compliance readiness. Regulatory changes have the power to alter revenue models, invalidate projections, and redefine risk profiles.
For valuation professionals, regulatory awareness must extend beyond mandatory disclosures. Continuous monitoring of regulatory developments, assessment of compliance preparedness, and timely incorporation of regulatory risk into valuation models are essential to ensure that valuation methodologies, assumptions and outcomes are both analytically sound and professionally defensible.
Valuation should always be undertaken considering the regulatory landscape in which the company operates. Overlooking regulatory risks can significantly impact assumptions, outcomes, and even the choice of valuation approach.
Regulatory Landscape
The Regulatory landscape can be divided in twofold:
1. Regulators
Given that the Fin-techs are a creation of the neo-tech age, there are multiple regulators and can be succinctly put as follows:
2.Product based legislations:
We can broadly classify the fin-tech products as follows and identify the applicable special laws hereinbelow:
These platforms act as middlemen between investors and the capital markets, providing tools for trading, research, and financial advice through both consumer apps and business partnership models.
Digital Assets like digital gold, crypto currency are still a regulatory grey area in India. The government has only introduced taxation on such assets.
Lending has become one of the most active areas in India’s fintech landscape, driven by platforms that provide quick, convenient, and technology-enabled credit through online and mobile channels. Using advanced data tools, these companies handle everything from credit evaluation and customer onboarding to loan disbursal and repayment.
In recent years, the RBI has tightened its supervision of this sector to address issues related to consumer safety, operational transparency, and potential gaps in regulatory compliance.
Payment systems facilitate the transfer of funds between individuals, and entities. This acts as a backbone in this digital economy.
Conclusion:
The regulatory environment governing the fintech industry in India is vast, multifaceted, and continuously evolving. With multiple regulators, complex product-based legislations, and increasing oversight from authorities like the RBI and SEBI, compliance is no longer optional. Fintech companies must approach regulatory obligations with serious consideration and seek expert professional guidance to navigate these intricate frameworks. Proactive compliance and sound legal consultation are essential to avoid regulatory hurdles and ensure sustainable, lawful business operations in an increasingly stringent ecosystem.
A. What is Reverse Flipping
B. Why companies preferred overseas jurisdiction
Companies earlier preferred to set up in overseas jurisdictions on account of the following reasons (included but not limited to)
The jurisdictions favoured for flipping were Singapore, UAE, Netherlands, Luxembourg, the Cayman Islands, Mauritius, the United States, and the United Kingdom
C. What is the drive to shift back to India
In the recent times, many Indian Companies have considered to return back to India majorly on account of the following:
D. Ways of Reverse Flipping
Some of the prevalent structures considered for reverse flipping to Indian jurisdiction are as follows:
1. Inbound Merger of offshore Hold Co into the India Co
Offshore Hold Co would be merged with the Indian Co. In consideration of merger, India Co would issue shares to the shareholders of the offshore Hold Co i.e. founders/ promoters
Key Tax and regulatory considerations
2. Transfer of shares of India Co by Hold Co to Founders/ Promoters
Key Tax and regulatory considerations
3. Swap of shares of Hold Co against the shares of New India Co
Key Tax and regulatory considerations
Other ways to undertake reverse flipping include Re-domiciliation of offshore Hold Co to India
E. Companies which have reverse flipped their structures recently
Few companies which have adopted reverse flipping structures to return to India are below:
F. Consideration of GIFT IFSC as a hub for Reverse Flipping
IFSCA introduced International Financial Services Centres Authority (Listing) Regulations, 2024 to provide access to global capital without domestic listing and has set up Padmanabhan committee to develop a plan.
Key recommendations made by the Committee for reverse flipping to GIFT IFSC
Once the above recommendations are finalized, GIFT IFSC would be a preferred destination for reverse flipping. Companies to keep a close eye on the finalization of these recommendations.
Introduction
In today’s knowledge‑driven economy, a company’s true value often lies in what cannot be seen on its balance sheet. Intangible assets—brands, trademarks, patents, customer relationships, source codes, know-how’s, and human capital—have become the new contributors of growth. Globally, many MNC firms derive a majority of their market value from intangibles and India is no exception.
Conventional Valuations to Brand Value: A Shift in Indian Valuations
Traditionally, Indian businesses were valued by their earning potential or in some case by their tangible assets—land, machinery, inventory, and buildings. This has taken a paradigm shift in a digital and services‑led economy. Today, a startup with few physical assets can command a billion‑dollar valuation solely on the strength of its technology, brand value, customer relationships, goodwill and other intellectual properties.
