US President Trump hails trade deal with India as 'historic'

US President Trump hails trade deal with India as 'historic'


US President Donald Trump
| Photo Credit:
REUTERS

US President Donald Trump has hailed the trade deal with India as “historic” and said America will increase its coal exports dramatically to the country and to others with which it has trade agreements.

“And under our leadership, we’re becoming a massive energy exporter. In just the past few months, we’ve made historic trade deals with Japan, Korea, India and others to increase our coal exports dramatically,” Trump said Wednesday during an event titled ‘Champion of Coal’.

“We’re now exporting coal all over the world, and the quality of our coal is supposed to be…the finest anywhere in the world,” he said.

Last week, the US and India announced they have reached a framework for an interim agreement on trade, under which New Delhi will eliminate or reduce tariffs on all American industrial goods, a wide range of food and agricultural products, as well as purchase $500 billion of US products over the next five years.

A joint statement issued by the two countries on Friday said they have reached a framework “regarding reciprocal and mutually beneficial trade.” It said that India “intends to purchase $500 billion of US energy products, aircraft and aircraft parts, precious metals, technology products, and coking coal over the next five years.” It added that the framework reaffirms the countries’ commitment to the broader US-India Bilateral Trade Agreement (BTA) negotiations, launched by President Trump and Prime Minister Narendra Modi on February 13, 2025, which will include additional market access commitments and support more resilient supply chains.

Published on February 12, 2026



Source link

Vedanta moves Madras HC as TNPCB rejects its ‘Green Copper’ proposal at Thoothukudi Sterlite plant

Vedanta moves Madras HC as TNPCB rejects its ‘Green Copper’ proposal at Thoothukudi Sterlite plant


Vedanta submitted an application to the TNPCB on January 9, seeking the CTO, but the board rejected it on January 27

The Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board (TNPCB) has refused to issue a ‘consent to operate’ (CTO) to multinational business conglomerate Vedanta Ltd for establishing a ‘green copper’ plant on the Thoothukudi Sterlite plant premises, which has remained non-functional since 2018. The company has, therefore, approached the Madras High Court with a plea to quash the rejection order.

Chief Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava and Justice G Arul Murugan on Wednesday (February 11, 2026) directed Additional Advocate General (AAG) J Ravindran to get instructions by February 26 regarding the constitution of an expert committee to study the possibility of permitting the ‘green copper’ facility. Vedanta submitted an application to the TNPCB on January 9, seeking the CTO, but the board rejected it on January 27.

Assailing the rejection order, senior counsel Satish Parasaran, assisted by Rahul Balaji, contended that the application had been rejected in an arbitrary manner without providing advance notice or an opportunity for hearing to his client. “This reflects a pre-determined and prejudicial approach towards the petitioner and therefore, the rejection order is ex-facie arbitrary, illegal, and untenable,” he argued.

In order to ensure a fair and impartial adjudication of Vedanta’s applications/proposal for establishing the ‘green copper’ facility, the counsel urged the Bench to order the constitution of a court-monitored multidisciplinary expert committee, comprising representatives of the State government as well as the Centre, along with independent experts in relevant fields, to examine the proposal independently, comprehensively, and scientifically.

Until the disposal of its main writ petition, Vedanta also sought an interim direction to the TNPCB to permit the petitioner to have limited and conditional access to the Sterlite Copper facility in Thoothukudi so that it could carry out preparatory and operational activities for the scientific assessment. The interim activities could also be supervised, monitored, and controlled by a court-appointed committee, it said.

On the other hand, opposing the writ petition filed by Vedanta, the AAG said: “They are trying to pour old wine into a new bottle and call it green copper.” He said, the company ought to have gone on statutory appeal against the board’s order instead of filing a writ petition. He also stated that protection of environment was more important than the economic aspects, which the company was stressing upon.

However, Parasaran said only a committee comprising experts from the Union Ministry of Environment and Forests, the Central Pollution Control Board, and other such bodies would be able to give independent thought to the proposal. “If the experts say that the industry should perish, let it perish. But if they say it can be revived, let it be revived. Let the TNPCB not approach the issue with a stone wall,” he added.

