---

       T R O U B L E D   C O M P A N Y   R E P O R T E R

                     A S I A   P A C I F I C

          Friday, March 26, 2021, Vol. 24, No. 56

                           Headlines



A U S T R A L I A

AUSTRALIA: New Insolvency Law Reforms Enacted for Small Businesses
HUNT AND GATHER: Second Creditors' Meeting Set for April 1
ORZORA PTY: Second Creditors' Meeting Set for April 7
PEPPER I-PRIME 2021-1: S&P Assigns B Rating on Class F Notes
REDZED TRUST 2021-1: Moody's Assigns (P)B2 Rating to Class F Notes

REZEX TIMBER: Second Creditors' Meeting Set for April 1
TIKFORCE LIMITED: First Creditors' Meeting Set for April 7
ZIP MASTER 2021-1: Moody's Assigns (P)B2 Rating to Class E Notes


C H I N A

CAR INC: Moody's Assigns Caa1 Rating to New USD Notes
CHINA SCE GROUP: Fitch Assigns BB- Rating on Proposed USD Notes
CHINA: Warns Regional Banks to Brace for Tidal Wave of Bad Debt
GUANGZHOU RURAL: Moody's Puts Ba1 BCA Under Review for Downgrade
MGM CHINA: S&P Rates New $500MM Sr. Unsecured Notes Due 2027 'B+'

MONG DUONG: Moody's Affirms Ba3 Rating on USD Senior Secured Notes
YONGCHENG COAL: Haitong Securities Hit by Business Ban Default
YUZHOU GROUP: Moody's Lowers CFR to B1 on Weak Revenue


I N D I A

A2Z INFRA: CARE Reaffirms D Ratings on INR832.17cr Loans
ARIISTO DEVELOPERS: Prestige Wins $1.4BB Mumbai Home Project
BHAGWATI AIR: CARE Lowers Rating on INR15cr LT Loan to C
BRAHMAPUTRA METALLICS: CARE Reaffirms D Rating on INR77.87cr Loan
CONTINUUM ENERGY: Fitch Rates $561MM Secured Notes 'BB+'

INDIA: Likely to Resume New Bankruptcy Filings After Halt Expires
INDIAN OVERSEAS: Moody's Withdraws Ba2 Long Term Deposit Ratings
INDUSIND BANK: Moody's Affirms Ba1 Deposit Ratings, Outlook Stable
IRAA CLOTHING: CRISIL Reaffirms D Rating on INR11cr Loan
ISHWAR CABLES: CARE Withdraws D Rating on Bank Debts

K.S. INFRA: CARE Withdraws D Rating on Bank Debts
KRISHAK VIKAS: CRISIL Keeps B Debt Rating in Not Cooperating
LAKSHMI NARASIMHA: CRISIL Keeps B+ Debt Rating in Not Cooperating
LAXMI VISHNU: CRISIL Keeps B Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating
LIFE STYLE: CRISIL Keeps B Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating

LOHR INDIA: CRISIL Keeps D Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating
M.G. ASSOCIATES: CARE Lowers Rating on INR10cr LT Loan to C
MAHENJU TEXTILES: CRISIL Keeps B+ Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating
MAIYAS BEVERAGES: CRISIL Keeps B Debt Rating in Not Cooperating
MALGANGA MILK: CRISIL Withdraws B Rating on INR14cr Loans

PARIJAT OIL: CRISIL Keeps B Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating
PURVI BHARAT: CRISIL Keeps B Debt Rating in Not Cooperating
QUALITY HYBRID: CRISIL Lowers Rating on INR9.88cr Loans to B
R. PRIYA: CRISIL Keeps B Debt Rating in Not Cooperating Category
RELIANCE CAPITAL: CARE Reaffirms D Rating on INR15,000cr Loan

RM DAIRY: CRISIL Keeps D Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating
SAMAY COTTON: CRISIL Keeps B+ Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating
SHEWDANMAL GAJANAND: CRISIL Lowers Rating on INR9.8cr Loan to B
SIDDHIVINAYAK POLYTEX: CRISIL Keeps B Ratings in Not Cooperating
VARDHMAN SPINNERS: CRISIL Keeps B Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating

VELATAL SPINNING: CRISIL Keeps B+ Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating
VELAVAN HYPER: CRISIL Keeps B Debt Rating in Not Cooperating
VENKATESHWARA FOOD: CARE Moves D Debt Rating to Not Cooperating


I N D O N E S I A

BANK NEGARA: Moody's Assigns (P)Ba2 Rating to Tier 2 Notes
REJEKI ISMAN: Moody's Lowers CFR to B3, Placed on Further Review
TUNAS BARU: Moody's Assigns B1 Rating to New USD Unsecured Notes


J A P A N

TOSHIBA CORP: S&P Raises ICR to 'BB+' on Improved Earnings


N E W   Z E A L A N D

STA TRAVEL: Court to Decide Distribution of Refunds to Customers


S I N G A P O R E

GENTING BHD: Unit Placed Under Voluntary Liquidation

                           - - - - -


=================
A U S T R A L I A
=================

AUSTRALIA: New Insolvency Law Reforms Enacted for Small Businesses
------------------------------------------------------------------
JD Supra reports that in response to the emergence of the COVID-19
pandemic in Australia in 2020, the federal government injected an
unprecedented level of stimulus into the Australian economy and
introduced temporary law reforms aimed at protecting against an
anticipated "tidal wave" of insolvencies. These temporary law
reforms included a moratorium on civil liability for insolvent
trading for directors and increased thresholds and time frames for
responding to statutory demands, according to JD Supra.

The majority of these temporary relief measures came to an end on
December 31, 2020, and in an attempt to address the expected
resulting rise in insolvencies, the federal government has
implemented a number of permanent insolvency law reforms intended
to assist small businesses restructure their debts in 2021 and
beyond. These reforms, which were analyzed as draft legislation in
a Jones Day White Paper in October 2020, have been passed by the
government and have come into effect from January 1, 2021. The
reforms introduce a new reorganization process, a simplified
liquidation process, and some changes to the licensing of
liquidators.

The reforms apply to "small businesses," which are companies in
Australia with liabilities of less than AUD1 million. The federal
government has suggested this will capture around 76% of businesses
subject to insolvencies today.

    The "Debtor in Possession" Reorganization Process
             for Small Businesses

The centerpiece of the reforms is a new reorganization process,
which the federal government has emphasized is similar to a Chapter
11 process under the Bankruptcy Code in the United States, in that
it is a "debtor in possession" model. However, unlike a Chapter 11
reorganization, the new reorganization process is an out-of-court
process and generally does not allow for secured claims to be
compromised.

The new reorganization process is in fact more like a hybrid of a
safe harbor for insolvent trading and a streamlined voluntary
administration process (which already exists under Part 5.3A of the
Corporations Act 2001). It aims to provide small businesses with a
quicker and simpler way to restructure their existing debts and
maximize their chances of continuing as a business.

The new reorganization process for small businesses involves the
following general steps:

   1. The small business announces its intention to access the
restructuring process. The directors have discretion on whether or
not to commence this process, but they must be satisfied that in
their opinion the company is insolvent, or is likely to become
insolvent at some future time. The company must also have total
liabilities of less than AUD1 million on the day that the
restructuring begins.

   2. The directors of the business appoint a small business
restructuring practitioner (or "SBRP") who helps the business
develop a restructuring plan. A moratorium on enforcement action by
certain creditors against the company commences upon appointment of
the SBRP. The directors continue to control the business and trade
in the ordinary course, while they work alongside the SBRP to
develop a restructuring plan over 20 business days. The directors
have a safe harbor for civil liability for insolvent trading during
the restructuring of the company.

   3. After this 20-business-day period, the business sends the
plan and supporting documents to creditors, and the SBRP declares
that, if the restructuring plan is made, the company is likely to
be able to discharge the obligations created by the plan. The
company must have lodged any outstanding tax returns and paid any
outstanding employee entitlements before the plan is put to
creditors.

   4. Creditors vote on the proposed plan. If a majority of
creditors voting by value approve the plan, the plan is then
binding on all unsecured creditors (and secured creditors to the
extent that any part of their debt exceeds the value of their
security interest).

   5. If the plan is approved, the SBRP administers the plan and
makes distributions to creditors while the business continues to be
run as normal by the directors. If the plan is not approved, the
directors may place the company into voluntary administration or
liquidation.

                         Temporary Relief

The new laws also introduce a temporary relief period between
January 1, 2021, and March 31, 2021, for businesses that wish to
engage an SBRP and enter into a restructuring process, but have
been unable to find a practitioner or otherwise enter into the
process. This is because there may not be enough SBRPs in the early
stages of 2021 to service those companies that wish to
restructure.

In order to avail themselves of this temporary relief period, the
directors of the business must make a declaration in writing that
sets out that there are reasonable grounds to believe the that: (i)
company is insolvent and otherwise eligible for a small business
restructuring; (ii) the board has resolved that a restructuring
practitioner should be appointed; and (iii) there is no SBRP or
administrator for the company. This declaration must be provided to
the Australian corporate regulator, ASIC, within five business days
of being made.

The temporary relief provides eligible businesses with a safe
harbor from insolvent trading and protection against statutory
demands—statutory demands may be issued against the company only
for debts above AUD20,000 (instead of the threshold of AUD2,000
applicable to all other companies) and the company has six months
to respond to a demand (instead of the deadline of 21 days
applicable to all other companies).

                The Simplified Liquidation Process

From January 1, 2021, small businesses with liabilities of less
than AUD1 million will also be able to access a new simplified
liquidation process. This process will retain the basic structure
of existing liquidations in Australia, but with time and cost
savings through reduced investigative and reporting requirements,
and without the requirement for holding meetings of creditors.

The key features of the simplified liquidation process are:

   1. Liquidators have narrower obligations to report on potential
misconduct by officers or employees of the company in liquidation
(as is typically required by Section 533 of the Corporations Act
2001).

   2. Liquidators have reduced requirements to convene meetings of
creditors.

   3. There are reduced circumstances in which unfair preference
payments made by a company are voidable, including if such payments
occurred more than three months prior to commencement of a
liquidation or the payments involve amounts of less than
AUD30,000.

   4. There are relaxed requirements regarding creditors' proofs of
debt and the processes for liquidators to pay out dividends to
creditors.

                  Relaxed Licensing Requirements

The suite of reforms also includes changes to the Insolvency
Practice Rules (Corporations) 2016 to allow for relaxed
requirements for the licensing of liquidators if they intend to
practice only as SBRPs. In short, the relatively onerous
requirements for the licensing of liquidators are relaxed for those
who intend to practice only as SBRPs. For example, accountants may
be appointed as SBRPs and need not have extensive specialist
insolvency or liquidation training.

                     Key Issues and Takeaways

The small business insolvency law reforms have been met with mixed
responses in Australia. Some insolvency practitioners and lawyers
have criticized the minimal qualifications, experience, and
licensing requirements for the new subcategory of liquidators
licensed only to act as SBRPs. Their concern is that those who will
qualify for licensing will not have sufficient understanding of
Australia's insolvency regime to competently fulfil their duties.

