ASSIGNMENT

ON
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE RATING

BUSINESS ETHICS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

Submitted to
Ms. Drashti Shah

MBA – SEM IV Class: S1

Submitted by
Group No – 7th
Enrollment No. Name
128050592011 Bharuchi Anas W.
128050592025 Elavia Binaifer H.
128050592037 Jain Anchal N.
128050592056 Malek Faisal H.
128050592058 Modi Binav R.
128050592064 Narmawala Tausif I.

S.R. LUTHRA INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT

M.T.B COLLEGE CAMPUS,
ATHWALINES, SURAT
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Sr. Page
Particulars
No. No.

1 CORPORATE GOVERNANCE 1

2
2 CORPORATE GOVERNANCE RATING

FEATURES OF CORPORATE GOVERNANCE RATING

3 3
(CGR)

4 IMPORTANCE OF CGR 3

5 LINKAGE OF CGRs WITH CREDIT RATINGS 4

6 WHAT CGR IS NOT? 4

7 CORPORATE GOVERNANCE RATING IN INDIA 4

8 ICRA’S CORPORATE GOVERNANCE RATING (CGR) 5

9 CRISIL GOVERNANCE AND VALUE CREATION (GVC) 12

 BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

 The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)

has defined Corporate Governance as the system by which business
corporations are directed and controlled. The corporate governance
structure specifies the distribution of rights and responsibilities among
different participants in the corporation, such as, the Board, managers,
shareholders and other stakeholders, and spells out the rules and
procedures for making decisions on corporate affairs. By doing this, it also
provides a mechanism through which the company objectives are set, the
means of attaining those objectives defined, and the process of
monitoring performance delineated.

 There has been renewed interest in the corporate governance practices of

modern corporations, particularly in relation to accountability, since the
high-profile collapses of a number of large corporations during 2001–
2002, most of which involved accounting fraud.

 Corporate scandals of various forms have maintained public and political

interest in the regulation of corporate governance. In the U.S., these
include Enron Corporation and MCI Inc. (formerly WorldCom).

 Their demise is associated with the U.S. federal government passing the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act in 2002, intending to restore public confidence in
corporate governance. Comparable failures in Australia (HIH, One.Tel)
are associated with the eventual passage of the CLERP 9 reforms.
Similar corporate failures in other countries stimulated increased
regulatory interest (e.g., Parmalat in Italy).

 Most companies strive to have a high level of corporate governance.

These days, it is not enough for a company to merely be profitable; it also
needs to demonstrate good corporate citizenship through environmental
awareness, ethical behavior and sound corporate governance practices.

1
2. CORPORATE GOVERNANCE RATING
 Corporate Governance Rating is an independent rating agency`s opinion
with regard to the existing company`s corporate governance system, its
compliance with the interests of financially interested parties.

 In simple words, corporate governance rating means to evaluate the

quality of CG in an organization. The quality is measured on the basis of
certain parameters of CG and for the each parameter points are awarded
to the given organization.

 CG Ratings are based on - Organisation for Economic Co-operation and

Development (OECD) principles of CG

 Rights and equitable treatment of shareholders: Organizations

should respect the rights of shareholders and help shareholders to
exercise those rights. They can help shareholders exercise their rights
by openly and effectively communicating information and by
encouraging shareholders to participate in general meetings.

 Interests of other stakeholders: Organizations should recognize that

they have legal, contractual, social, and market driven obligations to
non-shareholder stakeholders, including employees, investors,
creditors, suppliers, local communities, customers, and policy makers.

 Role and responsibilities of the board: The board needs sufficient

relevant skills and understanding to review and challenge management
performance. It also needs adequate size and appropriate levels of
independence and commitment.

 Integrity and ethical behavior: Integrity should be a fundamental

requirement in choosing corporate officers and board members.
Organizations should develop a code of conduct for their directors and
executives that promotes ethical and responsible decision making.

2
  Disclosure and transparency: Organizations should clarify and make
publicly known the roles and responsibilities of board and management
to provide stakeholders with a level of accountability. They should also
implement procedures to independently verify and safeguard the
integrity of the company's financial reporting. Disclosure of material
matters concerning the organization should be timely and balanced to
ensure that all investors have access to clear, factual information.