When Nykaa listed, for instance, its physical assets were limited. But investors back‑valued its strong brand and customer loyalty. Similarly, Indian IT majors like Infosys and TCS derive the lion’s share of their enterprise value from their IPs, proprietary platforms, and deep client relationships rather than heavy plants or equipment.
A striking example is Flipkart’s acquisition by Walmart in 2018. Walmart paid US $16 billion for a 77% stake—implying a total valuation exceeding US $20 billion—despite Flipkart having minimal fixed assets. Walmart wasn’t acquiring warehouses or factories; it was buying reach, brand trust, and data.
Intangibles: The Invisible Asset That Commands Premiums
Brand Value
In India, brand value often drives valuation multiples well beyond what physical assets justify. Taking Hindustan Unilever (HUL) as an example: its market capitalization is approximately ₹5.7 lakh crore as of November 2025, and it’s trading at a price-to-book ratio above 11x. Its factories and machinery can be replicated, but the consumer trust in its brands like Surf Excel and Dove is far harder to reproduce. That trust allows HUL to command premium pricing and retain investor confidence.
A contrast in the Indian FMCG landscape is Patanjali versus Dabur. While Patanjali rapidly expanded distribution, concerns over its governance, product consistency, and brand sustainability caused its valuation multiples to shrink. Meanwhile, Dabur, with over 135 years of heritage, continues to command stable multiples—testament to how long‑term brand and reputation resilience matters more than reach alone.
Intellectual Property, R&D and the Innovation Premium
In sectors like pharmaceuticals, biotech, and software, intellectual property is often the main value driver. Consider Biocon: its market capitalization is around INR 52 thousand crores as of November 2025, and its stock often reacts sharply to R&D breakthroughs and regulatory milestones. In such businesses, patents, licensing deals, and pipeline potential overshadow factories or land.
Customer Networks & Platform Economics
Intangibles play a central role in consumer tech and platform businesses. Paytm, at its IPO, was valued at nearly ₹1.4 lakh crore largely on the strength of its registered users and merchant network, not merely on its earning potential or its assets.
In non‑digital sectors too, customer loyalty and network effects matter. Amul, structured as a cooperative, does not own vast factories proportional to its reach, but it’s the bond with its registered consumers which acts as a powerful intangible.
Valuing Intangibles: Methods & Practical Hurdles
Most Common valuation approaches:
Yet in India, implementing these has challenges:
Conclusion: Recognize What Lies Beneath
In India’s evolving valuation landscape, ignoring intangibles is as good as turning our back to reality. From Flipkart’s multibillion-dollar acquisition to HUL’s market cap built on its customer base, we see that real value often hides beyond books and numbers. As India pivots deeper into digital and service economies, intangibles—brands, patents, trademarks, customer relationships, technology platforms, human resource capital will matter even more.
For valuation professionals and investors, the challenge is to supplement conventional valuation models with a detailed assessment of value-generating intangibles. Only then can businesses be fairly valued. Companies should not be penalized in their valuations for having invisible yet powerful assets in the form of intangibles.
India's M&A scene is booming. From billion-dollar tech deals to strategic healthcare mergers, the country is becoming a hotbed for corporate restructuring. But what does it really take to pull off a merger or acquisition in India?
Why India is a Magnet for M&A
India's economic growth, investor-friendly reforms, and booming sectors like fintech, renewable energy, and healthcare are attracting global attention. With relaxed FDI norms and a surge in IPOs, companies are seeing India as a land of opportunity.
Take the Walmart-Flipkart deal—a landmark acquisition that showcased India's potential in e-commerce. Or the HDFC Bank-HDFC Ltd merger, which created a financial powerhouse.
Types of M&A – With Examples
There are different types of M&A Transactions. Here's a simple breakdown of the types with examples to relate -
Takeovers vs. Acquisitions
A takeover is when one company gains control of another—often by buying a majority stake. An acquisition can be more strategic, involving asset transfers or business restructuring. This can be through a Slump sale for instance.
Example: Zomato's acquisition of Blinkit was a strategic move to enter quick
Legal & Regulatory Maze
There are multiple regulations that come into play during a Corporate Restructuring Action. Here are a few common and significant ones -
Company Law
SEBI Rules
Competition Law
Where a combination (acquisition or merger) crosses the Assets or turnover related thresholds provided under Competition Act, 2002, notification to Competition Commission of India needs to be made
FEMA Compliance
Income Tax
Other Considerations
Final Thoughts
M&A in India is a powerful tool for growth, diversification, and innovation. But it's not just about strategy—it's about compliance, valuation, and timing. Whether you're a startup eyeing expansion or a global player entering India, understanding the legal and tax landscape is key.
