The deal space in the FY 2023–2024 in India has witnessed a slowdown compared to the preceding years due to global inflationary trends, valuation mismatch, geopolitical unrest and macroeconomic factors. In the context of the energy sector, the Russia-Ukraine war has led to a marked increase in global crude oil prices and energy costs, threatening energy security thereby, forcing Russian energy customers to focus on alternate suppliers or increased adoption of renewables in their energy mix.
However, the global M&A outlook has been contrasted, in context of India, through steady deal making in certain specific sectors – green energy (solar, wind and green hydrogen), oil and gas, and sustainable mobility in particular. India’s commitment to green energy transition in the COP26 in Glasgow (with a goal of 50% of its energy demands to be met through renewable sources by 2030), ever-increasing energy demands, and infrastructure requirements of a developing economy have led to sector-focused inbound investments of significant deal value.
The government’s continued pro-business regulatory reforms focused towards enhancing ease of doing business, the sector-focused liberalisation of the foreign investment regime, and the introduction of schemes such as the production-linked incentive scheme continues to drive inbound investment decisions and the value chain around these sectors.
Key deals in FY 2023–24:
In India, most infrastructure projects are developed through the public private partnership mode under the competitive bidding route which allows only limited foreign participation – either by way of a joint venture or consortium. Each of these sectors are also considerably regulated with most sectors having sectoral regulators. Therefore, entrepreneurs are advised to incorporate in India – particularly, project developers and manufacturers.
After the submission of the incorporation documents to the regulator, it takes about three to four weeks to incorporate a private limited company.
There is no initial capital requirement/minimum paid-up capital to incorporate a private limited company other than the requirement to have a minimum of two shareholders for private limited companies and seven shareholders for public limited companies.
Considering the capital requirement in the energy and infrastructure sectors, entrepreneurs are typically advised to incorporate a private limited company under the Companies Act, 2013 (the “Companies Act”). The requirement of higher debt capital due to the gestation period involved in energy and infrastructure projects also makes these entities preferable for entrepreneurs. Investors prefer this corporate vehicle due to the flexibility it offers from a funding and corporate governance perspective along with the limitation of liability for its shareholders.
In the renewable energy sector, entrepreneurs also structure certain special purpose vehicles (SPV) as a limited liability partnership especially, for captive power projects.
Early-stage financing for energy and infrastructure sectors is largely dependent on the specific sub-sector, since the challenges and the regulatory regime differ across the sub-sectors. Therefore, primary capital can be raised from local investors, promoters of family offices, government-sponsored funds, etc, or a combination of these sources. In more recent times, foreign private equity funds (through their Indian arm) have financed new companies in the energy and infrastructure sectors.
Early-stage financing is typically provided in the form of equity, debt-equity, or convertible instruments – depending on the specific sub-sector and the risks thereof. The documentation in such cases mostly includes the following:
Debt capital is also a critical source of funding, especially for companies formed to execute energy and infrastructure projects. Most concession agreements prescribe a debt-to-equity ratio of 70 (debt) to 30 (equity) and project financing is commonly availed by such companies to fulfil this requirement.
The typical sources of venture capital include venture capital funds (domestic and foreign), corporate venture capital, government initiatives and angel investors.
However, pure play venture capital funding, focused on long-term growth, is not a customary source of raising capital for the energy and infrastructure sectors. Due to the cyclical nature of business, these sectors have been more attractive for private equity and institutional investors (both domestic and foreign). In recent times, sector-focused venture capital has been introduced by certain entities – such as Venture Capital Fund for Energy Efficiency by Bureau of Energy Efficiency, BPCL, has introduced a corporate venture capital arm working towards targeted renewable energy start-ups, Green India Venture Fund, by the venture capital arm of IFCI.
Venture capital documentation has been considerably standardised over the past decade, with well-defined parameters regarding tag- and drag-along rights, anti-dilution, right of first refusal, dispute resolution, etc. While there are no institutional standards, there are market-practice and sector-based principles which guide the documentation along with due diligence findings and regulatory risks.
If start-ups intend to access public capital, they are required to change their corporate form from a private limited company to a public limited company. Start-ups are not typically advised to change their jurisdiction unless this decision is guided by key investors or better valuation considerations. Few companies have chosen the SPAC model for listing in foreign jurisdictions.
Considering foreign exchange laws, complex tax and legal issues and sectoral demands, it is atypical for companies in the energy and infrastructure sectors to change their jurisdiction.
While investors usually leave all options open for an exit including through IPOs, traditionally there has been a preference to exit through secondary sales rather than IPOs (in energy and infrastructure sectors). While this decision is guided by certain key factors – value optimisation of the business, macro market conditions, investor sentiments vis-à-vis the economic factors, etc, the cyclical nature of the business has been a key determinant for the choice of exit through secondary sales. Also, considering the nature of the business of these sectors, not many companies reach the stage of listing unless they are part of a large promoter-driven conglomerate. In recent times, government-backed renewable energy companies are seeking to raise capital through the public markets.
Indian companies are only allowed to list on international exchanges which are approved and recognised by the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, in accordance with the Companies (Listing of Equity Shares in Permissible Jurisdictions) Rules, 2024. Companies mostly list on the Indian stock exchanges due to their familiarity with the regulatory regime which is often designed to the Indian market, as well as compliance and disclosure requirements, relatively attractive valuations and the potential to leverage their domestic reputation. That said, even in case of domestic IPOs, companies do attract significant foreign investors through the qualified institutional buyer route. Few companies have also chosen the SPAC model to list their companies in foreign exchanges.
The firm does not opine on such matters without consulting with the foreign lawyers of the relevant jurisdictions.
While the sale of a company is typically undertaken through bilateral negotiation, over the last decade, auction processes have been firmly established as a preferred process for businesses backed by private equity/venture capital investors or businesses that have steady growth. However, bilateral process for sale continues to be a key feature of the market, especially where a transaction is initiated by a buyer and involves less time and cost.