Vedanta’s affidavit

In its affidavit, Vedanta contended that the TNPCB’s rejection order does not reflect any genuine statutory evaluation of the ‘green copper’ proposal, but rests on a fundamentally “flawed” premise that past regulatory actions and earlier judicial proceedings operate as an erroneous assumption that past operations foreclose even the consideration of a re-engineered and environmentally superior facility.

The company claimed that the TNPCB had failed to take note the critical national as well as global demand for copper, its status as a strategic resource, and the growing trend of resource nationalism. It said, the green copper’ facility would help augment domestic copper production, while prioritising sustainability since the eco-friendly process would be distinct from previous copper-smelting processes.

Vedanta also pointed out that it had filed a writ petition in January this year seeking a direction to the State government to consider its ‘green copper’ proposal, which would utilise an environmentally superior process designed to be an exemplar of sustainable and responsible industry. While passing interim orders in that petition, the court had permitted the company to submit applications to statutory authorities.

Therefore, Vedanta had applied to the TNPCB for the issuance of a CTO on January 9 but it was rejected on January 27, forcing the group to file a fresh writ petition challenging the rejection order.

What is ‘green copper’?

Explaining the benefits of ‘green copper,’ the company told the court that the term refers to copper produced with a significantly lower carbon footprint in comparison with conventional smelting processes. The reduction would be achieved by maximising the use of recycled copper as input. “Using recycled copper minimises the need for copper concentrate processing, which was the primary source of slag generation in smelting operation,” it said.

Apart from the projected reduction of 15 per cent in slag generation, approximately 40 per cent of reduction was expected in hazardous waste generation, too. Through the utilisation of 30 per cent recycled input, the proposed green copper plant was projected to achieve 34 per cent reduction in carbon footprint because less fossil fuel would be consumed in the energy-intensive smelting and converting processes, Vedanta claimed.

“Furthermore, round-the-clock renewable energy will be utilised for hybrid operations. The suspension of the phosphoric acid plant and adoption of advanced air and water management technologies will further minimise environmental impact and enable the company to produce copper cathode with less than 0.9 kg of CO₂ emissions per kg of copper, i.e., about 50 per cent less than the global average,” its affidavit read.

Published on February 11, 2026



Source link

Despite big start-up push, J&K funds only 18 ventures in three years

Despite big start-up push, J&K funds only 18 ventures in three years


No units were established under other central and Union Territory schemes such as the Youth Start-Up Loan Scheme (YSSL), Seed Capital Fund Scheme (SCFS), and the National Minorities Development and Finance Corporation (NMDFC) in Jammu and Kashmir during the last three years
| Photo Credit:
Getty Images

 

Srinagar  

The Jammu and Kashmir government has said only 18 start-ups have received seed capital support in the Union Territory over the past three financial years, with funding released only in the current fiscal under the Jammu and Kashmir Entrepreneurship Development Institute (JKEDI).

The government on Tuesday informed the Legislative Assembly said that no seed capital was provided to start-ups in 2023–24 and 2024–25 under JKEDI or any other government-supported mechanism. Funding was released only in 2025–26, when ₹3.6 crore was sanctioned in favour of 18 start-ups, at ₹20 lakh per start-up.

The total seed capital released during the period stands at ₹9 crore, calculated at ₹5 lakh per start-up, the government said in reply to a un-starred question by MLA Shabir Ahmad Kullay, adding that all 18 start-ups were funded in the current financial year. Officials said the sanctioned assistance was aimed at early-stage ventures with scalable business models, though details of sector-wise distribution were not shared.

The government also informed the House that no units were established under other central and Union Territory schemes such as the Youth Start-Up Loan Scheme (YSSL), Seed Capital Fund Scheme (SCFS), and the National Minorities Development and Finance Corporation (NMDFC) in Jammu and Kashmir during the last three years.

The disclosure comes at a time when the administration has been projecting entrepreneurship and start-ups as key drivers of employment generation in the Union Territory. 

Significant gap

However, the figures highlight a significant gap between policy intent and on-ground implementation, particularly in terms of financial support to new ventures.

Start-up founders and industry observers have repeatedly flagged delays in funding, procedural bottlenecks, and limited outreach of existing schemes as major hurdles for aspiring entrepreneurs in the region.

The government, however, maintains that efforts are underway to strengthen the start-up ecosystem and expand institutional support in the coming years.