Always consult legal and financial advisors before diving into a deal. The right structure can save you time, money, and regulatory headaches.
For many Non-Resident Indians (NRIs), investing in India is more than just a financial move—it’s a way to stay connected to their roots. Whether it’s buying a home in your hometown, backing a promising startup, or simply growing your wealth in a familiar market, the emotional pull is strong. But as with all things financial, there are regulations to comply with.
Let’s explore how NRIs and Overseas Citizens of India (OCIs) can invest in India while staying fully compliant with FEMA. From property to pensions, repatriation to reporting, here’s a summary of the key aspects to consider
FEMA: Your Investment GPS
FEMA governs all cross-border financial transactions involving foreign exchange. That includes investments made by NRIs, OCIs, and Persons of Indian Origin (PIOs). Its goal? To facilitate external trade and payments while keeping India’s foreign exchange market stable and well-regulated.
Under FEMA:
Real Estate: What You Can Own
NRIs can acquire immovable property in India—but with a few caveats. You’re free to buy:
However, you cannot purchase:
You can transfer property to resident Indians or other NRIs, as long as it’s not in the restricted categories. All payments must be made through banking channels or from compliant non-resident accounts.
Repatriation vs. Non-Repatriation: Know the Difference.
Repatriation Investments: What’s Allowed
NRIs can invest on a repatriation basis in several ways:
Where You Can Invest
Investment Limits for investment in listed Indian companies
Mode of Payment
Remittance of Sale Proceeds
Non-Repatriation Investments: What’s on the Table
If you’re not looking to send your money back abroad, non-repatriation investments offer more flexibility and fewer limits.
Where You Can Invest
These investments are treated as domestic, just like those made by resident Indians.
Mode of Payment
What You Can’t Invest In
Remittance of Sale Proceeds
LEC (NRI): The Reporting Rule You Can’t Ignore
Every time you buy or sell equity instruments on Indian stock exchanges, your Authorised Dealer (AD) bank must report the transaction to the RBI using Form LEC (NRI).
What’s your responsibility? Keep your AD bank informed. If they don’t know about your transaction, they can’t report it—and that could lead to compliance issues.
Regulatory Filing Requirement for Share Transactions When an NRI acquires shares in an Indian company—either through a primary issuance (fresh allotment) or a secondary transaction (transfer from an existing shareholder)—certain filings are mandated under FEMA. Specifically:
Importantly, the responsibility for filing these forms lies with the resident party to the transaction, not the NRI investor. This ensures regulatory compliance while simplifying the process for non-resident participants.
In Conclusion
Investing in India as an NRI is a beautiful blend of emotion and opportunity. It’s a way to stay connected, contribute to India’s growth, and build wealth in a market you understand. But it’s also a journey that requires awareness and adherence to FEMA’s rules.
Whether you’re buying property in your hometown, trading stocks in Mumbai, or backing a startup in Bengaluru, make sure your investments are not just heartfelt—but also fully class="mb-20compliant
What is the Group of Companies Doctrine?
The Group of Companies Doctrine allows an arbitration agreement signed by one company in a corporate group to bind non-signatory affiliates, provided certain conditions are met.
This doctrine challenges traditional legal principles like:
The Supreme Court’s Findings in Cox and Kings Limited v. SAP India Private Limited (2023)
The Court interpreted sections 2(1)(h) (defines “Party” as Party to an arbitration agreement) and 7 (essentials of arbitration agreement) of the Arbitration Act, 1996 (“Act”) to include both signatories and non-signatories as Party.
Further the Court highlights that the central tenet of section 7 of the Act lies in the mutual interests of the parties rather than their express consent to be bound by an arbitration agreement.
Judgments Post Cox and Kings
Supreme Court’s Intervention
Conclusion
The Supreme Court in Cox and Kings Limited v. SAP India Private Limited significantly expanded the Group of Companies Doctrine, allowing arbitration agreements to bind both signatories and non-signatories where commercial realities and mutual intent justify it. Post Cox and Kings, the doctrine’s scope remains evolving.
While drafting multi-party arbitration agreements, extreme caution must be exhibited in drafting joinder of party clause. However, given that this is an evolving Doctrine express exclusion of joinder of parties in arbitration agreement is surely a rickety bridge. While the Court has provided guiding factors, time will tell how consistently and concretely these will be applied to define the contours and limits of the Group of Companies Doctrine in India.