The Indian market does not typically have VC investors in the energy and infrastructure sectors. However, of late, India is witnessing VC investments in the oil and gas and e-mobility sectors.
A typical transaction structure for the sale of a privately held energy and infrastructure company that has VC investors may include:
The decision to sell the entire stake or a controlling interest is typically linked to various factors including return on investment timelines, fund lifecycle, ownership structure in the company, and available exit option including an IPO/listing or similar liquidity event contemplated in the near future.
While secondary sale has been common in the energy and infrastructure sectors, considering the recent market trends, energy companies (especially, those in renewables) are seeking the IPO route for fundraising.
Most M&A transactions in the Indian market are generally structured as pure cash deals, especially in transactions involving financial buyers. However, the specific structure can vary based on factors such as the companies concerned, the industry and the strategic goals of the acquisition. A combination of cash and stock, while not prevalent in the Indian market, may be opted for, rather than the sale of the entire company for cash or a stock-for-stock transaction, to allow the sellers to receive immediate liquidity through cash while also retaining an interest in the company through buying shares in the buying entity.
The founders are generally expected to stand behind representations and warranties and indemnities provided under the transaction documents, which includes all liabilities including tax, employee benefits, litigation, and environmental matters. The VC investors in the sector are only expected to represent and warrant clear title to their shareholding in the company and its authority to execute the transaction.
While escrows or holdbacks are not customary in India, parties may, especially private equity funds, structure such transactions for tax liabilities.
Transactions backed by representations and warranties insurance is a relatively new concept in India, and stakeholders are familiarising themselves with the structure especially for larger transactions to provide coverage for losses resulting from breach of representations and warranties. Since it is not customary in transactions, there is a recent trend in obtaining insurance, particularly in sponsor-led deals.
Spin-offs are becoming increasingly customary in India’s energy and infrastructure sector. In the past year, a few companies have demerged their energy business into a separate legal entity including Siemens Limited, Sterlite Power Transmission Limited and GE India Industrial Private Limited.
In India, spin-offs can be undertaken either by way of a demerger through a scheme of arrangement approved by the competent authorities and/or the tribunal or through a contractual arrangement in the form of a business transfer or asset transfer.
Companies engaged in the business of energy and infrastructure often pursue spin-offs to: (i) enhance value creation since independent entities attract more focused investment; (ii) improve operational efficiency; (iii) risk mitigation by managing the overall corporate risk; or (iv) a proposed business structure since spin-offs can also serve as a precursor to potential mergers or acquisitions, creating opportunities for strategic partnerships.
Spin-offs, in India, can potentially be structured as tax-free transactions at both corporate and shareholders’ levels if spin-offs are being undertaken by way of a scheme of arrangement. Business combinations that involve the transfer of capital assets, such as amalgamations and demergers, can be tax-neutral transactions since they are exempted from taxation on capital gains under the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Such spin-offs must meet the following key requirements:
In India, a spin-off immediately followed by a business combination is possible, however, it has to be in compliance with the regulatory framework under the Companies Act and approvals from the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) and the Competition Commission of India (CCI), if applicable. Key requirements for undertaking a business combination after spin-offs are as follows.
However, in a business combination through contractual arrangement in the form of a business transfer or asset transfer, approvals from regulatory authorities like SEBI or CCI may be necessary.
Spin-off undertaken by way of a scheme of arrangement has been reported to be a time-consuming process and the approval process typically takes six to eight months. However, the timeline for spin-offs, undertaken by way of business transfer or asset transfer agreements, are case specific and typically take two to four months.
The SEBI (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations, 2011 (the “Takeover Regulations”) govern the acquisition of voting shares or voting rights or control in a listed company.
Any person, with or without holding any shares in a target company, can make an offer to acquire shares of a listed company, subject to minimum offer size of 26%. That said, the promoters or the promoter group typically control the board of listed companies, and it is difficult to successfully implement an open offer in the absence of any agreement with the promoters. From a practical standpoint, the acquisition of shares through execution of share subscription or share purchase agreements with the promoters of the listed company and the open offer process are typically conducted as a simultaneous process.
In context of the reporting requirements under the Takeover Regulations, if the acquisition in the first instance crosses 5% of the voting shares/voting rights in the listed company, the acquirer is required to make a disclosure of its holding and of the persons acting in concert with such acquirer (PAC), to the stock exchanges and the listed company. An acquirer (along with the PAC) already holding 5% or more of voting shares/voting rights is required to disclose any change in their shareholding exceeding 2% of voting shares/voting rights. These disclosures are required to be made to the stock exchanges within two working days of such acquisition or change.
The Takeover Regulations do not obligate the acquirer acquiring a stake in a listed company to publicly disclose the purpose of the acquisition or the intent regarding the acquisition with respect to the company. However, if the mandatory open offer (MOO) requirement is triggered, as discussed in 6.2 Mandatory Offer, the material portions of the acquisition including the reasons for the acquisitions, the commercial reasoning (long term) and strategic plans are required to be provided in the offer document.
Under the Indian Takeover Regulations, an acquirer (along with PACs) is required to carry out a MOO in the following instances (both direct and indirect).
Acquisition of a public company is typically structured in either of the two forms:
Under the merger scheme route, a minimum of 75% of the shareholders of the merging entity are required to receive their consideration in the form of shares. In case of a failure to meet this criterion, the transaction leads to tax implications in the hands of the recipient receiving the consideration.
Further, no approval of the shareholders of the listed company is required in case of a share acquisition for cash, however, the merger scheme requires the approval of 75% of shareholders, and an additional minority shareholders’ approval in a few select cases.