3. FEATURES OF CORPORATE GOVERNANCE RATING

(CGR)

 It is mandate driven, not unsolicited

 It is public rating-disclosed only on acceptance
 Confidential rating – Company may accept and disclose only to select
entities
 It is accepted ratings subject to regular surveillance
 It has exist option with a notice of 1 year

4. IMPORTANCE OF CGR

 CGR assists corporate to develop a credible opinion on its management

quality and responsiveness towards the interests of all its financial
stakeholders.
 Improved perception of investors may in turn influence its valuation and
facilitate rising of funds at favorable terms.
 Though CGR is not an indicator of statutory compliance, a higher CGR
rating may also improve the comfort level of the statutory authorities and
regulators.
 It can also be used as a check to determine the relative standing of the
company with respect to the benchmarks of best corporate practices in
the industry.

3
5. LINKAGE OF CGRs WITH CREDIT RATINGS

CGR has some relationship but no direct linkage with credit rating.

 Credit rating is measured of credit risk. Determinants are business outlook,

competitive position, operational efficiencies and financial position.
 CGR is an assessment of management conduct, its fairness and
transparency.
Thus, a high corporate governance rating does not necessarily imply high
credit rating, though companies with high credit ratings are generally expected
to have acceptable level of corporate governance.

6. WHAT CGR IS NOT?

CGR can affect the attractiveness of a company to potential investors (debt or

equity), but CGR is not the following:-

1. CGR is not intended to be an opinion on:

 Specific financial obligation
 Capital market valuation
 Future business outlook.
 Business competitiveness
 Operational performance

2. CGR is not an audit

3. CGR is not be interpreted as an indicator as an indicator of statutory
compliance

7. CORPORATE GOVERNANCE RATING IN INDIA

 The Department Of Company Affairs has set up an institute to rate

corporate excellence similar to credit rating agencies such as CRISIL.
This institute will undertake research in the area of corporate governance
to be able to improve the overall legal frame work and to advise
companies and directors on how they can take corporate excellence

4
 forward. Individual corporate excellence ratings will be made available to
investors, lenders and the public. The institute will be funded from the
penalties paid by companies for violating the provisions of the Companies
Act.

 The Securities and Exchange board of India (SEBI) has sought the
services of two of the leading credit rating agencies in the country –
Credit Rating Information Services of India Ltd. (CRISIL) and Investment
Information and Credit Rating Agency (ICRA) to prepare a
comprehensive instrument for rating the good corporate governance
practices of listed companies.

 Besides these two, there are two other credit rating agencies (CRA’s).
These are CARE and FITCH India. According to former SEBI chairman,
Mr. G.N. Bajpai, CRA’s would enable the securities market regulator
judge the compliance status of corporates on parameters such as
effective creation, management and distribution of investor’s wealth.
CRA’s are normally expected to carry out periodic reviews of the ratings
given.

8. ICRA’S CORPORATE GOVERNANCE RATING (CGR)

ICRA’s framework is designed to analyze the following key variables while
arriving at the CGR for a corporate entity:

i. Ownership Structure
ii. Governance Structure and Management Processes
iii. Board Structure and Processes
iv. Stakeholder Relationship
v. Transparency and Disclosures
vi. Financial Discipline
vii. Ethical Practices

The following paragraphs highlight the key issues that are analyzed for each
of the variables.

5
 i. OWNERSHIP STRUCTURE

The key issues analyzed are:

 Extent to which dominant shareholders are easily identifiable

 Extent of cross-holdings that may compromise minority interest
 Extent of shareholding by promoter group
 Extent of institutional shareholding
 Pattern of retail shareholding
A transparent ownership structure where the key shareholders are easily
identifiable and the absence of opaque cross-holdings are positives from
ICRA’s CGR perspective.

ii. GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE AND MANAGEMENT PROCESSES

The focus of ICRA’s analysis here is on the decision -making process

followed within the company being rated, and the quality and nature of
information that is presented to its Board. ICRA believes that for a company to
be able to respond swiftly to changes in today’s dynamic business
environment, line managers led by the Chief Executive Officer must be given
enough powers to take decisions in the most appropriate manner. However, it
needs to be ensured that the powers are exercised in accordance with
established procedures and that they are in harmony with the broad policy
guidelines and strategic objectives formulated by the Board.