Valuation has evolved from backroom metric to a boardroom obsession. A decade ago, it was rarely part of mainstream startup conversations—today, it’s front and center. But let’s be clear that valuation isn’t just a number on a spreadsheet. It’s a dynamic blend of founder’s ambition, strategic vision, market conditions, investor sentiment, growth trajectory, and peer benchmarks. It’s as much art as it is math.
Why valuation fell after 2023
Back in 2020-21, market optimism and the availability of low-cost capital inflated valuations across the board. Growth was the key metric. Investors overlooked losses and placed their bets on rapid market capture and the promise of future profitability. However, that approach has since shifted dramatically. Today, growth alone is no longer enough. The market demands profitability or at least a credible, measurable path to it.
In 2021–2022, Indian tech IPOs like Paytm, Zomato, and Nykaa entered public markets at highly inflated valuations, often without strong fundamentals to back them. Many of these IPOs were priced aggressively, often without solid fundamentals. Investors were betting on what these companies could become, not what they were
In response to the volatility and investor concerns, SEBI (Securities and Exchange Board of India) introduced stricter disclosure norms. Companies now had to be more transparent about their financials, risks, and future plans.
This regulatory push helped shift the focus from flashy narratives to fundamentals. IPOs in 2024–25 are showing a marked change—valuations are more reasonable, and companies are presenting clearer paths to profitability. Revenue Multiples vs. Profitability
It’s often observed that technology companies are valued on revenue multiples rather than profits. On the surface, this seems to ignore the ultimate goal of any business—profitability. But in reality, the logic is different. Profits, while critical in the long run, can be suppressed in the early years due to heavy spending on R&D, marketing, customer acquisition, and infrastructure. Revenue, on the other hand, reflects product–market fit and signals growth potential, which makes it a cleaner, comparable metric when companies are loss-making.
However, the crucial caveat is that not all revenue growth is created equal. The contrasting cases of Paytm and Zomato during their IPOs in 2021 highlight how investor sentiment diverges when revenue growth is not matched by economic fundamentals.
Case Study: Paytm vs. Zomato
| Metric | Paytm (INR) | Zomato (INR) |
|---|---|---|
| Revenue (FY 2020-21) | 2,801 Cr approx. | 1,994 Cr approx. |
| IPO Valuation | 1,49,428 Cr | 64,365 Cr |
| Revenue Multiple | 53x | 32x |
| Loss | 1,700 Cr | 816 Cr |
| Listing Performance | Loss of around 9% | Gain of around 65% |
Zomato attracted investors with strong revenue growth, higher gross margins, and improvements in contribution margins. Its business model—with commissions from restaurants, delivery charges, and advertising—offered clearer monetization opportunities. Investors believed that operating leverage would eventually lead to profitability.
Paytm, on the other hand, struggled with slowing growth, wafer-thin margins due to low take-rates on payments, and no clear profitability roadmap. Despite being pitched as India’s “super app,” the economics could not justify the global fintech-style valuations it was assigned. Within a year of its listing, Paytm’s stock had lost nearly 75% of its value.
The lesson here is clear: revenue multiples are not inherently problematic, but they must be supported by strong fundamentals. When used in isolation, they can backfire—Paytm became a cautionary tale, while Zomato was seen as a more balanced bet
Current Valuation Trends
Global interest rates have risen and inflation remains sticky, leading to tighter flows of venture capital. Investors today are more cautious, selective, and demanding when evaluating opportunities. The old narrative of prioritizing growth above all else is no longer sufficient. Metrics such as efficiency, cost discipline, customer acquisition cost (CAC), contribution margins, and profitability roadmaps have taken center stage. Growth must now be paired with sustainable unit economics.
What Defines a Strong Valuation Today
A strong valuation today is built on realistic growth expectations, efficient execution, and a clear roadmap to profitability. High GMV or user counts, which once dominated startup pitches, mean little if they don’t translate into healthy cash flows. Investors are rewarding resilience, scalability, and sustainability over momentum-driven growth.
Some of the key drivers of valuation now include:
The Bottom Line
The valuation climate has changed significantly. If 2021 was about momentum, 2025 is about maturity. Founders must move away from chasing inflated numbers and focus instead on building resilient, efficient, and profitable businesses.
The experiences of Zomato, Paytm, and Nykaa provide critical lessons. Public markets reward execution and performance, not just potential. Sustainable growth, operational efficiency, and a credible path to profitability will ultimately determine how startups are valued—and whether they thrive or fail in the long run.
Our insights keep evolving. Stay connected as we bring you new perspectives and updates on a regular basis.