Particularly in the context of energy and infrastructure companies, acquisition of public listed companies is also structured as a business transfer wherein the acquirer and the listed company enter into a bilaterally negotiated business transfer agreement – to purchase the listed company’s business or certain identified undertakings. Another structuring option is that of demerger, which involves demerging the business of the listed company in favour of the acquirer in consideration for shares to be issued by the acquirer to the shareholders of the listed company. From a regulatory perspective, the demerger scheme and its process is similar to a merger scheme as discussed above.
Business transfers do not trigger the MOO obligations but require an approval of 75% of shareholders and a separate approval of the minority shareholders. Business transfers are prone to tax implications, and therefore should be structured with caution to ensure the least tax incidence for the parties involved.
As discussed in 6.3 Transaction Structures, the acquisition of a public company is commonly structured as an acquisition-for-cash transaction, and although rare, transactions are in certain instances also structured as a partly stock and partly cash deals.
Minimum Price Requirement
In the context of pricing, other than in specific instances (such as, if acquisitions are undertaken through the exchanges or if the transaction is regulated under the extant foreign exchange laws), pricing is not typically regulated for acquisitions which trigger a MOO.
However, the Takeover Regulations prescribe the minimum price requirement for the price at which an offer in the MOO is to be made. This price is to be determined as the highest of the following parameters:
In a merger or demerger transaction, the pricing is determined based on the valuation report of the entities involved. In context of business transfer, while the pricing is not per se regulated, the determination of pricing is commonly based on tax implications.
Deferred Consideration or Contingent Payments
While it is not typical to carry out valuation adjustments through deferred consideration or contingent payments, in certain instances, parties do devise structures to address valuation uncertainties – issuance and subscription of convertible instruments; escrows (share based or cash based) to control deals and effect any future valuation adjustments. Note that under the foreign exchange laws of India, only 25% of the consideration can be paid by the acquirer as deferred consideration to be settled within 18 months from the date of the transfer agreement.
The Takeover Regulations prescribe several common conditions for takeover or tender offers, such as minimum percentage of shares to be acquired (26% of the voting share capital); the minimum offer price and parameters, as discussed in 6.4 Consideration: Minimum Price; the appointment of merchant bankers, etc. There may be certain exemptions in specified instances where the acquisition is between relatives or promoters, etc.
The Takeover Regulations do allow conditional MOOs – these are akin to standard open offers except that if the desired level of shares is not tendered by existing shareholders (a limit which is specified in the tender offer documents), the investor is not obligated to acquire any shares at all under the open offer. A conditional open offer ensures that an acquirer meets its objective from the transaction. However, if the desired level of acceptance has not been met and the acquirer decides not to proceed with the transaction, the underlying acquisition which triggered the MOO is also not allowed to be completed. In the Indian context, conditional offers are an all or nothing commitment for the acquirer.
As discussed in 6.1 Stakebuilding, it is customary to enter into share subscription or share purchase agreements with the promoters/principal shareholders as a parallel process to the open offer. On the other hand, merger and demerger transactions are required to be documented through a scheme of merger/demerger and are required to be approved by the NCLT, along with an implementation agreement which sets out the obligations of the parties in the context of the transaction. Business transfer agreements are documented through a business transfer or asset transfer agreement.
Other than the obligation to constitute a committee of independent directors as discussed in 11.2 Special or Ad Hoc Committees, the target/listed company is typically required to obtain the necessary regulatory approvals as may be required for the deal. The Takeover Code also places certain obligations on the listed company, and such as, the business of the listed company is to be undertaken as usual, consistent with past practice, during the offer period. The listed company is also restricted from carrying out the following acts, without the consent of 75% of shareholders:
Considering that public listed companies are required to make periodic disclosures under applicable laws, all price-sensitive information is available in the public domain, therefore public listed companies typically do not provide representations and warranties in the context of the deal. Due to corporate governance implications, listed companies also do not usually undertake additional obligations, unless robust reasons can be evidenced towards benefits of the transaction in favour of the shareholders. However, in select instances, listed companies may provide fundamental warranties (such as authority and capacity, due issuance of shares for subscription transactions). However, business warranties are based on commercial negotiations and usually provided if the acquisition is of a controlling interest and not a minority acquisition.
In case of a MOO, the open offer is required to be for at least 26% of the voting share capital of the listed company. Unless conditional in nature (as discussed in 6.5 Common Conditions for a Takeover Offer/Tender Offer), the acquirer is required to acquire the tender received subsequent to the offer. In case of a voluntary open offer, the acquirer is required to acquire at least such number of shares which would lead to the acquirer exercising 10% of the voting rights in the target company.
Under the Takeover Regulations, the acquirer is allowed to make a delisting-cum-tender offer.
Under the recently amended delisting laws applicable in India, an acquirer can carry out a delisting of the target company, if: (i) tender received in the offer is such that the total shareholding of such acquirer (together with the underlying acquisition) is not less than 75%; and (ii) 50% of the public shareholding has been tendered. That said, note that the minority shareholders of the listed company are not under an obligation to tender in the offer.
Any forced exit or squeeze-out of the minority shareholders must be through a capital reduction process (to be approved by the NCLT) and requires an approval of 75% of shareholders. That said, in such cases, the minority shareholders have the right to approach courts and regulatory authorities to block the squeeze-out. The NCLT’s ambit of judicial review is limited to adjudicating on the fairness of the scheme.
The acquirer is required to have firm financial arrangements in place for fulfilling its payment obligations under an open offer, prior to launching the open offer. The financial arrangements are required to be verified by a SEBI-registered merchant banker hired to run the open offer process.
Tender offers are typically financed through internal accruals, equity financing or debt financing from non-banking entities (since Indian banks are restricted from financing tender offers). Usually, the debt-based financing is structured outside India through convertible instruments and the subscription amount is used to fund the open offer.
In this context, note that bankers and financial advisers are not required to trigger an open offer as part of the acquisition of the shares by the buyer. In certain instances, based on specific facts, SEBI has viewed providers of equity financing as persons acting in concert – where financiers were viewed as using the acquirer as only a conduit, to carry out the open offer, on its behalf.