In addition, there are other key issues arising from the reforms,
including:

   1. Debts incurred after the appointment of the SBRP do not have
priority over unsecured debts incurred before the restructuring.
This means it may be difficult for small businesses to retain staff
and maintain relationships with key suppliers during the
restructuring process, as employees and suppliers will have no
comfort that their debts will be paid ahead of existing unsecured
creditors.

   2. The duties and liabilities of SBRPs are not commensurate with
the scope of their role, powers, and remuneration. SBRPs are
treated as "officers" of the company once appointed, exposing them
to directors' duties under the Corporations Act 2001, as well as
potentially significant liabilities under workplace or occupational
health and safety and environmental laws. In contrast, SBRPs have
limited control over the business, which remains in the hands of
the directors in a "debtor in possession" style process. This means
that SBRPs may be exposed to potential liabilities that are not
commensurate with their comparatively limited responsibilities,
notwithstanding the introduction of Regulation 5.3B.42 to the
Corporations Regulations 2001, which aims to protect SBRPs from
liability for conduct "in good faith and without negligence."

   3. The restructuring period is defined in Section 453A of the
Corporations Act 2001 and Regulation 5.3B.02 of the Corporations
Regulations 2001 as being (typically) the period beginning when an
SBRP is appointed and ending when the company makes a restructuring
plan that is approved by creditors. Notably, it does not include
the period in which the restructuring plan is actually implemented.
It remains to be seen how effective this will be in ensuring that
restructuring plans approved by creditors are implemented properly
and efficiently.

It is still not clear whether the anticipated "tidal wave" of
insolvencies in Australia will result in the wide-scale adoption of
the federal government's new restructuring processes for small
businesses. As of January 25, 2021, no businesses have made use of
the new reorganization process, and only five businesses have
announced their intention to access the temporary restructuring
relief period between January 1, 2021, and March 31, 2021.

Financiers, banks, and unsecured creditors should be aware of these
new kinds of restructuring and insolvency processes in Australia.
The lack of creditor oversight and compressed time frames mean that
creditors should be prepared to be proactive if debtors begin to
engage in a new reorganization process or simplified liquidation.


HUNT AND GATHER: Second Creditors' Meeting Set for April 1
----------------------------------------------------------
A second meeting of creditors in the proceedings of Hunt and Gather
Events Pty Limited has been set for April 1, 2021, at   11:00 a.m.
at the offices SM Solvency Accountants, Level 10/144 Edward Street,
in Brisbane, Queensland.

The purpose of the meeting is (1) to receive the report by the
Administrator about the business, property, affairs and financial
circumstances of the Company; and (2) for the creditors of the
Company to resolve whether the Company will execute a deed of
company arrangement, the administration should end, or the Company
be wound up.

Creditors wishing to attend are advised proofs and proxies should
be submitted to the Administrator by March 31, 2021, at 4:30 p.m.

Brendan Nixon of SM Solvency Accountants was appointed as
administrator of Hunt and Gather on Feb. 25, 2021.


ORZORA PTY: Second Creditors' Meeting Set for April 7
-----------------------------------------------------
A second meeting of creditors in the proceedings of Orzora Pty Ltd,
trading as Sign*a*rama (Pakenham), has been set for April 7, 2021,
at 11:00 a.m. at the offices SM Solvency Accountants, Level 10/144
Edward Street, in Brisbane, Queensland.

The purpose of the meeting is (1) to receive the report by the
Administrator about the business, property, affairs and financial
circumstances of the Company; and (2) for the creditors of the
Company to resolve whether the Company will execute a deed of
company arrangement, the administration should end, or the Company
be wound up.

Creditors wishing to attend are advised proofs and proxies should
be submitted to the Administrator by April 6, 2021, at 3:30 p.m.

Brendan Nixon of SM Solvency Accountants was appointed as
administrator of Orzora Pty on March 1, 2021.


PEPPER I-PRIME 2021-1: S&P Assigns B Rating on Class F Notes
------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to seven classes of prime
residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) issued by Permanent
Custodians Ltd. as trustee of Pepper I-Prime 2021-1 Trust. Pepper
I-Prime 2021-1 Trust is a securitization of prime residential
mortgages originated by Pepper Homeloans Pty Ltd.

The ratings reflect:

-- S&P's view of the credit risk of the underlying collateral
portfolio, including its view that the credit support is sufficient
to withstand the stresses it applies. The credit support for the
rated notes comprises note subordination and excess spread. The
assessment of credit risk takes into account the underwriting
standards and centralized approval process of the seller, Pepper
Homeloans.

-- The availability of a yield-enhancement reserve, amortization
reserve, and overcollateralization amount, which will all be funded
by excess spread to cover potential yield shortfalls and loss
reimbursements and to repay principal on the notes at various
stages of the transaction's term.

-- The extraordinary expense reserve of A$150,000, funded by
Pepper on or before closing, available to meet extraordinary
expenses. The reserve will be topped up via excess spread if
drawn.

-- S&P's expectation that the various mechanisms to support
liquidity within the transaction, including a liquidity facility
equal to 2.2% of the outstanding balance of the notes, and
principal draws, are sufficient under our stress assumptions to
ensure timely payment of interest.

-- Loss of income for borrowers in the coming months due to the
effects of COVID-19 might put upward pressure on mortgage arrears
over the longer term. S&P updated its outlook assumptions for
Australian RMBS in response to changing macroeconomic conditions as
a result of the COVID-19 outbreak. The collateral pool as of the
Jan. 31, 2021, cut-off date did not include any loans that were
under a COVID-19 hardship payment arrangement.

S&P Global Ratings believes there remains high, albeit moderating,
uncertainty about the evolution of the coronavirus pandemic and its
economic effects. Vaccine production is ramping up and rollouts are
gathering pace around the world. Widespread immunization, which
will help pave the way for a return to more normal levels of social
and economic activity, looks to be achievable by most developed
economies by the end of the third quarter. However, some emerging
markets may only be able to achieve widespread immunization by
year-end or later. S&P said, "We use these assumptions about
vaccine timing in assessing the economic and credit implications
associated with the pandemic. As the situation evolves, we will
update our assumptions and estimates accordingly."

  Ratings Assigned

  Pepper I-Prime 2021-1 Trust

  Class A1, A$637.40 million: AAA (sf)
  Class A2, A$63.90 million: AAA (sf)
  Class B, A$15.00 million: AA (sf)
  Class C, A$12.40 million: A (sf)
  Class D, A$8.30 million: BBB (sf)
  Class E, A$5.20 million: BB (sf)
  Class F, A$4.10 million: B (sf)
  Class G, A$3.70 million: Not rated


REDZED TRUST 2021-1: Moody's Assigns (P)B2 Rating to Class F Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned the following provisional
ratings to the notes to be issued by Perpetual Trustee Company
Limited as trustee of RedZed Trust Series 2021-1.

Issuer: Perpetual Trustee Company Limited as trustee of RedZed
Trust Series 2021-1

AUD412.5 million Class A-1 Notes, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

AUD64.9 million Class A-2 Notes, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

AUD40.7 million Class B Notes, Assigned (P)Aa2 (sf)

AUD5.5 million Class C Notes, Assigned (P)A2 (sf)

AUD9.9 million Class D Notes, Assigned (P)Baa2 (sf)

AUD6.6 million Class E Notes, Assigned (P)Ba2 (sf)

AUD3.3 million Class F Notes, Assigned (P)B2 (sf)

The AUD6.6 million of Class G1 and Class G2 Notes (together, the
Class G Notes) are not rated by Moody's.

The transaction is a securitisation of first-ranking mortgage loans
secured over residential properties located in Australia. The loans
were originated and are serviced by RedZed Lending Solutions Pty
Limited (RedZed, unrated).

The portfolio includes 96.5% of loans to self-employed borrowers.
91.4% were extended on alternative income documentation
verification ('alt doc') basis; and, based on Moody's
classifications, 5.1% are to borrowers with adverse credit
histories.

RATINGS RATIONALE

The provisional ratings take into account, among other factors, an
evaluation of the underlying receivables and their expected
performance, evaluation of the capital structure and credit
enhancement provided to the notes, availability of excess spread
over the life of the transaction, the liquidity facility in the
amount of 1.5% of the notes balance, the legal structure, and the
experience of RedZed as servicer.

Moody's MILAN CE — representing the loss that Moody's expects the
portfolio to suffer in the event of a severe recession scenario —
is 13.2%. Moody's expected loss for this transaction is 2.0%.

The coronavirus pandemic has had a significant impact on economic
activity. Although global economies have shown a remarkable degree
of resilience to date and are returning to growth, the uneven
effects on individual businesses, sectors and regions will continue
throughout 2021 and will endure as a challenge to the world's
economies well beyond the end of the year. While persistent virus
fears remain the main risk for a recovery in demand, the economy
will recover faster if vaccines and further fiscal and monetary
policy responses bring forward a normalization of activity. As a
result, there is a heightened degree of uncertainty around Moody's
forecasts. Moody's analysis has considered the effect on the
performance of consumer assets from a gradual and unbalanced
recovery in Australian economic activity.

Moody's regards the coronavirus outbreak as a social risk under its
ESG framework, given the substantial implications for public health
and safety.

Key transactional features are as follows:

While the Class A-2 Notes are subordinate to Class A-1 Notes in
relation to charge-offs, Class A-2 and Class A-1 Notes rank pari
passu in relation to principal payments, on the basis of their
stated amounts, before the call option date. This feature reduces
the absolute amount of credit enhancement available to the Class
A-1 Notes.

The servicer is required to maintain the weighted average interest
rates on the mortgage loans at least at 4.0% above one month BBSW,
which is within the current portfolio yield of 4.7% as at cut off
date. This generates a high level of excess spread available to
cover losses in the pool.

Under the retention mechanism, excess spread is used to repay
principal on the Class F Notes, up to AUD750,000, thereby limiting
their exposure to losses. At the same time, the retention amount
ledger ensures that the level of credit enhancement available to
the more senior ranking notes is preserved.

The Class B to Class F Notes will start receiving their pro-rata
share of principal if certain step-down conditions are met.
Pro-rata allocation is effectively limited to a maximum of one
years.

While the Class G Notes do not receive principal payments until
the other notes are repaid, once step-down conditions are met,
their pro-rata share of principal will be allocated in a reverse
sequential order, starting from the Class F Notes.

Key pool features are as follows:

The pool has a weighted-average scheduled loan-to-value (LTV) of
69.9%, and 14.5% of the loans have scheduled LTVs over 80%. There
are no loans with a scheduled LTV over 85%.

Around 96.5% of the borrowers are self-employed. This is in line
with RedZed's business model and strategy to focus on the
self-employed market. The income of these borrowers is subject to
higher volatility than employed borrowers, and they may experience
higher default rates.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was Moody's
Approach to Rating RMBS Using the MILAN Framework published in
December 2020.

Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the ratings:

Factors that could lead to an upgrade of the notes include a rapid
build-up of credit enhancement, due to sequential amortization, or
better-than-expected collateral performance. The Australian jobs
market and the housing market are primary drivers of performance.

