https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169783 Section 2(1)(o) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, which defines a non-performing asset by reference to regulatory asset-classification norms, was upheld as a valid framework. The Court held that Parliament had laid down the policy and core statutory scheme, while the RBI was confined to operational details of classification; this was not excessive delegation. Applying the presumption of constitutionality, it found no arbitrariness or uncanalised discretion in the classification mechanism, and accepted that different regulatory treatment for financial institutions had a rational nexus with asset recovery and banking discipline. The RBI circular dated 1 July 2013 was also held consistent with the statutory definition and valid under Articles 14 and 19(1)(g). en-us Fri, 17 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 May 2015 15:16:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169783 Section 2(1)(o) of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, which defines a non-performing asset by reference to regulatory asset-classification norms, was upheld as a valid framework. The Court held that Parliament had laid down the policy and core statutory scheme, while the RBI was confined to operational details of classification; this was not excessive delegation. Applying the presumption of constitutionality, it found no arbitrariness or uncanalised discretion in the classification mechanism, and accepted that different regulatory treatment for financial institutions had a rational nexus with asset recovery and banking discipline. The RBI circular dated 1 July 2013 was also held consistent with the statutory definition and valid under Articles 14 and 19(1)(g). Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 17 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169783