As discussed in 6.5 Common Conditions for a Takeover Offer/Tender Offer, Takeover Regulations permit withdrawal of a mandatory tender offer only in certain limited cases – inability to obtain financing is not one of them.
In the context of business combinations, arrangement of financing may be agreed as a condition to completion of the acquisition. From a corporate governance perspective, the board of the listed company may have to justify to the minority shareholders the rationale for including such a condition in the transaction documents vis-à-vis the requirements for listed companies to have deal certainty.
As discussed in 6.6 Deal Documentation, corporate governance implication is one of the key considerations guiding the ability of listed companies to support an acquisition transaction, and listed companies do not usually undertake additional obligations, unless proved to be favourable towards the shareholder body. Therefore, it is not typical for listed companies to grant any specific deal protection measures.
However, as discussed in 6.6 Deal Documentation, the Takeover Regulations do prescribe certain value protection measures to be adhered to by the listed company, during the period of the open offer (such as, continue to undertake business in ordinary course, not to effect any change in capital structure, etc).
At the outset, public listed companies in India are required to ensure that at least 25% of their equity shares are held by non-promoters (public). Acquirers cannot acquire 100% shareholding of a public listed company, without carrying out a delisting of the target company.
While Indian law permits majority shareholders to appoint nominee shareholders in the company, the directors have a fiduciary duty to act in the best interest of the company and not just in favour of the majority shareholders they represent. In fact, any arrangement where there is disproportionate allocation of governance rights in favour of majority shareholders vis-à-vis their shareholding, or which is detrimental to the minority shareholders, is subject to regulatory scrutiny.
In the context of profit-sharing arrangements, compensation or profit-sharing arrangements with respect to dealing in securities between a majority shareholder and an employee/director of the listed company requires a board approval and a separate minority shareholder approval.
As discussed in 6.1 Stakebuilding, Indian listed companies are largely promoter driven, with a high concentration of promoter/principal shareholder shareholding. Therefore, acquirers usually enter into arrangements with the promoters/principal shareholders to acquire their shares, thereby triggering a MOO (subject to breach of relevant thresholds). However, the Takeover Regulations do not allow parties to such agreements to tender any of their shareholding in the MOO.
Indian regulators do not view such commitments favourably with respect to listed companies, since these structures tend to compromise shareholder democracy and influence voting decisions.
There is no requirement to obtain SEBI’s approval prior to launching the MOO or executing agreements that trigger the MOO. However, the draft offer is required to be submitted to SEBI for providing its comments, and thereafter, SEBI’s comments are to be incorporated in the final offer letter before its circulation.
Under the Takeover Regulations, SEBI is required to provide its comments within 15 working days from the receipt of the letter. SEBI may also seek clarifications and additional information from the merchant banker, and often, the prescribed timeline may get extended until the clarifications and information are provided. In conducting its review, SEBI analyses the compliance of the tender offer with the Takeover Regulations, including the offer price, and broadly, if the terms of the offer and the transaction will have a detrimental impact on the minority shareholders.
The timelines for the tender offer are prescribed by SEBI through its various guidelines, although the actual time involved in the process may vary, especially, in transactions where regulatory approvals are required, and the payments are subject to obtaining the approvals.
Competing offers can be launched only within 20 working days from the date of the initial tender offer. In such case, the schedule of activities and the tender period for both the initial tender offer and the competing tender offer are carried out with identical timelines, and the last date to tender in the initial tender offer is changed to the last date to tender in the competing offer.
If the completion of the tender offer is subject to regulatory/antitrust approvals, the payment to the tendering shareholders may be delayed until such approvals are obtained. Any such delay would, however, attract an interest to be specified by SEBI (typically 10%) to be paid to the tendering shareholders.
The timing for obtaining the regulatory approval is fact specific and depends on the modalities of the deal. That said, usually parties approach the regulators for obtaining the approvals (or, at least apply for such approval) prior to launching the offer.
Setting up of project companies or SPVs in the energy and infrastructure sector requires compliance with the existing legal framework under the Companies Act along with the regulatory landscape governing the specific sectors. Refer to 2.1 Establishing a New Company.
Principally, no approvals are required to be obtained, except in cases of licensed sectors. For example, generation of electricity is a de-licensed activity in India; a licence is required to be obtained for transmission, distribution and trading of power. In case of an investment by an entity of a country sharing a land border with India or where the beneficial owner of an investment into India is situated in or is a citizen of any such country, that entity can invest only under the government route – ie, after obtaining a prior approval from the relevant Administrative Ministry and/or Department.
Regulatory Bodies
The key regulatory bodies governing the key sectors in the energy and infrastructure sectors are as follows.
Timeline for Obtaining Permits and Approvals
The timeline for obtaining the applicable permits and approvals is based on the project’s nature, size and location. However, it may take up to six months for obtaining the approvals and/or licences in regulated sectors.
The primary securities market regulator for M&A transactions is SEBI for public listed companies.
India regulates foreign investment depending on the sector in which the investment is proposed to be made. In the energy and infrastructure sector, except in case of mining and mineral separation of titanium-bearing minerals and ores, its value addition and integrated activities and defence sectors, 100% foreign investment is permitted under the automatic route – ie, no prior approval is required to be obtained. Refer to 7.1 Regulations Applicable to Energy & Infrastructure Companies.
As for the FDI filing, it is mandatory for foreign investors to adhere to certain reporting requirements. Depending on the nature of the investment (ie, whether primary or secondary), relevant forms must be submitted to the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) reporting the investment in equity instruments by foreign investors.
Refer to 7.3 Restrictions on Foreign Investments.
While export control regulations do not apply to the energy and infrastructure sectors, such regulations are applicable on dual-use goods and technologies (ie, goods and technologies that can be used for both civilian and military purposes) and cannot be exported without an export authorisation from the Director General of Foreign Trade. The restrictions are applicable on the export of nuclear technology and material, solar panels with specific components depending on the materials involved, and export of technologies that could impact national security, especially in communications infrastructure.