A factor that could lead to a downgrade of the notes is
worse-than-expected collateral performance. Other reasons that
could lead to a downgrade include poor servicing, error on the part
of transaction parties, a deterioration in the credit quality of
transaction counterparties, or lack of transactional governance,
and fraud.

REZEX TIMBER: Second Creditors' Meeting Set for April 1
-------------------------------------------------------
A second meeting of creditors in the proceedings of Rezex Timber
Pty Ltd has been set for April 1, 2021, at 3:30 p.m. via virtual
meeting technology.

The purpose of the meeting is (1) to receive the report by the
Administrator about the business, property, affairs and financial
circumstances of the Company; and (2) for the creditors of the
Company to resolve whether the Company will execute a deed of
company arrangement, the administration should end, or the Company
be wound up.

Creditors wishing to attend are advised proofs and proxies should
be submitted to the Administrator by March 31, 2021, at 4:00 p.m.

Stephen Robert Dixon and Leigh Dudman of Hamilton Murphy were
appointed as administrators of Rezex Timber on Feb. 25, 2021.


TIKFORCE LIMITED: First Creditors' Meeting Set for April 7
----------------------------------------------------------
A first meeting of the creditors in the proceedings of Tikforce
Limited will be held on April 7, 2021, at 1:00 p.m. via virtual
meeting technology

Mathieu Tribut of GTS Advisory was appointed as administrator of
Tikforce Limited on March 25, 2021.


ZIP MASTER 2021-1: Moody's Assigns (P)B2 Rating to Class E Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned provisional ratings to notes
to be issued by Perpetual Trustee Company Limited, as trustee of
the Zip Master Trust.

Issuer: Zip Master Trust Series 2021-1

AUD200.75million Class A1 Notes, Assigned (P)Aa2 (sf)

AUD38.30 million Class A2 Notes, Assigned (P)Aa2 (sf)

AUD35.00 million Class B Notes, Assigned (P)A2 (sf)

AUD21.00 million Class C Notes, Assigned (P)Baa2 (sf)

AUD14.00 million Class D Notes, Assigned (P)Ba2 (sf)

AUD8.75 million Class E Notes, Assigned (P)B2 (sf)

The AUD14.70 million Class F Notes and AUD17.50 million Class G
Notes are not rated by Moody's.

DESCRIPTION OF TRANSACTION AND ISSUER

The Master Trust is a revolving cash securitisation of two types of
revolving line of credit products with either full (Zip Pay) or
initial (Zip Money) interest-free terms, more commonly known as
'buy-now-pay-later' receivables. All receivables were originated
and are serviced by zipMoney Payments Pty Ltd (Zip, unrated, a
wholly owned subsidiary of Zip Co Limited).

Zip is an Australian non-bank fintech that was founded in 2013 as a
buy-now-pay-later retail credit platform. Zip provides customers
with a revolving line of credit to finance their retail purchase at
a large variety of merchant partners.

Series 2021-1 is the fourth issuance out of the Zip Master Trust.
As is usual in master trust structures, Zip may designate
additional accounts for assignment to the master trust. Series
2021-1 has an expected maturity date in April 2024. Principal
collections will be retained and used to purchase substitution
receivables for at least the first 24 months, and potentially up to
36 months, provided a "controlled accumulation period" or "rapid
amortization" has not started. Additionally, the master trust may
be in a position to buy receivables from principal allocation to
other series even if Series 2021-1 has entered controlled
accumulation, scheduled amortisation or rapid amortisation.

The optional controlled accumulation period for the 2021-1 series
can begin from April 2023. If a controlled accumulation notice is
served, Series 2021-1 principal allocations will be retained in a
ledger, to be distributed at the expected maturity date. If the
series 2021-1 notes remain outstanding after that date, the series
will enter the scheduled amortisation period, during which Series
2021-1 principal allocations will be distributed on a pass-through
basis. The scheduled amortisation period ends on the scheduled
maturity date in April 2025. The legal final maturity date is April
2033, seven years after the scheduled maturity date.

As of the December 30, 2020, the securitised pool consisted of
1,604,452 buy-now-pay-later revolving credit accounts. The total
outstanding balance of the receivables is AUD1,054,448,609
comprising AUD483,885,547 Zip Money receivables (45.9% of the total
pool) and AUD570,563,061 Zip Pay receivables (54.1% of the total
pool). The maximum credit limit is AUD50,000 for Zip Money accounts
and AUD2,000 for Zip Pay accounts. The average account balance is
AUD1,232 for Zip Money accounts and AUD468 for Zip Pay accounts.
Approximately 97.8% of Zip Money accounts have a balance less than
AUD5,000. Approximately 80.5% of Zip Pay accounts have a balance
less than AUD1,000.

RATINGS RATIONALE

The provisional ratings take into account, among other factors:

The limited amount of historical data. Zip was established in
2013, with significant origination growth beginning in 2017. The
collateral performance data used in Moody's analysis reflects Zip's
short origination history since July 2016 and does not cover a full
economic cycle.

The revolving nature of the master trust structure. The nature of
the trust and the ability of the sponsor to add new accounts and
new liabilities to the trust could introduce some variability in
the quality of the securitised portfolio over time. The risk of a
change in underwriting is partially mitigated by the average excess
spread trigger. In addition, there are eligibility criteria as well
as triggers and other structural features to mitigate portfolio
deterioration.

The high degree of dependency on Zip. Zip acts as the sponsor,
originator, servicer and trust manager. In addition, given Zip's
short operating history, it has a comparably weaker credit profile.
These risks are mitigated by the inclusion of Perpetual Trustee
Company Limited (unrated) as a standby servicer and sub-trust
manager, as well as by various replacement and notification
triggers.

The credit enhancement levels for each class of notes: Class A-1
Notes - 42.6%; Class A-2 Notes -- 31.7%; Class B Notes -- 21.7%;
Class C Notes -- 15.7%; Class D Notes -- 11.7%; Class E Notes --
9.2%

The availability of a significant amount of excess spread over the
life of the transaction.

The minimum seller note size of 1%. These seller notes can provide
the trust with protection against a number of events, including
fraud and dilutions. Additionally, excess seller note interest and
principal allocations will be used to cover any income shortfalls
for Series 2021-1 and shortfalls on amortisation amounts for Series
2021-1.

The liquidity facility in the amount of 1% of the note balance
subject to a floor of AUD750,000.

The coronavirus pandemic has had a significant impact on economic
activity. Although global economies have shown a remarkable degree
of resilience to date and are returning to growth, the uneven
effects on individual businesses, sectors and regions will continue
throughout 2021 and will endure as a challenge to the world's
economies well beyond the end of the year. While persistent virus
fears remain the main risk for a recovery in demand, the economy
will recover faster if vaccines and further fiscal and monetary
policy responses bring forward a normalization of activity. As a
result, there is a heightened degree of uncertainty around Moody's
forecasts. Moody's analysis has considered the effect on the
performance of consumer assets from a gradual and unbalanced
recovery in Australia economic activity.

Moody's regards the coronavirus outbreak as a social risk under its
ESG framework, given the substantial implications for public health
and safety.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's
Approach to Rating Credit Card Receivables-Backed Securities"
published in June 2020.

Moody's credit card ABS rating methodology begins by developing a
maximum loss that is consistent with an Aaa (sf) rating ("Aaa loss
given sponsor default (LGSD)"), assuming that the sponsor has
closed its revolving consumer loan accounts. This scenario is
associated with sponsors that are in or near to default. For Zip
Master Trust, the Aaa LGSD is 42.6%.

The key parameters used to derive the Aaa LGSD are: charge off
rates (current, long run and peak); payment rates (current and at
the start of early amortisation), receivable yield rates (current,
at the start of early amortisation and the compression level, due
to potential asset-liability mismatches); servicing fees (current
and stressed) and the minimum seller's interest (as per the
documents).

In a second step, the level of credit enhancement that is
consistent with a Aaa (sf) rating is determined by lowering the Aaa
LGSD by the applicable "dependency ratio". This ratio varies
according to the sponsor's credit rating or counterparty risk
assessment ("CR Assessment"), if available. The higher the
sponsor's credit rating or CR Assessment as the case may be, the
lower the dependency ratio. The ratio reflects the likelihood of
the sponsor entering default. Higher rated sponsors will therefore
require lower Aaa enhancement, all else being equal. The result is
the minimum Aaa credit enhancement (CE), absent other counterparty
or operational risks. For Zip Master Trust, the Moody's Aaa CE is
based on Moody's undisclosed assessment of Zip's credit profile.

For credit card-backed securities — with CE less than that
consistent with a Aaa (sf) rating — Moody's adjusts the rating of
the securities based on the level of credit enhancement available.
Finally, for subordinate securities, additional adjustments are
made to account for the higher severity of loss inherent, due to
the smaller sizes and the ranking of those classes of securities.

Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the ratings:

Factors that could lead to an upgrade of the notes include
better-than-expected collateral performance or improvement in the
credit quality of the sponsor.

A factor that could lead to a downgrade of the notes is
worse-than-expected collateral performance. Specifically, if the
charge off rate rises or the payment rate or yield falls
significantly. A downgrade of the sponsor's CR Assessment could
also lead to a downgrade of the rating of the Rated Notes, given
the ongoing role of the bank sponsor as underwriter, originator,
risk manager, servicer and collector. Other reasons that could lead
to a downgrade include poor servicing, error on the part of
transaction parties, a deterioration in the credit quality of
transaction counterparties, or lack of transactional governance and
fraud.

Although certain triggers are in place to help decrease, to a
certain extent, the exposure to the sponsor in its various roles,
these will probably not fully mitigate the impact of a significant
deterioration in the credit quality of the sponsor. Consequently,
the originator's credit quality is always an important input in
monitoring the transaction.




=========
C H I N A
=========

CAR INC: Moody's Assigns Caa1 Rating to New USD Notes
-----------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned a Caa1 senior unsecured
rating to the proposed USD bonds to be issued by CAR Inc. (Caa1
positive).

CAR will use the proceeds from the proposed bonds to repay its
existing debt and for general corporate purposes.

RATINGS RATIONALE

CAR's Caa1 corporate family rating is supported by the company's
leading position in China's growing car rental market.

The rating also considers the company's business model, which
provides some financial flexibility, evident in the short lead time
needed for its fleet acquisitions, its asset-light network, and the
ease with which it can dispose of its assets.

At the same time, the rating is constrained by (1) company's weak
liquidity profile; (2) direct competition from other car rental
companies and indirect competition from non-car rental companies
that provide transportation services.

"The proposed issuance, if successful, will improve CAR's liquidity
profile and not materially affect its debt leverage level, as the
proceeds will be partially used to refinance its existing debts,"
says Gerwin Ho, a Moody's Vice President and Senior Credit Officer.
"At the same time, remaining proceeds can support its operating
needs," adds Ho.

The coronavirus outbreak in China had reduced leisure and business
travel, pressuring CAR's revenue in 2020. However, Moody's expects
the impact of the outbreak on CAR's business will dissipate over
the next 12-18 months, reflecting China's relatively effective
containment of the virus.