Accordingly, the key issues analyzed are:

 Extent to which clearly-defined Governance arrangements are present
and followed
 Appropriateness of the decision-making process
 Quality of information submitted to the Board

iii. BOARD STRUCTURE AND PROCESSES

The key Board functions of any organisation may be summed up as follows:

• Approving, monitoring and reviewing the strategy proposed by the executive

management

6
• Evaluating the performance of the top management
• Ensuring compliance with legal and statutory requirements (that is, the
“control” function of the Board)
• Balancing the rights and concerns of shareholders and other stakeholders

ICRA’s CGR process evaluates the Board Structure and Processes in relation
to the following:

 Structural Aspects
 Size of the Board
 Proportion of “Independent” Directors
 Other Directorships held by the Independent Director(s)
 The mix of skill sets which the “Independent” Directors bring to the
Board
 Effectiveness of the Board
 Frequency of Board meetings
 Attendance track record of Directors
 Quality of agenda papers and extent to which they are circulated in
advance
 Quality of presentations made to the Board
 Board’s role in approving strategy proposed by the executive
management
 Deliberations related to major investments, capital expenditure, and
related party transactions
 Board’s role in determining executive compensation
 Functioning of Board Committees
 Composition of the Audit Committee
 Background, expertise, experience and independence of its
members
 Deliberations at Audit Committee meetings with respect to:
 Compliance with Accounting Standards
 Qualifications in published accounts
 Major issues involving the financial reporting process, systems
and control, and internal audit coverage

7
 Audit Committee’s role in the appointment of statutory auditors, and its
policy on rotation of lead partners and on “non-Audit” services provided by
the auditors

Internal Auditors and Audit Committees are mutually supportive; it is

essential for the Audit Committee to consider the work of internal auditors
so as to gain an understanding of the organisation’s risk management
processes and control systems, and of the areas that need strengthening.
Thus, ICRA’s assessment covers, among others:
 Strength and quality of the Internal Audit team
 Internal Audit coverage plan
 Extent of Internal Audit’s interaction with the Audit Committee
 Management’s responsiveness to issues highlighted by Internal Audit

iv. STAKEHOLDER RELATIONSHIP

An organisation’s shareholders are its owners, and their basic rights include:
the right to have their shares transferred and registered smoothly; the right to
access timely information; the right to participate in, and vote at, shareholders’
meetings; the right to elect members on the Board; and the right to share the
organisation’s profits through dividends. Shareholders also have a say on
issues such as amendments to the organisation’s Memorandum and Articles
of Association, reduction or augmentation of share capital, and
sale/lease/disposal of any undertaking. Most importantly, all shareholders
need to be treated equitably. Also, an organisation must have appropriate
systems in place to enable its shareholders participate effectively in
shareholders’ meetings and cast their votes.

The emphasis of ICRA’s analysis is on evaluating the extent to which a

company goes beyond what is mandatory under law to serve the rights and
interests of its shareholders. The issues analysed include:
 Conduct of Annual/Extraordinary General Meetings (AGMs/EGMs) and
the extent of disclosures at such meetings

8
  Procedures for transfer and registration of shares and payment of
dividend
 Company’s responsiveness to investor complaints
 Timeliness of release of any market sensitive information
 History of penalties levied by regulators for violations of statutory
provisions, if any

Moreover, ICRA evaluates the functioning of the company’s in-house Investor

Services Centre or the Share Register & Transfer Agent, as the case may be.
Besides, ICRA also evaluates the track record of the company in servicing
other financial stakeholders like banks, financial institutions and fixed deposit
holders.

v. TRANSPARENCY AND DISCLOSURES

Listed companies have to meet several statutory requirements on disclosures,

financial results, and information that must be part of their published accounts.
However, with the depth of the capital markets increasing and institutional
activity in the markets picking up, organizations are making voluntary
disclosures that go beyond the minimum disclosure requirements.
Shareholders and potential investors require access to regular, reliable and
comparable information in sufficient detail to assess the quality of the
management, the organisation’s growth prospects, and the associated risk
factors. At the same time, organizations are not expected to disclose
information that may endanger their competitive position. In ICRA’s opinion,
the information disclosed by organizations should be material and must shed
light on their plans/expectations as well the foreseeable risks.