According to the merger control regime in India, antitrust filing for takeover offers and business combinations are required if the business combination breaches the prescribed deal value threshold (DVT) and does not fall under any exemptions provided under the Competition Act, 2002 (the “Competition Act”). A notification of the business combination must be made to the Competition Commission of India (CCI) if the combination breaches the DVT. The CCI will issue a prima facie opinion if, on the basis of its analysis, it believes that the transaction is likely to cause an appreciable adverse effect on competition (AAEC) in the specific industry within 30 working days from the date of notification, or approve it if there is no AAEC. However, if the CCI does not pass an order within a period of 210 days, the combination is deemed to be approved.
The Competition Act provides for the De Minimis Exemption which exempts transactions from notification to the CCI, if the target assets/company/business/division being acquired has either:
The Competition (Amendment) Act, 2023 has introduced an additional test for determination of the DVT for notification to the CCI if:
The key labour legislations and aspects that should be looked at during an M&A transaction to understand the operational practices and potential issues of a company are:
While there is no formal works council system as prevalent in European countries, typically, companies have mechanisms for personnel representation through trade unions. Such consultation with employees and unions are not legally binding, however, labour consultation may be required if the target’s personnel are represented by a trade union, and forms the basis of the collective bargaining agreements entered into between the target company and such trade union. It is not mandatory to disclose such information either to the board or the shareholders.
The currency control regulations are primarily regulated by the RBI and governed by the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (FEMA). A prior approval may be required from the RBI for a transaction involving FDI in the government-approval route, if the combination involves the transfer of shares or interest in an Indian company by a person resident outside India or an overseas citizen of India or an erstwhile overseas corporate body. As per the Companies (Compromises, Arrangements and Amalgamations) Rules, 2016, in cases of merger or amalgamation of a transferor foreign company incorporated outside India (being a holding company) and the transferee Indian company (being a wholly owned subsidiary company incorporated in India), a prior approval from the RBI is required to be obtained by both companies.
In order to regulate receipt and payment in foreign exchange transactions, RBI has also issued the Foreign Exchange Management (Manner of Receipt and Payment) Regulations, 2023, which provide that no Indian resident is permitted to make or receive payments from a non-resident, unless permitted under the foreign exchange laws or approved by the RBI. These regulations also bifurcate the transactions into trade transactions and transactions other than trade transactions. Receipt/payment for any export or import have been provided for countries like Nepal, Bhutan, and Asian Clearing Union member countries, in case of trade transactions. Further, apart from trade transactions, payments and receipts for any current account transaction may only be made in Indian Rupees between an Indian resident and a foreign resident visiting India.
A few significant legal developments relating to energy and infrastructure M&A are the following.
For transactions involving purchase of shares in listed companies and/or the schemes for mergers and demergers, the potential acquirers are provided with access to undertake a due diligence activity. The company may provide financial statements, material contracts, intellectual property details, applicable permits and consents, details of litigation (both pending and threatened), etc.
However, any unpublished price-sensitive information (UPSI) can only be provided if the board is of the view that disclosing such information is in the best interest of the company and passes a resolution authorising the disclosure of UPSI. However, in cases where a tender is floated, any UPSI of a company must be disclosed in tender documents and in cases where no tender is triggered, such UPSI must be made public before the deal is finalised.
There are no regulatory restrictions on the quality or quantity of information that can be provided in a due diligence process, however, the information provided to different bidders is based on the specific information sought by the bidders.
Data privacy in India is regulated by the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (the “DPDP Act”) which provides for procedures and penalties for use of personal data of individuals, whether collected in digital form or non-digital data. The definition of “person” under the DPDP Act includes companies, firms and artificial juristic persons. The DPDP Act does not apply to data which is processed for individual or domestic purposes, and data which has been made publicly available by the owner of such data.
Any company-related information processed by investors for due diligence purposes is not subject to restrictions under the DPDP Act, as it exists in the public domain or is provided by the companies themselves.
Under the Takeover Regulations, the public announcement of an open offer (based on the events discussed in 6.2 Mandatory Offer) is required to be made on the date of execution of the transaction documents (in indirect acquisitions – immediately thereafter) in the prescribed format. This is followed by a detailed public statement and thereafter, the tender offer.
For acquisition of unlisted companies, there is no requirement to make a public disclosure of a bid in relation to its acquisition. In mergers, demergers and business transfers, the board is required to make statutory disclosures after approving the transaction.
In business combinations (scheme-based mergers or demergers) between unlisted companies or business transfer transactions, there is no requirement to issue a prospectus. If the business combination involves a listed company, an abridged prospectus is required to be issued.
Please note that there is no requirement for the buyer’s shares to be listed on a specified stock exchange for it to acquire the shares of a listed company.
In open offers, detailed financial statements of the acquirer are not required to be submitted, but limited audited financial information – such as total revenue, net income, earnings per share, etc, are required to be disclosed in the offer letter and the detailed public statement. In mergers and demergers, the financial statements of the entities are required to be provided to the exchanges for inspection by the shareholders.
The financial statements are required to be prepared in accordance with the applicable accounting standards (which includes the accounting standards issued by the Institute of Chartered Accountants of India and GAAP).
In the acquisition of listed companies, the key terms of the transaction documents (such as transaction type, any proposed change in control) are required to be specified in the tender offer and the detailed public statement, to be prepared as the standard formats prescribed by SEBI. The transaction documents are not required to be filed but have to be made available for public inspection during the tender offer period.
If the proposed acquisition involves a sale of shares between residents and non-residents, the key extracts of the transaction documents are to be filed with RBI. Further, if the transaction triggers the requirement of a merger filing, then a copy of the transaction documents should be filed with the CCI as part of merger control filing.