Moody's expects CAR's revenue will remain stable from the level in
2020 over the next 12-18 months. Auto rental revenue will rise 2%
from the level last year because of better rental pricing and
utilization. Revenue from used-vehicle sales is likely to decline
about 5% from the level last year as the company expands its fleet
by retaining more of its existing vehicles.

Consequently, Moody's expects CAR's debt leverage, as measured by
adjusted debt/EBITDA, will remain stable at about 3.6x over the
next 12 months, compared with about 3.6x as of December 31, 2020,
reflecting a higher EBITDA level that will offset a moderate
increase in debt compared with the same period a year ago. The
company's 2H2020 rental revenue had improved by 21% compared with
that of 1H2020.

CAR's liquidity remains weak. As of December 31, 2020, its cash
balance of RMB2.2 billion -- including restricted cash of RMB12
million -- was insufficient to cover its short-term debt of RMB3.6
billion, which includes a RMB750 million bond due in April 2021.

Nonetheless, Moody's expects CAR can meet its upcoming maturities.
The company has repaid its $300 million bond using proceeds from
its $175 million convertible bond issued in January. Moody's also
expects the company's financial flexibility and funding access will
improve as a result of the emergence of its new majority
shareholder.

CAR's senior unsecured rating is not affected by subordination to
claims at the operating company level, because the latter is not
seen as material, especially as Moody's expects the majority of
claims will remain at the holding company.

Moody's credit assessment also takes into account the following
environmental, social and governance (ESG) considerations.

Moody's regards the coronavirus outbreak as a social risk under its
ESG framework, given the substantial implications for public health
and safety. CAR's rating also reflects the impact of the breadth
and severity of the shock on the company, and the broad
deterioration in credit quality and shifts in market sentiment it
has triggered.

As for governance, the introduction of Indigo Glamour Company
Limited, a subsidiary of a private investment fund managed by MBK
Partners, as a major shareholder in place of UCAR Inc. lowers
concerns over CAR's governance. CAR is developing its corporate
strategy and financial policy under its new major shareholder.

FACTORS THAT COULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OF THE RATING

The positive outlook reflects Moody's expectation that CAR's
liquidity profile and business operation will continue to improve.

Moody's could upgrade the ratings if CAR (1) improves its
operations in terms of revenue and profitability; (2) improves its
liquidity; and (3) demonstrates a track record of funding access.

On the other hand, Moody's could downgrade the ratings if CAR's
operations and liquidity do not improve as Moody's expected or if
its financial policy becomes more aggressive.

The principal methodology used in this rating was Equipment and
Transportation Rental Industry published in April 2017.

CAR Inc., founded in 2007 and headquartered in Beijing, provides
car rental services, including car rentals and fleet rentals in
China. CAR was listed on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange in September
2014.


CHINA SCE GROUP: Fitch Assigns BB- Rating on Proposed USD Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned homebuilder China SCE Group Holdings
Limited's (BB-/Stable) proposed US dollar senior notes a rating of
'BB-'. The proposed notes are rated at the same level as China
SCE's senior unsecured rating because they will constitute its
direct and senior unsecured obligations. China SCE intends to use
the net proceeds from the proposed notes to refinance existing
debt.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Expanding Sales Scale: China SCE's total contracted sales increased
by 26% to CNY101.5 billion in 2020 after rising 57% in 2019. Fitch
expects the company's sales to rise by 5%-6% a year in 2021-2023,
supported by its diversified saleable resources in the Yangtze
River Delta, central and western China, the Bohai Rim, and the west
coast of the Taiwan Strait. About 60% of China SCE's land bank is
in Tier 1 and 2 cities where demand is more resilient and less
affected by the Covid-19 pandemic.

Integrated Land Acquisitions: China SCE's land bank is sufficient
for about three years of development. It focuses on acquiring land
that integrates development and investment properties (including
shopping malls and long-term rental apartments), which tends to be
cheaper than land acquired at public auctions. This enables it to
maintain a reasonable margin for development properties. Fitch
expects its EBITDA margin (after adding back capitalised interest)
to be fairly stable at 22%-24% in 2021-2023, compared with 22% in
2019.

Leverage Rising Gradually: Fitch expects China SCE's leverage,
defined as net debt (including guarantees to joint ventures (JV)
and associates)/adjusted inventory, to rise to about 45% in
2020-2023 from 41% in 2019, according to its budget for land
replenishment and capex for investment properties. Fitch expects it
to spend 60%-65% of its contracted sales proceeds to replenish land
for both development and investment properties in 2021-2023, which
means there is limited room for leverage to improve despite its
sufficient land bank.

Rising Non-Development Income: China SCE's non-development income
is mainly from rental of investment properties and property
management fees. Fitch expects its strong pipeline of new shopping
malls and the increasing number of long-term rental apartments to
help its non-development gross profit to more than double to CNY1.5
billion by 2023 from CNY0.7 billion in 2019. However, the amount of
non-development income provides only limited support to its rating
at the current level.

Non-Controlling Interest: China SCE's exposure to non-controlling
interests (NCI), at 42% of total equity at end-2019 and 38% at
end-June 2020, is higher than the average of 'BB-' rated peers.
This reflects its reliance on capital contributions from
non-controlling shareholders, which are mostly developers, to
finance its expansion. This reduces China SCE's need for debt
funding, but creates potential for cash leakage and reduces
financial flexibility because homebuilders with lower NCI can
dispose of stakes in projects to cut leverage.

DERIVATION SUMMARY

China SCE's attributable contracted sales of about CNY55 billion in
2020 is similar to that of Yuzhou Group Holdings Company Limited
(BB-/Stable), but smaller than that of other 'BB-' rated peers such
as Ronshine China Holdings Limited (BB-/Stable) and KWG Group
Holdings Limited (BB-/Stable). Its land bank and geographical
diversification are similar to that of 'BB-' peers.

China SCE's leverage, defined as net debt/adjusted inventory
(including external guarantees), of 40%-45% is similar to that of
Ronshine. China SCE's gross profit margin (after adding back
capitalised interest) of about 30% is similar to that of Yuzhou,
although its EBITDA margin of 22%-24% is lower due to higher
selling and administrative expenses as a percentage of revenue
recognised.

KEY ASSUMPTIONS

Fitch's key assumptions within its rating case for the issuer
include:

-- Contracted sales to increase by 6% in 2021 and 5% per year in
    2021-2023 (2020: 26%);

-- Cash collection as a percentage of total sales at 90% in 2021
    2023 (2019: 96%);

-- Land premium for development and investment outflow of around
    60% of sales proceeds in 2021-2023 (2020: 65%);

-- Overall EBITDA margin, excluding capitalised interest, at 20%
    25% in 2021-2023 (2019: 22%).

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to positive
rating action/upgrade:

-- Attributable contracted sales increase to a level that is
    comparable with that of 'BB' rated peers.

-- Net debt (including guarantees to JVs and associates)/adjusted
    inventory sustained below 35%.

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to negative
rating action/downgrade:

-- Net debt (including guarantees to JVs and associates)/adjusted
    inventory above 45% for a sustained period.

-- EBITDA margin (after adding back capitalised interest)
    sustained below 20%.

BEST/WORST CASE RATING SCENARIO

International scale credit ratings of Non-Financial Corporate
issuers have a best-case rating upgrade scenario (defined as the
99th percentile of rating transitions, measured in a positive
direction) of three notches over a three-year rating horizon; and a
worst-case rating downgrade scenario (defined as the 99th
percentile of rating transitions, measured in a negative direction)
of four notches over three years. The complete span of best- and
worst-case scenario credit ratings for all rating categories ranges
from 'AAA' to 'D'. Best- and worst-case scenario credit ratings are
based on historical performance.

LIQUIDITY AND DEBT STRUCTURE

Sufficient Liquidity: China SCE had available cash of CNY20.7
billion, excluding restricted cash of CNY4.2 billion, as of
end-June 2020, against CNY20.7 billion in short-term debt. It
issued USD500 million in 7% senior notes due 2025 in October 2020
and redeemed USD500 million in 8.75% senior notes due 2021. It also
issued USD350 million in 6% senior notes due 2026 in January 2021.

ESG CONSIDERATIONS

Unless otherwise disclosed in this section, the highest level of
ESG credit relevance is a score of '3'. This means ESG issues are
credit-neutral or have only a minimal credit impact on the entity,
either due to their nature or the way in which they are being
managed by the entity.

CHINA: Warns Regional Banks to Brace for Tidal Wave of Bad Debt
---------------------------------------------------------------
Nikkei Asia reports that China's small regional banks are fast
approaching a surge of nonperforming debt that threatens to
undermine the financial health of the vulnerable lenders.

As part of the country's coronavirus stimulus package, the
government allowed small to midsized enterprises to defer principal
and interest payments on loans. The extensions were applied to
CNY6.6 trillion (US$1 trillion) as of the end of December,
according to the China Banking and Insurance Regulatory Commission,
Nikkei Asia says.

This break from debt servicing helped prop up small businesses,
together with declining interest rates and relief from paying
social insurance contributions.

However, the waivers from debt servicing expire at the end of this
month, Nikkei Asia notes.

"Nonperforming loans account for a higher ratio of debt subject to
repayment deferrals than for normal debt," Nikkei Asia quotes Gu
Shu, chairman of the Agricultural Bank of China, one of the big
four state-owned banks, as saying.

According to Nikkei Asia, small businesses suffered when the
Chinese economy slowed in 2019 due to the trade war with the U.S.
The coronavirus unleashed a double whammy. Roughly 2.3 million
companies failed in the first half of 2020, or 6% of the total,
according to an analysis by the Peterson Institute for
International Economics.

Nikkei Asia relates that the government plans to extend debt
payment waivers for microbusinesses, but it has not disclosed the
scope of eligible businesses. There are lingering concerns that bad
loans that were once hidden will rise to the surface once the March
31 deadline passes.

The Chinese banking industry shouldered a CNY3.5 trillion balance
in nonperforming loans at the end of last year. If the debt payment
relief ends, additional bad loans could grow as much as CNY700
billion this year, according to a projection from China
Securities.

Financial regulators are stepping up vigilance, Nikkei Asia states.
Over CNY3 trillion in nonperforming loans were disposed of last
year, up more than 30% from the previous year.

"The amount of nonperforming loans that need to be disposed will
likely increase this year," Guo Shuqing, chairman of the China
Banking and Insurance Regulatory Commission, told reporters this
month. Guo qualified that forecast by saying the body is still
interviewing commercial banks, the report relays.

According to Nikkei Asia, China's five-year plan through 2025
contains a provision to improve mechanisms for identifying and
disposing nonperforming loans. The goal is to avoid a scenario in
which uncertainties from the pandemic and global economy spill over
into the nation's financial system.

Expanding the capital base at small and midsized banks via multiple
channels was declared as a major policy initiative for this year,
Nikkei Asia says. The China Banking and Insurance Regulatory
Commission and the People's Bank of China, the central bank, have
recently allowed smaller banks to issue perpetual bonds with an
equity conversion feature.

