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

Post a Comment

Most viewed this month

Amendment of plaint under Order VI Rule 17 of the CPC explained

Cause Title :  Ganesh Prasad vs Rajeshwar Prasad, SLP (C) NO. 28377 OF 2018, Supreme Court Of India Date of Judgment/Order : 14/3/2023 Corum : J. B. Pardiwala, J. Citied:  Revajeetu Builders and Developers v. Narayanaswamy & Sons and Others reported in (2009) 10 SCC 84 North Eastern Railway Administration, Gorakhpur v. Bhagwan Das reported in (2008) 8 SCC 511 P.A. Jayalakshmi v. H. Saradha and Others reported in (2009) 14 SCC 525 B.K. Narayana Pillai v. Parameswaran Pillai and Another reported in (2000) 1 SCC 712 A.K. Gupta and Sons Ltd. v. Damodar Valley Corporation reported in AIR 1967 SC 96 Life Insurance Corporation of India v. Sanjeev Builders Private Limited and Another, Civil Appeal No. 5909 of 2022 dated 01.09.2022 Firm Sriniwas Ram Kumar v. Mahabir Prasad and Others reported in AIR 1951 SC 177 G. Nagamma and Another v. Siromanamma and Another reported in (1996) 2 SCC 25 Praful Manohar Rele v. Krishnabai Narayan Ghosalkar and Others reported in (2014...
Post a Comment
Read more

The recovery of vehicles by the financier not an offence - SC

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 8907  of 2009 Anup Sarmah (Petitioner) Vs Bhola Nath Sharma & Ors.(Respondents) The petitioner submitted that  respondents-financer had forcibly taken away the vehicle financed by them and  illegally deprived the petitioner from its lawful possession  and  thus,  committed  a crime. The complaint filed by the petitioner had been  entertained  by  the Judicial Magistrate (Ist Class), Gauhati (Assam) in Complaint Case  No.  608 of 2009, even directing the interim custody of the vehicle (Maruti  Zen)  be given to the petitioner vide order dated  17.3.2009.  The respondent on approaching the Guwahati High  Court against this order, the hon'ble court squashed the criminal  proceedings  pending   before  the  learned Magistrate. After hearing both sides, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided on 30th...
7 comments
Read more

Owner of vehicle is not expected to verify the genuineness of the driving license before appointing a driver

Cause Title : Rishi Pal Singh Versus New India Assurance Co. Ltd & Ors., Civil Appeal No. 4919 Of 2022, The Supreme Court Of India Date of Judgment/Order : July 26, 2022 Corum : Hemant Gupta; J., Vikram Nath; J. Background the truck owned by the appellant met with an accident. The owner deposed before the court that before employing the driver, he had taken his driving test and that he was driving the vehicle satisfactorily and  that the driver was employed with him for 3 years before the date of the accident. He produced his driving license. This was reaffirmed by the driver who deposed that the driving license was obtained from the driver and it was issued from Nagaland, but no such license was produced on record. Both the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and the High Court have held that the owner has alleged that the driver had a driving license from Nagaland but the same was not produced and therefore, the Insurance Company is entitled to recover the awarded amount...
Post a Comment
Read more