Officials said the administration was reviewing existing startup schemes to streamline approval processes and improve disbursal timelines. 

“Steps were being taken  to improve coordination between financial institutions and implementing agencies to ensure wider coverage and more effective support for early-stage entrepreneurs in the region”, said the officials. 

Published on February 11, 2026



Source link

SBI’s market cap surges past TCS; becomes fourth most valuable company

SBI’s market cap surges past TCS; becomes fourth most valuable company


Over a one-year period SBI’s shares have appreciated 61.6 cent and over a five-year time frame, were up over 3 times, compared to Nifty50’s 71 per cent returns. 

Government-owned lender State Bank of India (SBI) became the country’s fourth most valuable company, its market capitalisation surpassing that of Tata Consultancy Services, and hitting ₹10.9 lakh crore.

The shares of the bank rose 3.2 per cent on Wednesday with over 2.9 crore shares being traded.

Its market cap has been steadily rising and in the current fiscal so far has increased 58 per cent. Over the same period TCS’ market cap has fallen 17.8 per cent to ₹10.5 lakh crore.

One-year gains

Over a one-year period SBI’s shares have appreciated 61.6 cent and over a five-year time frame, were up over 3 times, compared to Nifty50’s 71 per cent returns.

The stock has got a boost from its strong quarterly performance, reporting a 24 per cent rise in net profit led by good loan growth, while its asset quality has remained stable.

Its gross advances rose 15 per cent and it expects to end the year with 14-15 per cent growth in credit. Slippages during the quarter were lower compared to the second quarter while recoveries were better.

In contrast, TCS has been an underperformer and over a one-year time period has fallen 26.6 per cent.

Slower deal-making in the US, the largest market for Indian IT companies, has had an impact on its performance and this has been an overhang on the company for several quarters now.

Mega deals are now fewer than they were before and revenue visibility is still dependent on the US; headwinds such as restrictions on H1b visas, are still playing out. Client spends are still tightly controlled and the company has now pivoted to shorter-cycle, AI-led work to boost revenue.

The most valuable company are Reliance Industries, followed by HDFC Bank and Bharti Airtel.

Published on February 11, 2026



Source link

Legacy created over last six years will be carried forward by successor: Yes Bank CEO

Legacy created over last six years will be carried forward by successor: Yes Bank CEO


The six years of legacy created after the reconstruction of Yes Bank in 2020 will be carried forward by Vinay Tonse, who is set to take over as the private lender’s MD and CEO in April. The bank’s current chief Prashant Kumar shared how the bank was brought back from the brink in 2020, his guidance for his successor and the retail segment’s profitability.

What are your next plans after the tenure ends as Yes Bank chief in April?

Change is the only constant. I never plan for the future. If anything comes at a later point, we will see it then. I have completed 42 years as a banker with SBI and Yes Bank. It is a very long time. I would live a happy retired life

What would be your guidance to your successor?

I feel very happy that I am passing on the baton to a very competent person who has vast experience at SBI. And it gives me lot of comfort that the legacy created over last six years will be carried forward. No one should give strategic business guidance to anyone. Every leader needs to have the freedom to chart down the bank’s future trajectory. From a risk-taking perspective, the banking sector has shown that organisations that have patience and don’t take aggressive bets move in the positive direction. Our performance has shown consistent improvement each quarter. And people who take certain aggressive calls, I am not naming any banks, but there are lenders who in the past posted double our profits, but today, they post only 40-50 per cent of our profits. You are dealing with public money and must not take undue, aggressive risk. Also, while managing multiple stakeholders, being honest, transparent and clear is the right way, and with Vinay’s term at SBI, this would never be an issue.

You led Yes Bank after the RBI notified the bank’s reconstruction scheme in 2020. How have things changed since then when depositors were panicking and withdrawing funds en masse?

When I joined six years ago, we declared the results for December quarter in 2019. We reported a loss of over ₹18,000 crore, which I think was the highest loss for any bank. That only shows the size of problem. In the December 2025 quarter, exactly six years since then, the bank showed a profit of almost ₹1,000 crore, which is very near to 1 per cent RoA. At that point of time, deposits stood at around ₹1 lakh crore, now the base stands at ₹3 lakh crore, almost three times growth. Gross NPA ratio at that point was 18 per cent, now it is at 1.5 per cent. Capital adequacy ratio was then less than 1 per cent, now it is around 13 per cent. It was very difficult back then to assess how to resolve such a large problem as there was no particular format. This was the first-of-its-kind experiment, and we have been able to revive the bank as independent entity without merging it with other lender. SBI and other banks that supported us got good investment returns, and as we brought in world’s 10th largest lender SMBC as a major investor, it showed the confidence in franchise that has been created in the last six years.