If a bank runs into financial distress, it can reduce the debt by
unilaterally converting the bonds into equity without prior notice
to investors, the report notes. Once the bank restores its
finances, the original bond investors are treated as shareholders
and granted dividends.

As the name suggests, perpetual bonds carry no redemption date,
Nikkei Asia says. That means the issuer only has to pay the
interest, although the rates are expected to be set high. In terms
of financial soundness, perpetual bonds take a back seat to common
stock and retained earnings. But the bonds can be classified as
core capital just the same.

Nikkei Asia adds financial regulators have long allowed banks to
issue other perpetual bonds, which often have triggers for writing
off debt if the bank runs into financial distress. But investors
have tended to shy away from perpetual bonds issued by small to
midsized banks due to the institutions' weak capital foundations.


GUANGZHOU RURAL: Moody's Puts Ba1 BCA Under Review for Downgrade
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has placed Guangzhou Rural Commercial
Bank Co., Ltd. (GRCB)'s Baa2/P-2 long-term/short-term deposit
ratings, ba1 Baseline Credit Assessment and ba1 Adjusted BCA on
review for downgrade. Moody's has also placed the bank's all other
ratings and assessments on review for downgrade. The previous
outlook on GRCB was negative.

RATINGS RATIONALE / FACTORS THAT COULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OR
DOWNGRADE OF THE RATINGS

The review for downgrade follows GRCB's preliminary earning
announcement on March 12, 2021 that its net income declined about
35% in 2020 compared with a year ago, and reflects the decline of
the bank's profitability and potential deterioration of its asset
quality and capital ratios.

The decline of GRCB's net income in 2020 was significant and higher
than that of many of its rated domestic peers. This indicates that
the bank was impacted more than its rated domestic peers by risks
in its lending and investment portfolio, partly due to the impact
of the coronavirus pandemic and the implementation of the new asset
management regulations. The bank also disposed of certain existing
wealth management products, resulting in the increase in impairment
losses. Moody's estimates that this could in turn dampen its return
on average assets to below 0.60% in 2020, which was a significant
decline from 0.95% in 2019.

Moody's expects that new nonperforming loan (NPL) formation amid
structural adjustments in the Chinese economy will remain a key
risk to GRCB's asset quality. The bank's loan growth has outpaced
the industry average, bringing unseasoned risks to its lending
portfolio. Its asset quality is sensitive to economic adjustments,
given its large exposure to small and micro enterprises, and
sizable exposure to the wholesale and retail sectors and property
developers.

The bank's reported NPL ratio increased slightly to 1.8% as of the
end of June 2020 from 1.7% at the end of 2019, while its Stage 3
loan ratio under IFRS 9 increased significantly to 3.6% as of the
end of June 2020 from 2.6% at the end of 2019, indicating pressure
on its asset quality.

GRCB's tangible common equity (TCE) capital ratio will also be
challenged by its relatively weak internal capital generation when
compared with rated domestic bank peers. GRCB's reported Common
Equity Tier 1 capital and total capital adequacy ratios were 9.4%
and 13.4% respectively as of the end of June 2020, decreasing from
10.0% and 14.2% respectively at the end of 2019. The bank withdrew
its A-share IPO plan in December 2020, and has not released a
concrete capital replenishment plan yet.

Despite the challenges in asset quality, capital and profitability,
the bank's liquidity profile will remain largely stable in the
coming 12-18 months. Its reliance on market funds was lower than
most rated domestic bank peers, benefiting from its established
network in townships in Guangzhou, a large retail deposit base and
close ties with village organizations and local government
agencies. It also had adequate liquid resources to cover its market
funds.

The review for downgrade on GRCB's Baa2/P-2 long-term/short-term
deposit ratings and all other ratings and assessments reflects the
review for downgrade on the bank's ba1 BCAs.

During the review period, Moody's will assess the drivers of the
deterioration and the forward-looking view of the bank's asset
quality, profitability and capital. In addition, Moody's will
review the strategy of the bank to bring these back to levels that
are more in line with Moody's expectations for its ba1 BCA peers.
Moody's will also review the bank's plans to replenish capital, if
any.

GRCB's rating is based on China's Moderate+ Banking System Macro
Profile. Its BCA is ba1, and its ba1 adjusted BCA does not
incorporate any affiliate support. China does not have an
operational bank resolution regime, as a result, Moody's applies
its basic Loss Given Failure approach to rating GRCB's debt
securities and assumes a high level of support from the Chinese
government in times of need. Given this, GRCB's deposit ratings,
Counterparty Risk Assessment and Counterparty Risk Ratings
incorporate two notches of uplift.

Moody's assessment of government support reflects the bank's
position as the fourth largest rural commercial bank in China and
the only listed regional commercial bank incorporated in Guangzhou,
as well as the role it plays in the development of Guangzhou.

Furthermore, the Guangzhou government holds 18.22% of the bank's
shares as of the end of June 2020, including a 3.73% stake held by
Guangzhou Financial Holdings Co., Ltd., a state-owned financial
holding company established in Guangzhou.

The bank's BCA and ratings upgrade is unlikely given the current
review for downgrade. Its BCA and ratings could be confirmed if the
bank maintains sound credit metrics in line with its current
ratings and assessments.

The bank's ratings could be downgraded should the Chinese
government's capability or willingness to support the bank weaken.

Furthermore, there could be downward rating pressure if the
operating environment weakens significantly, for example, if
China's economic growth moderates or if corporate financial
leverage increases significantly as a result of loose monetary
policies.

GRCB's BCA and ratings could also be downgraded if the bank's asset
quality and profitability weaken significantly; risk-weighted
assets grow rapidly and lead to a weaker capital position; or
liquidity conditions deteriorate.

PRINCIPAL METHODOLOGY

The principal methodology used in these ratings was Banks
Methodology published in November 2019.

Headquartered in Guangzhou, Guangzhou Rural Commercial Bank Co.,
Ltd. reported assets of about RMB972 billion at June 30, 2020.

The local market analyst for these ratings is Yulia Wan
+86.21.2057.4017.

Issuer: Guangzhou Rural Comm Bank Co., Ltd.

Adjusted Baseline Credit Assessment, Placed on Review for
Downgrade, currently ba1

Baseline Credit Assessment, Placed on Review for Downgrade,
currently ba1

Long-term Counterparty Risk Assessment, Placed on Review for
Downgrade, currently Baa2(cr)

Short-term Counterparty Risk Assessment, Placed on Review for
Downgrade, currently P-2(cr)

Long-term Counterparty Risk Rating (Foreign and Local Currency),
Placed on Review for Downgrade, currently Baa2

Short-term Counterparty Risk Rating (Foreign and Local Currency),
Placed on Review for Downgrade, currently P-2

Long-term Deposit Rating (Foreign and Local Currency), Placed on
Review for Downgrade, currently Baa2, outlook changed to Rating
Under Review from Negative

Short-term Deposit Rating (Foreign and Local Currency), Placed on
Review for Downgrade, currently P-2

Outlook, Changed To Rating Under Review From Negative


MGM CHINA: S&P Rates New $500MM Sr. Unsecured Notes Due 2027 'B+'
-----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its 'B+' issue-level rating to
Macau-based casino resort owner and operator MGM China Holdings
Ltd.'s proposed $500 million senior unsecured notes due 2027. The
company is a majority-owned subsidiary of MGM Resorts International
(MGM).

S&P said, "We expect the company to use the proceeds to repay a
portion of the outstanding balance under its revolver and for
general corporate purposes, including to bolster its liquidity
position amid the COVID-19 pandemic. As of Dec. 31, 2020, MGM China
had total available liquidity of $1.2 billion, including $345
million in cash and $880 million of availability under its two
revolvers. Pro forma for the proposed notes and assuming an
offering size of $500 million, MGM China's liquidity position will
increase to $1.7 billion, which should provide sufficient liquidity
as revenue gradually recovers.

"We expect MGM's leverage will likely remain very high in 2021
because its portfolio of resort casinos in its largest markets--Las
Vegas and Macau--is recovering more slowly than its regional
casinos. Although we expect MGM's consolidated lease adjusted
leverage to remain very high (above 10x) in 2021, we believe that
the company's recovery will accelerate later in 2021 and into 2022,
which should support lease-adjusted net leverage improving to below
6.5x by year-end 2022. (We add MGM's $8.4 billion of operating
lease liabilities to our measure of debt and net cash balances in
excess of $500 million, our estimate of required cage cash, against
debt balances.)

"The negative outlook on MGM reflects continued significant stress
on revenue and cash flow in 2021 and our forecast for lease
adjusted net leverage to be very high this year. This places heavy
reliance on a significant recovery in cash flow in the second half
of 2021 and 2022 to support leverage improving below 6.5x. The
negative outlook further reflects the potential for continued
operating restrictions across its gaming markets over the coming
months until widespread immunization is achieved and the continued
implementation of social distancing measures that may impair
consumer discretionary spending.

"We could lower our rating on MGM if the recovery in revenue and
cash flow in Las Vegas and Macau are slower than we expect, such
that we no longer believe lease-adjusted net leverage will improve
to below 6.5x in 2022. More specifically, we could lower the rating
if recovery in the second half of 2021 is weaker than we expect,
such that we don't believe MGM could achieve these metrics in 2022.
We could revise the outlook to stable once we believe that
widespread immunization, coronavirus containment, and economic
recovery are robust enough in key markets to enable MGM to improve
lease-adjusted net leverage to below 6.5x in 2022."

Issue Ratings--Subordination Risk Analysis

S&P said, "We apply our subordination risk criteria to rate MGM
China's unsecured notes in lieu of assigning recovery ratings
because we do not assign recovery ratings to debt issued in Macau.
We have not published an insolvency report for the jurisdiction and
have not ranked it because there is limited historical precedent
for a large-scale bankruptcy filing of a foreign-owned entity in
Macau. The jurisdiction is a special administrative region of the
People's Republic of China. Furthermore, even if lenders have a
good claim with a registerable interest in the real estate, we
believe there is significant uncertainty surrounding the
application of the insolvency process and lenders' ability to
realize asset value in this jurisdiction."

Capital structure

MGM China's capital structure solely comprises unsecured debt,
including two revolvers and several series of unsecured notes.

Analytical conclusions

S&P rates the unsecured notes 'B+', the same as its issuer credit
rating on MGM China, because there are no significant elements of
subordination risk present in its capital structure.


MONG DUONG: Moody's Affirms Ba3 Rating on USD Senior Secured Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed Mong Duong Finance Holdings
BV's Ba3 USD senior secured notes rating.

At the same time, Moody's has revised the rating outlook to
positive from negative.

The rating action follows Moody's affirmation of Vietnam's Ba3
ratings with an outlook revision to positive from negative on March
18.

Full details on the sovereign rating action are available at
https://bit.ly/3lEFoNi

"The rating action on Mong Duong Finance reflects our assessment
that the notes will benefit from Vietnam's improving credit
quality, given the constraint by the sovereign rating," says Mic
Kang, a Moody's Vice President and Senior Credit Officer.