The key parameters used to assess a company’s transparency and disclosure

standards are:
 Accounting quality, including compliance with accepted accounting
standards and comparison with industry best practices
 Changes in accounting policies
 Notes to accounts of a materially significant nature

9
 Quality and level of detail in accounts, especially with respect to item
likes Loans and Advances, Inter-Corporate Advances and Contingent
Liabilities
 Disclosures on transactions with subsidiaries, associates and other
related parties
 Additional information to shareholders
 Quality of disclosures in Management Discussion and Analysis (MDA)

While assessing the MDA and Directors’ report, ICRA evaluates the extent to
which information is available on areas like:
 Competitive position of the company’s product portfolio and trends in
the same
 Key drivers of the company’s operating performance, including
sustainability of margins
 The rate and success of product innovations
 Risk factors that could have a bearing on the prospects of each
business line

The trends in share price movements around major corporate announcements

are also looked at to evaluate whether price sensitive information is
disseminated in a timely manner to all stakeholders.

vi. FINANCIAL DISCIPLINE

The ultimate objective of Corporate Governance is to create and maximise

shareholder value. While the actual shareholder value generated by a
company may be dependent on a number of factors that are beyond the
control of its management, ICRA believes that maintenance of a certain level
of discipline in the conduct of business operations also has an important role
to play. ICRA’s analysis therefore focuses on factors that are within the
company’s control, and which, in ICRA’s opinion, impact the shareholder
value that a company is able to generate in the long run. Such factors include:
 Business segments in which the company operates
 Rationale for presence in multiple businesses, if any

10
 Return on capital employed in each business compared with the industry
average
 History of equity dilution
 Extent of reliance on debt funding
 Dividend policy
 Number of subsidiaries/associates and rationale for the same
 Nature of transactions with subsidiaries

It must be emphasized that ICRA does not view a company’s presence in

multiple businesses or the existence of subsidiaries/associates as a negative
factor per se. ICRA only tries to evaluate the rationale for the same and
determine whether the parent holds its subsidiaries/associates at “arm’s-
length” in its transactions with them and whether the business decisions are
based on commercial prudence.

vii. ETHICAL PRACTICES

Corporate Governance, ultimately, is about promoting corporate fairness and

transparency. Therefore, a cornerstone of Corporate Governance is a
company’s commitment to maintain the highest standards of ethical practices
in all its transactions. ICRA’s analysis thus covers:

 Comprehensiveness of code of ethics and integrity

 Steps taken to effectively communicate the principles of corporate
ethics
 Extent to which compliance with the codes and guidelines is monitored
 Extent to which feedback systems have been established to
encourage whistle-blowing.

ICRA’s CORPORATE GOVERNANCE RATING SCALE

i) CGR1 - Highest Level of Corporate Governance

ii) CGR2 - Highest Level of Corporate Governance, but not as high as
in CGR1
iii) CGR3 - Adequate level of Corporate Governance

11
 iv) CGR4 - Moderate Level of Corporate Governance
v) CGR5 - Inadequate level of Corporate Governance
vi) CGR6 - Poor Level of Corporate Governance

ICRA’s CGR IN CORPORATE AND BANKS

i) Bank of Baroda – CGR2

ii) Infosys Technologies Limited – CGR2
iii) Wipro Limited – SVG1
iv) ITC Limited – CGR2
v) Godrej Consumer Products Limited – CGR2+ & SVG2
vi) PNB Gifts Limited – CGR3+

9. CRISIL GOVERNANCE AND VALUE CREATION (GVC)

CRISIL has taken the initiative to assist Indian companies to identify the
existing corporate governance practices and improve them to attain global
standards. A CRISIL GVC© diagnostic study is an analysis of the governance
and value creation practices of a company based on an interactive process.
The study identifies gaps between a company’s practices and global best
practices, and lays down a road map for improvement. CRISIL submits a
report and makes a presentation to the company at the end of the study. The
entire study is confidential. CRISIL can also monitor the progress and
implementation of the recommendations made, at the option of the company.

The CRISIL GVC© assessment is based on a globally unique framework,

developed in-house by CRISIL. To make the analysis of corporate
governance complete and more meaningful, CRISIL has added two aspects
which are unique to its assessment methodology.

The first is an assessment of management quality, an indicator of value

creation potential. The second is the analysis of the value created for various
stakeholders. Thus, in addition to a detailed analysis of corporate governance
practices, CRISIL also evaluates the benefits of following good governance:

12
whether it is adding value to the various stakeholders of the company, and if
so to what extent.

CRISIL measures and captures this element in its analysis to make it a

genuine 360 degree evaluation rather than an analysis of one aspect alone.