The directors have a fiduciary duty towards the company and its shareholders (including minority shareholders) to act in good faith towards the best interest of the company, its members, the community at large and the environment. Directors are required to exercise due care, skill and diligence, avoid conflicts of interest and not seek undue gains. Independent directors have additional responsibilities which include the obligation to report unethical and corrupt behaviour.
There are no special duties or obligations prescribed for directors for business combinations involving unlisted companies. In case of listed companies, the director has the following obligations during an open offer process under the Takeover Regulations:
The decision whether establish special or ad hoc committees for business combination transactions largely depends upon the company and the complexity of the transaction. In merger and demerger transactions, parties can choose to constitute transaction implementation committees, which commonly have equal representation of both the parties involved and may include the directors of the parties involved. However, it is not typical for bilaterally negotiated business transfer transactions to have implementation committees.
The Takeover Regulations require the board of directors of the target company to constitute a committee of independent directors, which is required to provide reasoned recommendations on the open offer. This recommendation is required to be published at least two working days prior to the opening of the offer.
Directors are required to annually disclose their interest in any other entities and update such disclosures in a timely manner. While directors have a fiduciary duty to ensure their interests are not in conflict with that of the company, in case of public companies, directors are barred from participating in meetings or voting on resolutions they may have an interest in.
The key duties of the board include formulation of corporate strategy, allocation of resources, management of risks, communication with shareholders and overall governance of the company. The board plays an active role in case of M&A transactions as it is tasked with the strategic analysis of the target to ascertain synergy with the acquirer’s business and its long-term strategic goals.
The board plays an active role in business combinations, since the board is required to approve these transactions. Other than setting up a committee as discussed in 11.2 Special or Ad Hoc Committees, in open offer transactions (where the promoters or principal shareholders are selling their shares), the target company’s board has a limited role as the target company may not necessarily be a party to the transaction.
While it is not common for shareholders to challenge the decisions of the board in case of M&A transactions, shareholder disputes do arise for reasons which may include – the deal violates the existing rights of the minority shareholders under the articles of association or is oppressive to them; unfair dilution of shareholding; the terms of the open offer or valuation are detrimental to the minority shareholders; or not being treated at par with the majority shareholders.
Independent advice is typically sought on formulating transaction structures with specific advice on tax implications, opinion from legal counsel on compliance with applicable laws and appropriate issuance of shares, valuation certificate from valuers. The committee of independent directors, formed to provide recommendations on open offers, is permitted to seek professional advice or consult SEBI-registered merchant bankers. In mergers and demergers involving listed companies, a fairness opinion from a SEBI-registered merchant banker is mandatory before filing the scheme before the NCLT.
Specifically in case of energy and infrastructure transactions, technical advisers are also appointed to ascertain the quality of the assets, their compliance with performance parameters vis-à-vis industry standards and overall operational life and risks thereof.
AZB House
Plot No A-7 and A-8
Sector 4
Noida
Uttar Pradesh
201301
India
+91 120 4179 999
+91 120 4179 900
delhi@azbpartners.com www.azbpartners.comIntroduction
India has experienced dynamic trends in energy and infrastructure M&A in the past decade, especially driven by a confluence of factors including technological advancements, an evolving regulatory framework, climate change and dynamic geopolitical landscapes. The heightened urgency of the climate crisis has accelerated calls to action for the energy industry to shift from traditional fossil fuel-based systems including oil, natural gas, and coal to renewable energy sources. In its commitment to achieve net zero by 2070, India is currently laying the foundations for a new energy and infrastructure system while inviting global participation. This shift has led to increased inbound M&A activity in the energy and infrastructure sectors in India. Growth in the manufacturing and automotive sectors can be largely attributed to India’s strategic initiatives to augment its manufacturing capabilities, including the “Make in India” campaign and significant liberalisation of FDI by increasing the automatic route threshold in certain sectors. India has also pledged an investment of USD5 billion in the clean energy value chain including renewable energy, green hydrogen and electric vehicle markets at the recent Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity (IPEF) Clean Economy Investor Forum meeting.
While deal-making activity dropped significantly globally in 2023 after the thriving year of 2021–22, M&A and FDI activity in India experienced merely moderate slow-down. Energy deals, as a share in the total M&A deal value, increased from 7% in 2021 to 15% in 2023 specifically focusing on green asset allocations (source: Mergermarket). The automative and manufacturing sectors had one of the highest growth rates in M&A activity amidst general market suppression, where the M&A deal value in the sector increased by 33% from 2022 to 2023 and increased 20% in deal value (source: Mergermarket). Certain factors that have propelled deal-making in the recent past include stabilisation of interest rates, growing convergence between buyer and seller pricing expectations and availability of dry powder particularly held by sovereign wealth funds, private equity (PE) and venture capital (VC) investors. These factors, coupled with India’s increasing importance in the global economy, predict a bright future for inbound M&A and PE activity in India, especially in sectors such as decarbonisation and renewables, digital transformation and technology, and real estate and infrastructure.
Recent M&A Trends
Private debt – a potential structuring option
Private debt is a relatively new trend in alternative investments and refers to the provision of debt financing to companies by a fund or entity which is not a bank and is not ordinarily in the business of capital lending. Private debt, as a financing option, expanded rapidly after the Global Financial Crisis when financial institutions pulled back from leveraged lending and concentrated their corporate operations on larger clients. The gap created in the market was filled by private debt funds.
The debt provided in such a structure is in the form of debentures which are often secured through a pledge of shares or assets of the company and/ or its promoters. The redemption premium of the debentures that are available to the lenders may be linked to identified performance indicators or targets such as achievement of financial targets by the company. The benefits of availing private debt are: (i) it provides lenders with the upside protection of equity (ie, conversion and appreciation characteristic built in the instrument) and downside protection of debt (by way of a pledge or security); and (ii) immediate availability of financial assistance to companies without any dilution, at times when retention of control may be essential.