"The government's commitment through a guarantee and undertakings
will help the underlying power project mitigate risks stemming from
its concentration in a single offtaker and a sole coal supplier,
thereby allowing the project to continue benefiting from its
fully-contracted cash flow," adds Kang.

Mong Duong Finance is a finance entity whose credit profile is
closely linked to AES Mong Duong Power Company Limited (MDP), which
owns and operates the underlying power project, because of several
structural features.

MDP operates with the assurance that the government will make
reliable and timely payments to MDP, if and when required, under
the Government Guarantee and Undertaking Agreement (GGU) and the
Build Operate Transfer (BOT) contract.

RATINGS RATIONALE

The Ba3 rating reflects MDP's fully contracted cash flow under a
long-term power purchase agreement (PPA). The PPA contains a robust
tariff structure allowing for the recovery of costs and realization
of capital returns, so long as material offtaker and fuel supplier
risks do not emerge.

The government's commitment to MDP under the GGU and the BOT
contract supports the predictability of the company's operating
cash flow, while mitigating MDP's risk exposure to its single
offtaker, Vietnam Electricity, and its sole coal supplier, Vietnam
National Coal-Mineral Industries Group (Vinacomin).

Under the GGU and the BOT contract, the government guarantees the
performance of all payment obligations and all financial
commitments of Vietnam Electricity and Vinacomin, and compensates
MDP for any operational difficulties stemming from a failure of
coal supply by Vinacomin.

MDP's ownership structure will change, subject to approvals from
stakeholders -- including the government -- following The AES
Corporation's (Ba1 stable) announcement that it signed an agreement
to sell its entire 51% stake in MDP to a consortium led by a
US-based investor in January 2021.

At the same time, the terms of the notes require new owner(s) to
meet the conditions for a qualified transferee, which include (1) a
tangible net worth of at least $300 million or ratings of Ba1 or
above by Moody's or other rating agencies, and (2) substantial
experience operating fossil fuel power plants.

Moody's expects MDP's average debt service coverage ratios to be
1.4x-1.5x during the tenor of the notes. This level of credit
metrics will support MDP's credit quality.

In terms of environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors,
Moody's has considered that MDP's coal-fired power project is
exposed to carbon transition risk and tightening air pollution
regulations. Nevertheless, MDP's exposure to these environmental
risks should not increase materially, as long as the government
compensates most incremental costs resulting from unfavorable
regulatory changes, including environmental laws and regulations,
through direct payments or adjustments of the tariff structure
under the BOT contract.

MDP's exposure to social risk mainly stems from health and safety
requirements, but is mitigated by MDP's insurance coverage
encompassing property damage, business interruptions, public and
product liability and employer's liability.

MDP has a good operating track record, and certain project finance
features under the USD notes and project loans help Mong Duong
Finance maintain adequate debt servicing capability. However,
governance risk could increase if the sponsor profile or commitment
declines as a result of the potential ownership change.

FACTORS THAT COULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OF THE RATING

The positive outlook on the rating mirrors the positive outlook on
Vietnam's sovereign rating, given the government's commitment to
MDP's power project.

Moody's could upgrade the rating if Vietnam's sovereign ratings is
upgraded; and at the same time, (1) the government's strong
commitment to MDP's power project remains intact; (2) MDP maintains
its solid operations and financial leverage; and (3) MDP's sponsor
profile does not weaken.

Moody's could change the outlook to stable or take an adverse
rating action if (1) Moody's takes a negative rating action on the
sovereign; (2) MDP's debt service coverage ratio falls below 1.1x
during the amortization period; and/or (3) MDP's sponsor profile
weakens as a result of the potential ownership change, contrary to
Moody's expectation.

The principal methodology used in this rating was Power Generation
Projects Methodology published in July 2020.

Mong Duong Finance Holdings BV is the issuer of the USD notes. Mong
Duong Finance is indirectly owned by (1) AES Mong Duong Holdings
B.V. (51%), a subsidiary of The AES Corporation (Ba1 stable); (2)
PSC Energy Global Co., Ltd (30%), a subsidiary of POSCO Energy, and
which is in turn owned by POSCO (Baa1 stable); and (3) Stable
Investment Corporation (19%), which is owned by China Investment
Corporation, a sovereign wealth fund of the Government of China (A1
stable). This shareholding structure is the same as that for AES
Mong Duong Power Company Limited (MDP).

MDP is a limited liability joint venture that owns and operates two
sub-critical coal-fired power plants with a total capacity of 1,120
megawatts. The plants are located around 220 km east of Hanoi (50
km north-east of Ha Long City in Quang Ninh Province).


YONGCHENG COAL: Haitong Securities Hit by Business Ban Default
--------------------------------------------------------------
Caixin Global reports that China's top securities regulator slapped
a one-year business ban on Haitong Securities Co. Ltd. for
allegedly helping a bond defaulter to sell bonds illegally.

Caixin relates that the China Securities Regulatory Commission
(CSRC) said March 24 it had suspended Haitong from conducting bond
investment advisory business for institutional investors due to its
lax risk control measures. Several company executives were also
punished.

Haitong did not effectively control and prevent risk when it
conducted bond business, causing serious negative effects on the
market, said the CSRC, Caixin relays.

Yongcheng Coal & Electricity Holding Group Co. Ltd. mines and
distributes coal products. The Company produces brown coal
products, bituminous coal products, hard coal products, coking coal
products, and other related products. Yongcheng Coal & Electricity
Holding Group also provides electric generation, apparel
processing, trade, and other related services.

The company defaulted on a CNY1 billion (US$152 million) bond on
November 10, 2020.


YUZHOU GROUP: Moody's Lowers CFR to B1 on Weak Revenue
------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has downgraded Yuzhou Group Holdings
Company Limited's corporate family rating to B1 from Ba3, and its
senior unsecured rating to B2 from B1.

At the same time, the outlook was changed to negative from stable.

"The downgrade of Yuzhou's ratings follows its recent profit
warning and reflects our expectation that its revenue recognition
will be weak, due to the company's slow delivery of presold
projects. As a result, the company's key credit metrics will stay
weak in the next 12-18 months and will no longer be supportive of
its previous Ba3 CFR," says Celine Yang, a Moody's Assistant Vice
President and Analyst.

"Meanwhile, the negative outlook reflects the uncertainties over
the company's ability to improve its revenue recognition and
financial metrics over the next 12-18 months, as well as our
expectation that its access to funding will weaken as a result,"
adds Yang.

RATINGS RATIONALE

Yuzhou's B1 CFR reflects its 1) track record of developing and
selling residential properties in the Yangtze River Delta, Bohai
Rim and West Strait area, 2) geographic diversification in
different economic regions in China, and 3) good liquidity.

At the same time, the B1 rating reflects its weak credit metrics
and high reliance on sales from joint ventures (JVs) and
associates, which constrain its corporate transparency.

Moody's expects the company's leverage, as measured by
revenue/adjusted debt, will stay weak at 35%-40% in the next 12-18
months, largely unchanged from 35% for the 12 months ended June
2020 and contrary to Moody's original expectation of a meaningful
improvement. Similarly, its EBIT/interest ratio will fall to
1.6x-1.7x from 2.0x during the same period. This reflects
uncertainties over the company's abilities to catch up its delivery
of presold projects amidst a tightened credit condition in China.

The weak prospects of a material improvement in Yuzhou's credit
metrics could constrain its access to funding. This could include a
reduction in the availability of bank funding for its project
development, particularly as credit conditions tighten for the
property sector.

In addition, the company's weak revenue recognition reflects its
high usage of joint ventures, which limits transparency over the
company's control over the cash flow and development progress of
projects operating under those joint ventures.

However, Moody's expect Yuzhou's liquidity to remain adequate given
its sufficient internal resources to cover its maturing debt and
committed land payments for the next 12 months.

In terms of environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors,
Moody's has considered Yuzhou's concentrated ownership given the
controlling shareholder, Mr. Lam Lung On, holds a 57.33% stake in
the company as of June 30, 2020. Yuzhou had a relatively high
dividend payout ratio of 46.8% in 2019 compared with 35%-36.5% in
the previous four years.

Yuzhou's B2 senior unsecured bond rating is one notch below its CFR
because of the risk of structural subordination. This subordination
risk reflects the fact that most of Yuzhou's claims are at the
operating subsidiaries and have priority over claims at the holding
company in a bankruptcy scenario. In addition, the holding company
lacks significant mitigating factors for structural subordination.
As a result, the expected recovery rate for claims at the holding
company will be lower.

FACTORS THAT COULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OF THE RATINGS

An upgrade is unlikely given the negative outlook.

However, the outlook could be changed to stable if Yuzhou (1)
maintains solid contracted sales growth with stable margins; (2)
improves its revenue recognition and credit metrics, with
revenue/adjusted debt trending towards 50%-55% and EBIT/interest
coverage exceeding 2.0x, both on a sustained basis; and (3)
maintains good liquidity and uninterrupted access to onshore and
offshore funding.

On the other hand, Moody's could downgrade Yuzhou's ratings if (1)
its contracted sales and operating cash flow reduces; or (2) the
company is unable to improve its revenue recognition such that its
credit metrics remain weak. Credit metrics indicative of a
downgrade include (i) revenue/adjusted debt under 40%-45%, and (ii)
EBIT/interest coverage below 1.5x, all on a sustained basis.

A weakening in liquidity, with cash/short-term debt consistently
under 1.25x or an interruption to its access to onshore and
offshore funding, will pressure its ratings.

Moody's could also downgrade the rating if the company's contingent
liabilities associated with joint ventures increase materially, or
if there are heightened risks that it will need to provide funding
support to joint ventures. This could be the result of a material
deterioration in the financial strength and liquidity of its joint
venture projects or a substantial increase in investment in new
joint venture projects.

The principal methodology used in these ratings was Homebuilding
And Property Development Industry published in January 2018.

Yuzhou Group Holdings Company Limited is a property developer that
focuses on residential housing in the Yangtze River Delta and the
West Strait Economic Zone. Established in Xiamen in the mid-1990s,
Yuzhou is one of the city's largest developers. The company moved
its headquarters to Shanghai in 2016.

Yuzhou listed its shares on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange in 2009.
As of June 30, 2020, Yuzhou's land bank totaled 20.24 million
square meters in saleable gross floor area.




=========
I N D I A
=========

A2Z INFRA: CARE Reaffirms D Ratings on INR832.17cr Loans
--------------------------------------------------------
CARE Ratings reaffirmed ratings on certain bank facilities of A2Z
Infra Engineering Limited (A2Z), as:

                       Amount
   Facilities       (INR crore)    Ratings
   ----------       -----------    -------
   Long Term Bank
   Facilities           303.40     CARE D Reaffirmed

   Short Term Bank
   Facilities           528.77     CARE D Reaffirmed

Detailed Rationale & Key Rating Drivers

The ratings assigned to the bank facilities of A2Z takes into
account the ongoing delays in repayment of the debt obligations by
the company due to its stretched liquidity position.

