Skip to main content

One Documentary Proof of Address - RBI further simplifies KYC Norms for Bank Accounts

RBI/2013-14/634
DBOD.AML.BC. No. 119/14.01.001/2013-14

June 9, 2014

The Chairperson/CEOs of all Scheduled Commercial Banks (Excluding RRBs)/
Local Area Banks / All India Financial Institutions

Dear Sir/ Madam,

Know Your Customer (KYC) Norms/Anti-Money Laundering (AML) Standards/ Combating of Financing of Terrorism (CFT) /Obligation of banks under Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002 – Clarification on Proof of Address

Please refer to paragraph 2.4 (h), (i), (j) (l), (m) and Annex I of Reserve Bank’s Master Circular on Know Your Customer (KYC) Norms/Anti-Money Laundering (AML) Standards/Combating of Financing of Terrorism (CFT)/Obligations under Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002, issued vide DBOD. AML. BC. No. 24/14.01.001/2013-14 dated July 1, 2013, regarding requirement of ‘proof of address’ while opening a bank account by individuals.
2. Reserve Bank has been receiving representations/references from various quarters’ especially migrant workers, transferred employees, etc. regarding problems faced in submitting a proof of current/permanent address while opening a bank account. The matter has since been examined in the light of amendment to the Prevention of Money Laundering Rules (Maintenance of Records), 2005, and accordingly it has been decided to simplify the requirement of submission of ‘proof of address’ as follows:
Henceforth, customers may submit only one documentary proof of address (either current or permanent) while opening a bank account or while undergoing periodic updation. In case the address mentioned as per ‘proof of address’ undergoes a change, fresh proof of address may be submitted to the branch within a period of six months.
In case the proof of address furnished by the customer is not the local address or address where the customer is currently residing, the bank may take a declaration of the local address on which all correspondence will be made by the bank with the customer. No proof is required to be submitted for such address for correspondence/local address. This address may be verified by the bank through ‘positive confirmation’ such as acknowledgment of receipt of (i) letter, cheque books, ATM cards; (ii) telephonic conversation; (iii) visits; etc. In the event of change in this address due to relocation or any other reason, customers may intimate the new address for correspondence to the bank within two weeks of such a change.
3. Banks may revise their KYC policy in the light of the above instructions and ensure strict adherence to the same.
4. Please advise your Principal Officer to acknowledge receipt of this circular letter.

Yours faithfully
(Lily Vadera)
Chief General Manager

Comments

Most viewed this month

Deposit Of Minimum 20% Fine/Compensation U/s 148 NI Act Mandatory

In OP(Crl.).No.348 OF 2019, T.K.SAJEEVAN vs FRANCIS T.CHACKO, the appeal was filed against the order of the lower court to deposit 25% of the fine before filling of appeal. The appellant argued that the deposit introduced through the Section 148 of the NI Act after amendment was directory in nature as it used the term 'may' while mentioning the issue of deposit. The Kerala High Court however disagreeing held that in view of the object of the Legislature while incorporating Section 148 into N.I. Act, the word 'may' will have to be read as 'shall'. The imposition of payment contemplated under Section 148 N.I. Act cannot be restricted to some prosecutions and evaded in other prosecutions. Since the amount directed to be deposited being compensation, undoubtedly, it is liable to be ordered to be deposited irrespective of the nature of the prosecution. Therefore, the word 'may' can only be taken to have the colour and meaning of 'shall' and there

NCLT - Mere admission of receipt of money does not qualify as a financial debt

Cause Title : Meghna Devang Juthani Vs Ambe Securities Private Limited, National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai, CP (IB) No. 974/MB-VI/2020 Date of Judgment/Order : 18.12.2023 Corum : Hon’ble Shri K. R. Saji Kumar, Member (Judicial) Hon’ble Shri Sanjiv Dutt, Member (Technical) Citied:  Carnoustie Management India Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CBS International Projects Private Limited, NCLT Swiss Ribbons Pvt. Ltd. & Anr vs. Union of India & Ors. (2019) Sanjay Kewalramani vs Sunil Parmanand Kewalramani & Ors. (2018) Pawan Kumar vs. Utsav Securities Pvt Ltd 2021 Background Application was filed under section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 alleging loan of Rs, 1.70 cr is due. The Applicate identified herself as the widow and heir of the lender but could not produce any documents proving financial contract between her Late husband and the CD but claimed that the CD has accepted that money was received from her husband. The applicant subsequently filed rejoinder claiming the debt t

Jurisdiction of consumer forum is not ousted even if the other party has filed suit on the same matter in Civil Court

In Yashwant Rama Jadhav v. Shaukat Hussain Shaikh, First Appeal No. 1229 of 2017, decided on 18.11.2017,  the grievance of the petitioner before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission was that appellants/complainants had entered into agreements with the respondents for purchase of residential flats, which the respondents were to construct and despite paying the substantial amount to the respondents, the construction of the flats had not been completed. The State Commission dismissed the complaints and ruled in favor of respondents against which the appellants approached the National Commission. The NCDRC held that Section ‘3’ of the Consumer Protection Act, to the extent it is relevant provides that the provisions of the Act shall be in addition and not in derogation of the provisions of any other law for the time being in force. Thus the remedy available under the Consumer Protection Act is an additional remedy, which Parliament has made available to a consumer. Even