In recent times, private debt is increasingly being resorted to as a viable structuring option by companies and is being explored by seasoned equity investors. For instance, as of December 2024, India-focused private fund assets under management are expecting an increase from USD14 billion in 2022 to nearly USD18 billion by 2024, marking a 29% increase (source: Business Standard). Thus, it may be safely assumed that arrangement of private debt for structuring a transaction will grow in India, with key focus on the security package, redemption events and interest rate available to the lender.
Infrastructure investment trusts (InvIT)
Recently, India has witnessed tremendous growth in InvITs as an investment vehicle in the infrastructure sector. While approximately 26 InvITs are registered in India with total assets under management of more than INR3.5 billion, in view of the expected decline in interest rates, introduction of tax incentives and relaxed investment regime, fund mobilisation by the InvITs looks promising (source: Economic Times).
With an increase in e-commerce, digitalisation and data localisation in India, it is expected that various warehouse and data centre InvITs may be constituted especially after the recent classification of data centres as infrastructure. Since India is witnessing diversification of the portfolio of InvITs to non-traditional asset classes, it unlocks the potential for green and sustainable urban expansion for the country.
Warranty and indemnity (W&I) insurance
Despite the market slow-down during 2023, India has witnessed investors resorting to W&I insurance to cover potential unknown risks. The success of M&A deal making backed by W&I insurance is evident from its large-scale acceptance in India. Such a transaction mechanism is advantageous in situations where: (i) the sellers are VCs or PE funds intending a clean exit post-closing; or (ii) the seller is a limited-life entity whose remaining term of existence is shorter than the potential claim period for the withholding tax risk.
The growth in the W&I insurance is likely to continue because of several factors including the growing enterprise value of deals across energy and infrastructure sectors, entry of multiple players in the underwriting space and the ability to provide W&I insurance across sectors, growing risk appetite of insurers, and increasing number of sellers being limited life funds.
JVs – corporate vehicle for exploration
As opposed to development of renewable energy projects through traditional sources such as solar and wind, the impetus on green hydrogen, green ammonia and nuclear energy has driven conventional fuel-based companies to explore the potential that these newer sources of renewable energy present. Energy companies are diversifying their energy portfolio by entering into strategic partnerships for development of green projects and electrolysers. For example:
Rise of renewable energy IPOs
For close to a decade now, renewable energy companies in India have attracted foreign PE investors, institutional investors and other global funds – either in the form of platform deals or through strategic investments. With India’s commitment towards green energy transition, the renewables industry has evolved into a high-yielding sector with long-term value trajectory reflected in relatively lower capex (especially in the solar power sector) and consistent cash flows propelled by the ever-increasing energy demands. In the Indian context where public markets have been increasingly active with public listing, the renewable energy sector, in the recent past, has witnessed a considerable rise in IPOs with attractive valuations. The current pipeline for projected IPOs includes the green energy arms of prestigious state-owned companies such as ONGC Green, NHPC Renewable Energy, NTPC Green, and SJVN Green Energy as well as SECI – all of which are estimated to raise up to USD8 billion in the next few years (source: Mergermarket). These IPOs are expected to witness significant participation from foreign institutional investors.
Continued PE confidence
India’s supportive sectoral regulatory regime and growth-focused policies and incentives have resulted in the creation of large-scale assets across the energy and infrastructure subsectors that are bankable. Despite the downturn in the global economy and the overall decline in PE/VC investments, the energy and infrastructure sectors (particularly – new and alternate energies, renewables, climate impact and roads and highways) have continued to attract large investments from PEs. For example, Highway Infrastructure Trust (a KKR-backed fund) acquired 12 road projects from PNC Infratech in one of the biggest acquisitions in the roads and highways sector. Global PE majors such as KKR, Brookfield, Blackstone and Actis have identified Indian energy and infrastructure sectors as key markets for allocation of capital in the next few years.
Change in control – structuring consideration
Infrastructure projects and utility-scale energy projects in India are developed through public private partnership mode granted through agreements known as concessions – ie, a right conceded to a private partner for provision of a public asset and service for a designated purpose over a specified period on the basis of market-determined revenue streams that allow a commercial return on investment. Typically, concession agreements contain change in control restrictions (direct or indirect) for a certain specified timeline, usually linked to commissioning or operational commencement date of the asset, across various subsectors. These restrictions either completely disallow the concessionaire (ie, the entity developing the project) from effecting any change in its majority shareholding or control, or allow it only with the prior consent of the relevant authority.
Considering the volume of energy and infrastructure M&A transactions in recent times, the change in control restrictions have been a key consideration for transaction structuring – especially for projects which are under construction. The government authorities are usually not amenable to grant their consent to transactions which effect or purport to effect a change in shareholding or control. Therefore, transactions are being structured using a combination of equity and debt instruments to remain in compliance with change in shareholding or control restrictions and to achieve the desired outcome of the transaction once these restrictions come to an end.
Increased focus on forensics and anti-bribery and corruption (ABC)
India’s energy and infrastructure sectors have attracted tremendous inbound investment in recent times from PE funds, institutional investors, multilaterals and pension funds. With the increase in M&A activity in these sectors, the sophistication of investors and their risk profiles have witnessed a marked shift. Especially in the context of foreign investors which are within the ambit of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, 1977 and the Bribery Act, 2010, the findings of the forensic and ABC diligences have emerged as one of the drivers of investment decisions. ABC risks do not necessarily relate only to the jurisdictions in which the parties to the transaction operate themselves but can lead to potential exposure in other jurisdictions. Considering the impact of ABC exposure on the valuations of a company and the return on investment, investors are increasingly focusing on the regulatory regime governing the target’s jurisdiction with respect to anti-bribery and corruption, the best practices in such jurisdiction and the powers of the law enforcement agencies in order to have a clear assessment of the risks of any potential exposure of the target.