Rating Sensitivities

Positive Rating Sensitivities

* Timely track record of debt servicing by the company for
continuous period of 3 months
* Sustainable improvement in the operations of the company
* DSCR improves to >1x on a sustained basis

Detailed description of the key rating drivers

Key Rating Weaknesses

* Ongoing delays in debt servicing: There are ongoing delays in
servicing of its debt obligations due to the stretched liquidity
position.

* Weak financial performance: The company's total operating income
stood at INR400.19 crore in FY20 against INR521.51 crore in FY19.
The company reported loss of INR290.89 crore during FY20 (FY19:
Profit of INR32.12 crore). EBITDA stood at negative INR22.90 crore
against INR56.34 crore previous year. The loss consists of non-cash
expense from assets written off amounting to INR149.96 crore. The
management has performed an impairment of three cogeneration power
plants set up in collaboration with certain sugar mills on Build,
Own, Operate and Transfer (BOOT) basis. As such the GCA in FY20
stood at negative INR94.92 crore against INR43.68 crore previous
year. The overall gearing deteriorated to 1.07x as on March 31,
2020 (0.59x as on March 31, 2019).

Liquidity: Poor

The liquidity of the company is poor, owing to delays in debt
servicing. The company had cash and bank balance of INR5.44 crore
as on March 31, 2020.

Incorporated in January 2002 as A2Z Maintenance Services Private
Ltd, the company was renamed 'A2Z Maintenance & Engineering
Services Private Ltd' in June 2005. Subsequently, the company
became a public limited company in March 2010. A2Z came up with an
IPO in October 2010 and raised INR776.2 crore. The company got its
present name in December 2014 and is primarily engaged in providing
Engineering, Procurement and Construction (EPC) services in power
transmission and distribution sector.


ARIISTO DEVELOPERS: Prestige Wins $1.4BB Mumbai Home Project
------------------------------------------------------------
Dhwani Pandya at Bloomberg News reports that Prestige Estates
Projects Ltd. will take over a Mumbai housing project from bankrupt
Ariisto Developers Pvt. following a court decision on March 23.

According to Bloomberg, the Bengaluru-based developer plans to
launch the first phase of the project by May and second phase
toward the end of the year, Prestige's Chief Executive Officer
Venkat K. Narayana said by phone on March 24. He estimates revenues
of more than INR100 billion ($1.4 billion) from the 7.5 million
square feet under development.

"This will be our largest project in Mumbai," Bloomberg quotes
Narayana as saying.

Bloomberg notes that Prestige emerged as a top bidder for
beleaguered Ariisto in November 2019. But the proceedings were then
stuck in court and further delayed due to the pandemic.

Creditors had combined claims of about INR25 billion, of which
Prestige offered to pay INR16 billion, according to company
officials with knowledge of the matter, who asked not to be
identified as the details are private, Bloomberg relays. The
court-appointed insolvency resolution professional Jayesh
Sanghrajka declined to comment when reached by phone, Bloomberg
notes.

Under the resolution plan, Prestige will pay INR3.70 billion
upfront to creditors and allot them some 800,000 square feet of
fully constructed area, Narayana said. Creditors include HDFC Ltd.,
Piramal Group, IIFL and other wealthy individuals and homebuyers.

More than 500 apartments had been stuck for more than a decade as
India's real estate sector saw a series of challenges including a
crisis in the shadow banking industry and unfavorable government
policies, adds Bloomberg.

                     About Ariisto Developers

Ariisto Realtors Private Limited operates as a real estate
developer. The Company owns and develops residential and commercial
properties. Ariisto Realtors serves customers in India.

In November 2018, the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) admitted
insolvency proceedings against the developer. Ariisto Realtors owed
around INR2,500 crore to various lenders that includes HDFC Ltd,
IIFL Trustee Ltd and Indiabulls Housing Finance Ltd.


BHAGWATI AIR: CARE Lowers Rating on INR15cr LT Loan to C
--------------------------------------------------------
CARE Ratings revised the ratings on certain bank facilities of
Bhagwati Air Express Private Limited (BAEPL), as:

                       Amount
   Facilities       (INR crore)    Ratings
   ----------       -----------    -------
   Long term Bank
   Facilities           15.00      CARE C; Stable revised from
                                   CARE B; Stable

Detailed Rationale & Key Rating Drivers

The revision in rating of BAEPL takes into account the instance of
delay in servicing of debt obligations on its commercial vehicle
loan (not rated by CARE). The rating continues to factor in lower
profitability margins, leveraged capital structure, working capital
intensive nature of operations and presence of company in highly
fragmented and competitive industry.

The rating however, derive comfort from the experience of promoters
in logistics services, growing scale of operations and diversified
client base across various industries and presence in both surface
& air freight forwarding.

Rating Sensitivities

Positive Factors - Factors that could lead to positive rating
action/upgrade:

* Timely servicing of due debt obligations for more than 3 months.
* Growth in TOI by more than 30% and PBILDT margin of more than 6%
on a sustained basis
* Improvement in capital structure marked by overall gearing of
less than 1.50 times on sustained basis

Negative Factors- Factors that could lead to negative rating
action/downgrade:

* Deterioration in total income by more than 30% and PBILDT margin
of less than 3% on sustained basis

* Any higher than envisaged debt funded capex plan.

Detailed description of the key rating drivers

Key Rating Weaknesses

* Delay in servicing of debt obligations (Not rated by CARE): The
company has reported instance of delay in servicing of its debt
obligations on commercial vehicle loan (not rated by CARE) owing to
delay in receipt of receivables from the customers. There was a
delay in generating E-way bill during January 2021 which
subsequently resulted in delay in receipt of payment from the
customers. This led to timing mismatch and the due debt
obligation of INR0.08 crore on Feb. 22, 2021 was serviced on Feb.
27, 2021 with a delay of five days. However, there was no
overutilization in the cash credit facility and the average
utilization remains more than 90% over the past 12 months
February 2021.

* Low profitability margins: Profitability margins of BAEPL
remained low due to competitive and fragmented nature of the
industry with company offering better rates to its clients for
acquiring business. The PBILDT and PAT margins of the company
remained low at 3.50% and -0.22% respectively during FY20 (A) as
against 3.26% and -0.37% respectively during FY19(A).

* Leveraged capital structure: The capital structure of the company
stood leveraged with overall gearing of 2.33x in FY20(A) which
increased moderately from 2.28x during FY19(A). The high overall
gearing is largely due to increase in vehicle loans for buying
fleet of trucks which increased from 81 trucks in FY19 to 108
trucks in FY20.

* Working capital intensive nature of operations: As the company is
engaged in deliveries across the country, the delivery time add to
the receivable cycle of the company. The company gets payment in 30
days after presenting bill to its clients. The company has to incur
some upfront operational expenses for security check and advance
payments which along with time lag in collection of receivables
results in higher working capital requirements for BAEPL. The
company has to rely more on cash credit for financing its working
capital needs and its cash credit limits remain utilized more than
90% over the past 12 months February 2021.

* Highly fragmented and competitive industry: The logistics
industry is highly fragmented with large number of operators owing
to low entry barriers. Presence of various players results in
intense competition within the industry. High fragmentation and
intense competition lead to unhealthy price wars and discounts
resulting in pressure on margins and depressed freight rate.

Key Rating Strengths

* Experienced promoters: BAEPL is currently being managed by Mr.
Dinesh Kumar Digga and Mr. Roopchand Baheti both promoters have
vast experience of more than a decade in the logistics solutions
through their association with BAEPL. They collectively look after
the operations of the company. BAEPL has been operational for more
than a decade, which has enabled company to establish relationship
with its clients.

* Growing scale of operations: Total operating income of BAEPL grew
on y-o-y basis from INR109.57 crore during FY19 (A) to INR194.99
crore during FY20 (A) owing to higher demand from domestic
logistics sector. Several government initiatives like Make in
India, Skill India, Digital India and Start up India etc. had
resulted in big boost to E-Commerce and manufacturing sector in
India, which derived the demand in logistics sector in past few
years.

* Diversified client base across various industries and presence in
both surface and air freight forwarding: BAEPL provides domestic
freight services through both airway (Air Freight Forwarding
services) and surface channel to its broad and diversified customer
base in the verticals of E-commerce, pharmaceuticals and healthcare
industry, automobile, Industrial companies, courier companies etc.

Liquidity: Stretched

The liquidity of BAEPL is stretched with tightly matched cash
accruals vis-à-vis repayment obligations. The cash and balance
available with company stood at INR0.45 crore as on March 08, 2021.
The company also has FDR with bank which stood at INR3.45 crore as
on March 08, 2021 of which INR3.00 crore is lien marked with bank.
Company has to rely on cash credit limit for its working capital
requirements which remains utilized for more than 90% over the past
12 months February 2021.

BAEPL was incorporated in 2010 by Mr. Dinesh Kumar Digga and Mr.
Roopchand Baheti. The company provides domestic freight services
through airway channel (air freight forwarding services) and
surface transportation. The company has tie up with domestic air
carrier for transportation of goods through air and for surface
transportation the company has its own fleet of more than 108
trucks with capacity ranging from 9 tons to 18 tons.


BRAHMAPUTRA METALLICS: CARE Reaffirms D Rating on INR77.87cr Loan
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CARE Ratings reaffirmed ratings on certain bank facilities of
Brahmaputra Metallics Limited (BML), as:

                       Amount
   Facilities       (INR crore)    Ratings
   ----------       -----------    -------
   Long Term Bank
   Facilities           77.87      CARE D Reaffirmed

   Short Term Bank
   Facilities           44.86      CARE D Reaffirmed

Detailed Rationale & Key Rating Drivers

The reaffirmation in the rating assigned to the bank facilities of
BML continues to remain constrained by on-going delays in debt
servicing, moderate scale of operations and weak financial
profile.

The rating, however, derives strength from the experienced
promoters.

Rating Sensitivities

Positive Factors - Factors that could lead to positive rating
action/upgrade:

* Meeting the debt repayment obligations in a timely manner.
* Ability of the company to increase its scale of operations and
the profitability margin on a sustained basis.

Detailed description of the key rating drivers

Key Rating Weaknesses

* On-going delays in debt servicing: There have been instances of
delay in servicing of interests on term loan as per the bank
statements. Further, the banker has confirmed about the on-going
delay in debt servicing.

* Moderate scale of operations: BML is a moderate sized player in
the iron and steel industry. Thus, it suffers from lack of
economies of scale in an industry marked by presence of large
organized players. Furthermore, the moderate size restricts the
financial flexibility of the company in times of stress.

* Weak Financial profile: BML's total operating income moderated to
INR344.60 crore in FY20 from INR398.90 crore in FY19 on account of
decline in the sales realization of MS billets and sponge iron.
Further, the operating profit declined to INR4.40 crore in FY20
vis-à-vis INR35.93 crore in FY19 on account of increase in the
cost of raw materials. The company reported loss of INR23.89 crore
as against net profit of INR3.74 crore in FY19. Further, the
company reported cash loss of INR13.12 crore in FY20. Debt
servicing of INR41.97 crore was made good out of fund infusion by
the promoter group (INR29.96 Cr vide equity infusion and INR16.58
crore in the form of unsecured loans). Further, in the current
fiscal, the promoters have infused INR65crore (INR25 crore vide
equity & INR40 crore in the form of unsecured loans). Capital
structure of the company continues to remain leveraged amidst
negative networth as on March 31, 2020. In 9MFY21, the company
reported a TOI of INR222.71 crore.