Distinctive features of CRISIL GVC© diagnostic study

 Comprehensive gap analysis of governance practices

 Offers a reliable and independent view
 Focuses on substance rather than form
 Looks at actual practices through an interactive process rather than an
audit of regulatory compliance
 Takes into account the perspectives of all stakeholders (shareholders,
debt holders, employees, customers, suppliers and society at large)
 Quantifies the value created on account of good governance practice
 Recognises crucial role of stakeholders in value creation for
shareholders
 Provides an appropriate balance of quantitative and qualitative factors.

ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY

CRISIL looks at the following broad components while evaluating governance

and value creation practices:

i) Equitable treatment of shareholders

Ownership structure is a key factor in assessing the treatment given to

shareholders. While the presence of a large or majority shareholder is not
necessarily a negative governance issue, CRISIL analyses companies with
such concentrated shareholding in detail to ascertain the extent to which the
majority shareholder acts in the interest of minority shareholders and all other
stakeholders. The other aspects that are analysed here are the extent of
disclosure of shareholding pattern, presence of any disproportionate control
provisions, and the systems in place to detect and prevent insider trading.

13
 ii) Ownership rights of shareholders

CRISIL examines what the company does in articulating and protecting

shareholder rights: to what extent it is complying with the law, and where its
practices go beyond laws and regulations to address the spirit of governance.
The emphasis is on what a company does, rather than its compliance with the
minimum required by the law. CRISIL analyses the provisions of the
company’s charter, viz. memorandum and articles of association, for voting
rights, classes of shares, presence of any anti-takeover provisions, and
preferential rights for any section of shareholders. The analysis also focuses
on ease and effectiveness of shareholder participation at meetings.

iii) Transparency & disclosure

Transparency means timely disclosure of adequate information on the

company’s operating and financial performance and its corporate governance
practices. This helps stakeholders to monitor the operation and performance
of the management. Good disclosure in a transparent manner is a reflection of
the quality of a company’s corporate governance practices.

CRISIL examines the content of public disclosure for completeness, quality

and clarity of reporting. The degree of disclosure in financial statements on
related party transactions, operational performance, and governance, is one
key aspect that CRISIL looks into. The other aspect of disclosure is the timing
– whether the company communicates material events and performance in a
timely manner to reach the largest possible number of relevant stakeholders.

CRISIL looks at the independence of the auditor, adequacy of internal audit,

and effectiveness of the audit process. The composition and functioning of the
audit committee, quality and type of issues discussed at the audit committee,
the nature and adequacy of oversight provided with respect to the company’s
financial statement, and the internal control and risk management functions,
are some of the aspects examined under this parameter.

14
 iv) Composition of Board

CRISIL looks at the composition of the board and its sub-committees. Boards
should be structured in such a way that the interests of all the shareholders
and stakeholders are respected, represented and protected. CRISIL
evaluates whether the Board contains a good balance of independent and
executive directors, and whether the Board has the right mix of various
capabilities required for governing the company, taking into account the size,
nature of industry, and growth objectives. The analysis also includes aspects
like selection process for Board members, succession policies for Board
members, processes for ensuring availability of relevant competencies on the
Board, and Board compensation.

v) Functioning of Board

CRISIL examines the functioning of the Board and its sub-committees and
assesses the Board’s role in providing independent oversight of management
performance. Effective Boards are active, engaged, challenging and
questioning in attitude and exhibit true independence in action. CRISIL
assesses

Board effectiveness in terms of the role the Board has played in directing,
articulating and implementing the company’s strategy, overseeing the
performance of management, and monitoring operational controls and risk
management systems. CRISIL also examines the role and contribution of
independent directors.

vi) Management assessment

CRISIL looks at the reputation, experience, performance and skills of the

management. These enable the management to create value for
stakeholders. The success of past strategies, proactive nature of
management in identifying threats and opportunities in the operating
environment, integrity of the senior management, and risk appetite of the
management, are some of the key areas CRISIL examines while carrying out
a management assessment.