Impact of environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors
With growing concerns over climate, sustainability, diversity, inclusion and equity forming part of shaping public policy, ESG factors are redefining the value assessment and risks in business. Investors are increasingly applying these non-financial factors to assess material risks and growth opportunities while devising their investment strategies and diversifying their portfolio.
Due to the nature of energy and infrastructure sectors where each project may have a potential impact on the environment, assessment of environmental compliance has customarily been part of the investor’s checklist. However, ESG presents a more holistic set of parameters which requires a broader understanding of the risks beyond the immediate financial or regulatory parameters.
Various countries have introduced regulations and reporting frameworks around ESG and sustainability reporting, including India. The Securities and Exchange Board of India (India’s capital markets regulator), in 2021, introduced a sustainability reporting framework called the “Business Responsibility and Sustainability Report” (BRSR). The BRSR is applicable to the top 1,000 listed companies (by market capitalisation), which are mandatorily required to report under this framework from 2022–2023 onwards.
In high-value M&As with cross-border implications, investor sensitivity towards ESG awareness in the target’s jurisdiction is gradually increasing, especially in investments from jurisdictions with some form of mandatory ESG reporting, such as the United Kingdom, the United States and the European Union.
Recent Amendments to Key Indian Legislation
In the recent past, the Indian regulatory landscape has witnessed a few crucial amendments to key legislation, which have had a direct impact on the manner of deal-making in India. Set out below are a few key areas of such amendments.
Competition laws
The antitrust laws in India underwent significant amendments during 2023. One of the key amendments was the Competition (Amendment) Act, 2023, which provides for computation of deal value threshold and that a prior approval of the Competition Commission of India (CCI) will be required to be sought in case the deal value of a proposed combination (that may otherwise not be notifiable under other provisions of the law) exceeds INR20 billion.
In 2019, the CCI introduced an automatic fast-track system for approval of business combinations through the “green channel” route. Under this route, business combinations are deemed to be approved by the CCI if they fulfil the prescribed conditions, and upon the filing of a notice in the prescribed form. If a combination meets the requirements of green channel, then the notifying parties may give effect to the combination immediately upon filing of the form and receipt of the acknowledgement from the CCI.
Data protection
Amidst increased stakeholder consultations seeking to amend the existing data protection regime in India, the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (the “DPDP Act”), was enacted in August 2023, and is yet to be enforced. The scope of the legislation has been expanded from “sensitive personal data” (as protected under the erstwhile Information Technology (Reasonable security practices and procedures and sensitive personal data or information) Rules, 2011) to “personal data”. Therefore, any data that is related to or provides any personal identification details of a person must be protected under the umbrella of the DPDP Act. The DPDP Act prescribes compliance for companies handling such data and penalties that are significantly higher, ranging up to INR2.5 billion.
Separately, the Digital India Act may be enacted to replace the Information Technology Act, 2000, to streamline the framework for technology and digitalisation regulations, addressing key concerns afflicting the current legal framework, such as misinformation and cybersecurity.
Key Government Initiatives
PLI scheme
The GoI, in order to promote domestic manufacturing in line with the vision of becoming Atmanirbhar Bharat (ie, self-reliant India), has implemented the production-linked incentive (PLI) schemes for 14 key sectors with an outlay of INR1.97 trillion. In the context of the energy and infrastructure sectors, key products include: (i) telecoms and networking products; (ii) electronic/technology products; (iii) high-efficiency solar PV modules; (iv) specialty steel; and (v) advanced chemistry cell (ACC) battery.
The PLI scheme aims to encourage foreign manufacturers to establish production facilities in India and to incentivise domestic manufacturers to enhance their production capabilities and increase exports. Under the PLI Scheme, domestic manufacturers are provided financial incentives for production and sale of their products in India.
Gati Shakti – National Master Plan
In October 2021, the Prime Minister issued the Prime Minister Gati Shakti – National Master Plan for providing multi-modal connectivity infrastructure to various economic zones. This plan aims to develop next-generation infrastructure and create a digital platform to bring together various ministries for integrated planning and co-ordinated implementation of infrastructure connectivity projects. It envisages multi-modal connectivity in order to provide integrated and seamless connectivity for movement of skilled population, goods and services from one mode of transport to another.
Bankability of Energy and Infrastructure Projects
India has been actively putting efforts towards making the energy and infrastructure projects bankable through reforms in the regulatory framework. The government of India (GoI) has made the following changes to achieve bankability in the energy and infrastructure sectors.
Renewable energy
Roads and highways
In January 2024, the GoI issued amendments to the model concession agreements for Build-Operate-Toll and Toll-Operate Transfer models of road projects. The amended agreements provide for termination payment and compensation for default payable by the National Highways Authority of India. The termination compensation is payable even prior to achieving the commercial operation date of the project if the physical construction progress of the project exceeds 40% prior to the default causing termination of the concession agreement. The termination compensation will include direct costs and loss of toll revenue prior to the commercial operation date of the project. Another significant amendment to the model concession agreements enables concessionaires to claim monetary compensation and seek extension of the concession period in case of construction of competing roads or additional tollways to the project under construction.
Conclusion
India’s focus on its green energy transition in order to achieve its COP26 (in Glasgow) targets (ie, 50% of its energy demands to be met through renewable sources by 2030) and continued focus on the infrastructure subsectors with robust underlying policies presents unique growth potential. In fact, the regulatory regime (both financial and sub-sectoral) indicates a shift towards an enabling framework that encourages investments and boosts investor confidence in the energy and infrastructure sectors. If the current trends are a marker, these sectors will continue to attract greater capital relative to other sectors in the coming years as investments will be required at a stage of the life-cycle of various projects and the value chain associated with them.
AZB House
Plot No A-7 and A-8
Sector 4
Noida
Uttar Pradesh
201301
India
+91 120 4179999
+91 120 4179900
delhi@azbpartners.com www.azbpartners.com