Retail segment profitability has been a pain point, though…

When we started a new journey after reconstruction, the retail segment was contributing very little to the bank’s overall business and profitability. So, we had to first make substantial investments to build retail book and only then returns follow. As a strategy, we had no choice but to grow retail book as all banks do. We invested in new branches, hiring people and building tech. We were moving in right decision, but in FY24, the entire industry suffered an adverse credit cycle, with higher slippages in unsecured loan segments.

If anyone compares us with a matured bank with more income streams, established large retail businesses, then maybe they won’t see a decline in profitability, but since we were in the phase of building the retail book as this credit cycle came quite early in that phase of investment, that is the only reason why retail wasn’t showing profits. If you exclude credit cost, retail was always profitable for the bank from operating part. Today, retail book has broken even. People can appreciate or criticise things, but if you do it without perspective, then you may arrive at a wrong inference.



Source link

Mis-selling: Banks to refund, compensate customers, says RBI

Mis-selling: Banks to refund, compensate customers, says RBI


Banks can neither resort to dark patterns such as fake countdown timers to force quick decisions nor include additional items such as products/services, payments to charity or donation at the time of checkout from a platform, without the consent of the user
| Photo Credit:

The RBI on Wednesday issued comprehensive draft instructions on advertising, marketing and sales of financial products and services for banks to prevent mis-selling and compulsory bundling of financial products. Further, to ensure customers understood the financial product they bought, banks will have to seek customer feedback within 30 days of sale, per the Draft Reserve Bank of India (Commercial Banks – Responsible Business Conduct) Amendment Directions, 2026, which will come into effect on July 1.

If mis-selling is established, banks have to refund the entire amount paid by the customer for purchase of the product/service. They have to also compensate customers for any loss arising due to mis-selling. Before a financial product/service is marketed/sold to a particular customer, its suitability and appropriateness for the customer should be determined by the bank.

This will be based on an analysis of the features, risk-return attributes, time horizon, complexity, fee structure vis-à-vis the customer’s age, income, level of financial literacy and risk tolerance. Banks have to ensure that their policies and practices neither create incentives for mis-selling nor encourage employees / DSAs (Direct Selling Agents) to push the sale of products / services.

Also, banks can neither resort to dark patterns such as fake countdown timers to force quick decisions nor include additional items such as products/services, payments to charity or donation at the time of checkout from a platform, without the consent of the user.

Banks have been made accountable for third parties they engage with. For the benefit of customers, any agent of the bank, or representative of a third party, who is present within the bank’s premises for the sale of the bank’s own or third-party product/service, should be distinguishable from the employees of the bank, including clear on person identification.

code of conduct

A bank, based on the instructions mentioned in these Directions, shall put in place a code of conduct for marketing and sales of financial products/services, which shall be applicable to the bank’s own employees as well as DSAs / DMAs (direct marketing agents).

Meanwhile, the central bank said a bank can only deal with regulated financial products and services in which a bank is permitted to deal with. A bank may, at its option, act as an insurance broker departmentally, subject to the conditions. per Draft Reserve Bank of India (Commercial Banks – Undertaking of Financial Services) Amendment Directions, 2026, which will come into effect from April 1.

Banks may undertake agency business on fee basis without any risk participation. This shall be explicitly disclosed upfront to the customers. They have to ensure that the third-party product and service providers (TPPSP), whose products are being sold, have robust customer grievance redressal arrangements in place. The bank may facilitate the redressal of grievances.

Banks may refer their customers to a TPPSP only for regulated financial products and services (except insurance) subject to the conditions.

They may collect only a one-time fee from the TPPSP at the point of referring its customers. No other stream of income/ fee, or commission in any form should be collected by the bank under the referral arrangement.

Published on February 11, 2026



Source link

YouTube
Instagram
WhatsApp