15
 vii) Value creation for various stakeholders

The strength of a company’s relationship with all its stakeholders (including

shareholders) is an important determinant of its ability to create economic
value on a sustainable basis. CRISIL has devised parameters to quantify the
delivery of value to each stakeholder. The key parameters that CRISIL
considers while analysing the value delivered to various categories of
stakeholders are given in the table below:

Stakeholder Key Parameters

Shareholder Return on invested capital compared to the weighted
average cost of capital, dividend track record and payout
ratio
Debt Holder Debt protection measures, credit ratings
Customer Market share, assessment of customer satisfaction
Employee Absolute salary levels, adjusted growth in average annual
salaries, stock option programs, attrition rates and intangible
factors like work environment and facilities provided
Supplier Credit terms, support provided and transparent dealings
Society Social projects taken up by the company, care for the
environment, taxes paid to Government

PROCESS OF DIAGNOSTIC STUDY

CRISIL assigns a team to conduct the GVC diagnostic study. The team
reviews public information, and confidential papers like the Board agenda and
minutes. Individual meetings follow with senior management, Board members
and key stakeholders. The team then prepares a report based on its
observations and analysis, and presents this to CRISIL’s rating committee,
where the report is reviewed and discussed in detail. CRISIL submits its
report and makes a presentation to the senior management/ Board of
Directors of the company. The diagnostic study is typically completed within

16
three to four weeks from receiving the mandate. The entire process is
confidential.

BENEFITS OF CRISIL GVC© DIAGNOSTIC STUDY

A CRISIL GVC© diagnostic study would help a company to:-

 Have a clear picture on existing governance and value creation

practices
 Compare and benchmark with best practices
 Set up milestones for achieving best practices
 Monitor progress of implementation
 Use as a powerful self-assessment and self-improvement tool.

GVC RATING SCALE

The capability of entities rated CRISIL 'GVC Level 1' with
CRISIL GVC regard to corporate governance and value creation for all
Level-1 stakeholders is the Highest.
The capability of entities rated CRISIL 'GVC Level 2' with
CRISIL GVC regard to corporate governance and value creation for all
Level-2 stakeholders is Very High.
The capability of entities rated CRISIL 'GVC Level 3' with
CRISIL GVC regard to corporate governance and value creation for all
Level-3 stakeholders is High.
The capability of entities rated CRISIL 'GVC Level 4' with
CRISIL GVC regard to corporate governance and value creation for all
Level-4 stakeholders is Above Average.
The capability of entities rated CRISIL 'GVC Level 5' with
CRISIL GVC regard to corporate governance and value creation for all
Level-5 stakeholders is Average.
The capability of entities rated CRISIL 'GVC Level 6' with
CRISIL GVC regard to corporate governance and value creation for all
Level-6 stakeholders is Below Average.
The capability of entities rated CRISIL 'GVC Level 7' with
CRISIL GVC regard to corporate governance and value creation for all
Level-7 stakeholders is Low.
CRISIL GVC The capability of entities rated CRISIL 'GVC Level 8' with
Level-8 regard to corporate governance and value creation for all
stakeholders is the Lowest.

17
GVC RATING LIST

COMPANY NAME INDUSTRY NAME RATING

Bharti Airtel Limited (formerly Telecommunication - CRISIL GVC Level 1

Bharti Tele-Ventures Limited) Services - Equipment’s/
Cable

HDFC Bank Ltd. Banks CRISIL GVC Level 1

Housing Development Housing Finance CRISIL GVC Level 1

Finance Corporation Ltd. Company

Infosys Technologies Ltd Computers - Software CRISIL GVC Level 1

Mahindra & Mahindra Automobiles 4 wheelers CRISIL GVC Level 1

Limited

Indian Farmers Fertiliser Co- Fertilisers CRISIL GVC Level 2

operative Limited

Kanoria Chemicals & Chemicals - Inorganic CRISIL GVC Level 3

Industries Ltd.

18
BIBLIOGRAPHY
BOOKS

 A.C, Fernando. Business Ethics And Corporate Governance. Pearson

Education India, 2010.

 Rupani, Riya. Business Ethics And Corporate Governance. Himalaya

Publishing House, 2010.

WEB-PAGES

 Investopedia US, A Division of IAC. 2014. 21 February 2014

<http://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/corporategovernance.asp>.

 CRISIL. 2013. 20 February 2014 <http://crisil.com/ratings/crisil-gvc-

ratings.html>.

 ICRA. 2014. 19 February 2014 <www.icra.in/Files/Articles/2004-July-RM-

Corporategovernance.pdf>.

 ICRA. 2014. 20 February 2014

<http://www.icra.in/rating.aspx?ck=Al1zZU0jCxnnNzwL5uegv1FywzqWlG
7XXo1LFd139RXYzgMYK9S57yAVElNeyt/XaTZKAvxm5n3QFNK78Qi6A
xxtsNfhtNkvqsN02qKn1Jns2J8e/K/etZMxYh5901190113wgX>.

 Wikipedia. 2014. 20 February 2014

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporate_governance>.