Log in or register
Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 09 SEPTEMBER 2019

FDI Policy Amendments: Game-Changer for Single Brand Retail

Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co
Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co
Contributor
Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co

Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co

Founded on a century of legal achievements, Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co (SAM & Co) was born...

View firm profile
Explore more from Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co

As such, the impact of such conditionalities on the sector may need to be further evaluated.

IndiaGovernment, Public Sector
Iqbal Khan - Partner
Iqbal Khan - Partner
Author LinkedIn connections

In a bid to further liberalize the existing foreign direct investment ("FDI") regime in India, on August 28, 2019, the union cabinet approved several amendments to the existing FDI policy of the country (the "Extant FDI Policy").

This move comes amidst increasing concerns of an impending global economic slump and declining market confidence in India, and is the latest amongst a series of steps taken by the central government towards making India a more attractive foreign investment destination.

Perhaps the most significant amendments to the Extant FDI Policy pertain to foreign investment in single brand retail trading ("SBRT"). SBRT in India has seen rapidly growing foreign interest over the past few years, with the SBRT sector having received total foreign investment of approximately USD 1,636.24 million[1] in the period between April, 2006, and April, 2019. The present amendment is preceded by, and is aligned with, the recent liberalization of SBRT FDI

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Register for freeORLog in

Related Articles

Legal Intelligence Newsletters: sign up for the latest legal and regulatory news on your chosen topics

Read more about

See more popular content from

Article

Punjab And Haryana High Court Strikes Down JAO - FAO Retrospective Amendment As Unconstitutional

The Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court (HC) in Jyoti Sareen vs. UOI & Others (CWP No. 15791-2024 (O&M)) (Order) held the retrospective amendments carried out vide the Finance Act, 2026, with respect to the powers of the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer (JAO) to issue a reopening notice under section 148 (Reopening Notice) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (IT Act), as unconstitutional, being violative of the ‘doctrine of separation of powers’ and thus violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
IndiaGovernment, Public Sector
Khaitan & Co.
Khaitan & Co.
Article

Acquisition By An FOCC Of An Indian Company: Pricing Conditions For Resident And Non-resident Shareholders

A FOCC refers to an Indian entity that has received foreign investment and is ultimately owned or controlled by persons resident outside India. Although incorporated in India under the Companies Act, such entities are treated differently from domestically owned and controlled Indian companies for the purposes of foreign investment regulation and downstream investment structuring. Consequently, an FOCC, despite being an Indian incorporated entity, is subject to regulatory conditions applicable to foreign investment while undertaking investments into other Indian entities.
IndiaGovernment, Public Sector
LegaLogic
LegaLogic
Article

The IBC Amendment Act, 2026: Reshaping Real Estate Insolvency

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Act, 2026 (‘Amendment Act’), which amends the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (‘Code’), received Presidential assent on April 6, 2026. Most amendments took effect on May 26, 2026. However, three significant mechanisms the accelerated admission deadline, creditor-initiated resolution, and group insolvency have been enacted but have not yet come into force and will take effect only upon the issuance of a commencement notification by the Central Government under the applicable provisions of the Code.
IndiaInsolvency/Bankruptcy/Re-Structuring
Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co
Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co
Article

No GST On Assignment Of Industrial Leasehold Rights: Bombay High Court Grants Relief To Industrial Lessees Holding MIDC Plots

In Aerocom Cushions Private Limited v. Assistant Commissioner (Anti-Evasion), CGST & CX, Nagpur-1, the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court quashed a Show Cause Notice demanding Goods and Services Tax (“GST”) on the assignment of leasehold rights in an industrial plot allotted by the Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation (“MIDC”). The Court held that such an assignment constitutes a transfer of benefits arising out of immovable property and does not amount to a “supply of service” under the Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 (“CGST Act”).
IndiaTax
Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co
Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co
Article

From Beneficiary To Promoter: The Bombay High Court On Housing Society Liability Under RERA

The Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 (“RERA”) was enacted to protect homebuyers and promote transparency and accountability in the real estate sector. A key feature of the Act is the definition of “Promoter” under Section 2(zk), as it determines the persons or entities that bear statutory obligations and liabilities towards homebuyers.
IndiaReal Estate and Construction
Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co
Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas & Co