Key rating Strengths

* Experienced promoters: The promoters of the company have more
than two decades of experience in the steel manufacturing industry.
Besides, the promoters are involved in other businesses including
coking coal, retail, cement & paper.

Liquidity position-Poor

The liquidity position of the company is poor marked by inadequate
accruals when compared to the debt repayment obligations, high
average fund-based utilization levels of around ~86% during the
last 12 months ended Dec 20 and modest cash and bank balance.
However, debt servicing of INR41.97 crore in FY20 was made good out
of fund infusion by the promoter group (INR29.96 Cr vide equity
infusion and INR16.58 crore in the form of unsecured loans).
Further, in the current fiscal, the promoters have infused
INR65crore (INR25 crore vide equity & INR40 crore in the form of
unsecured loans). The company has availed moratorium of instalments
for a period of 6 months (March- Aug) under RBI's COVID-19
Regulatory Package.

Brahmaputra Metallics Limited (BML) is promoted by Guwahati based
Lohia Group and Jaiswal Group. The Company was initially
incorporated as Brahmaputra Breweries and Distilleries Pvt. Ltd. on
29th October 1999. Subsequently the Company decided to enter into
the steel plant and consequently the name of the Company was
changed to Brahmaputra Metallics (P) Limited on 4th December 2006.
The Company was converted into a public limited company and
rechristened as Brahmaputra Metallics Limited on 4th July 2007. In
May 2009, BML envisaged setting up an integrated steel plant at
Gola, Ramgarh District, Jharkhand. The installed capacity stands at
1,05,000 tonnes per annum for sponge iron, 210,000 tonnes per annum
for billets and a 20 MW captive power plant. The directors of the
company include Mr. Bajrang Lohia, Mr. Kaushik Agarwal and Mr.
Santosh Kumar Jaiswal.


CONTINUUM ENERGY: Fitch Rates $561MM Secured Notes 'BB+'
--------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned Continuum Energy Levanter Pte. Ltd.'s
(CELP) USD561 million senior secured notes due 2027 a final rating
of 'BB+'. The Outlook is Stable.

CELP is a wholly owned subsidiary of Continuum Green Energy Ltd
(Continuum), which is involved mainly in wind power generation in
India. Continuum has a portfolio of about 1GW of generation
capacity, of which around 757MW is operational, 154MW is under
construction and 150MW is ready to construct.

CELP will use the proceeds from the notes to refinance mainly
existing debt at operating entities within a restricted group of
companies (referred to as Continuum RG1) that is defined in the
indenture to the note issue. The operating entities will issue
secured Indian rupee-denominated bonds to CELP as part of this debt
refinancing.

RATING RATIONALE

The rating reflects the credit quality of a portfolio of four
projects across wind-abundant states in India. The rating is also
enhanced by a diversified pool of high-quality commercial and
industrial customers (C&Is) that pay on time and help offset the
long payment cycles of state distribution companies. The rating
takes into consideration the refinance risk arising from the
balloon structure of the notes, despite being manageable. The
financial profile is assessed by the debt service coverage ratio
(DSCR) over the refinancing period, assuming the outstanding
principal of the notes will be refinanced on maturity by a
long-term amortising debt. The DSCR averages 1.71x under Fitch's
rating case, which incorporates mainly reduced energy production,
higher expenses and refinance interest rate. The rating thresholds
that Fitch apply in its rating analysis are the thresholds
applicable to merchant projects.

A debt instrument's rating may be capped by the credit quality of
its revenue counterparties. Fitch does not rate the state
distribution companies that purchase power from Continuum RG1 under
the power purchase agreements (PPAs). However, the interaction
between Continuum RG1 and the state distributions companies is
regulated by relevant laws and regulations at the central and state
level, and replacement entities in case of failure to perform by
the incumbent would need to adhere to the same regulations. Fitch
considers exposure to these revenue counterparties to be in the
form of a possible temporary liquidity stress rather than a
constraint on the rating, as the portfolio is exposed to
diversified counterparties.

The state distribution companies have a history of payment delays
and weak credit profiles. Therefore, Fitch believes that it will be
prudent that Continuum RG1 should meet a higher threshold to
achieve a same rating as other projects that have counterparties
with known and healthy creditworthiness, all else being equal.
Hence, Fitch has based the notes' rating on the indicative DSCR
thresholds applicable to merchant projects instead of the ones for
fully contracted projects, while the cash flow is evaluated based
on the contracted prices, which constitutes a criteria variation
from Fitch's Renewable Project Rating Criteria.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Long-Term, Fixed-Price PPAs: Revenue Risk (Price) − Midrange

Continuum RG1 has a diversified customer pool, with 51.1% of
capacity contracted with state distribution companies and 48.9%
contracted with around 89 C&I customers. However, the share of C&I
customers will increase to 76.5% of capacity upon conversion of
some expiring PPAs with state distribution companies to the open
access route in 2027. The tariff paid by C&I customers varies with
the change in the retail tariff for C&I users charged by state
distribution companies (discom C&I tariff) and the various
applicable open access charges. Generators and customers each bear
half of the variation in the discom C&I tariff and open access
charges. A third-party consultant believes that the discom C&I
tariff will generally rise over time over the life of these
projects and the relevant projections used in the financial model
are prudent.

Robust Energy Yield, Geographically Diversified - Revenue Risk
(Volume): Midrange

The energy yield forecast produced by third-party consultants and
supported by the portfolio benefit analysis indicates an overall
P50/one-year P90 spread between 6% and 16%, leading to a 'Midrange'
assessment for volume risk. Curtailment risk is minimal as
renewables have "must-run" status in India. Only very limited
curtailment occurred in the Periyapatt project in the past, and
management expects this to improve after the 400KV system is
completed in 1QFY21. The C&I customers are also incentivised to
maximise offtake because of the cost advantage compared with
alternative sources, and the contracted volume of the Continuum RG1
projects forms only 50%-60% of the demand of a customer.

Experienced Operator; Proven Technology: Operation Risk −
Midrange

Operation risk is assessed as Midrange owing to favourable
production-based pricing mechanisms and comprehensive operating and
maintenance (O&M) contracts, including both scheduled and
unscheduled maintenance carried out by experienced teams. O&M
contracts have terms of seven to 15 years, longer than the debt
tenor. Fitch believes it will not be difficult to find replacement
operators upon expiry of the contracts as similar technology is
used widely in India. All the plants use proven technology with a
long operating history. Costs have not been verified by a
third-party technical advisor, which is a weakness. The operating
record of the plants is moderate, varying from months to eight
years with a capacity-weighted average of four years.

Ringfenced Structure, Manageable Refinancing Risk - Debt Structure
- Midrange

The bonds are issued in a two-part structure used commonly by
Indian renewable transactions. Noteholders are protected by the
ringfenced structure and covenants. The notes pay fixed interest
rates and the currency risk arising from changes in the US
dollar-Indian rupee exchange rate will be mitigated by entering
into a currency hedging arrangement. Noteholders benefit from a
lock-up test at backward-looking graded DSCRs. No additional
indebtedness is allowed other than a working-capital basket of
USD35 million. Nearly 8% of the note principal will amortise over
the note life. The refinancing risk exposure is mitigated by a cash
trap from year 1.5 and the mandatory cash sweep and cash lock-up
for about 38.75% of the principal from year 1.5. The refinancing
risk of the remaining 53.25% of the principal is low because of the
assets' good access to banking and capital markets and their longer
operating record by the time the notes mature.

PEER GROUP

Continuum RG1 is rated a notch higher than Azure Power Solar Energy
Private Limited (Azure RG2, senior secured rating BB/Stable). Azure
RG2 is a pure solar portfolio, which is likely to have lower
variation in production compared with Fitch's forecast.
Nevertheless, Continuum RG1 benefits from a much stronger average
DSCR of 1.71x in Fitch's rating case against Azure RG2's average of
1.45x. Continuum RG1 faces a variable price structure in its
contracts with C&I customers, which results in a 'Midrange'
revenue-price risk assessment compared with 'Stronger' for Azure
RG2, but Continuum RG1 benefits from better receivable days given
timely payments from these consumers. About 78% of Azure RG2's
capacity is contracted with state-owned distribution companies
while the rest is with sovereign-backed off-takers. Although, the
overall debt structure of both RGs is assessed as 'Midrange',
Continuum RG1 has tighter covenants, including lock-up tests based
on graded DSCRs, partial amortisation, cash trap from year 1.5 and
a mandatory cash sweep.

Continuum RG1 can be also compared to Adani Green Energy Limited
Restricted Group 1 (AGEL RG1, senior secure rating BB+/Stable) and
Adani Green Energy Limited Restricted Group 2 (AGEL RG2, senior
secure rating BBB-/Negative). Like Azure RG2, AGEL RG1 and RG2 are
solar portfolios with counterparties comprising state distribution
companies and sovereign-backed off-takers. However, AGEL RG1 and
RG2 have tighter structures, with direct issuance by the operating
entities as opposed to the two-tier structure used by Continuum
RG1. AGEL RG2 has less exposure to refinancing risk as most of the
note principal is amortising.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Factor that could, individually or collectively, lead to positive
rating action/upgrade:

-- No rating upgrade is expected in the near term given the
    uncertainty around the debt refinancing, renewal terms for
    maturing contracts and PPAs, the future discom C&I tariff and
    open access charges applicable for C&I projects.

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to negative
rating action/downgrade:

Average synthetic annual DSCR in the Fitch rating case dropping
below 1.6x persistently, which could result from:

-- Energy production underperforming long-term projections due to
    low renewable resources or operational issues; or

-- Working capital issues due to off-takers' payment delays; or

-- Failure to renew maturing PPAs or renewal at terms that are
    less favourable than the current terms; or

-- Less favourable future tariff for distribution companies and
    open access charges applicable for C&I projects than
    projected; or

-- Less favourable refinancing terms and structure than the
    assumptions made in Fitch's rating case.

BEST/WORST CASE RATING SCENARIO

International scale credit ratings of Sovereigns, Public Finance
and Infrastructure issuers have a best-case rating upgrade scenario
(defined as the 99th percentile of rating transitions, measured in
a positive direction) of three notches over a three-year rating
horizon; and a worst-case rating downgrade scenario (defined as the
99th percentile of rating transitions, measured in a negative
direction) of three notches over three years. The complete span of
best- and worst-case scenario credit ratings for all rating
categories ranges from 'AAA' to 'D'. Best- and worst-case scenario
credit ratings are based on historical performance.

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

Continuum RG1 is a restricted group consisting of four renewable
projects - mainly wind farms in India - and owned by Continuum. The
projects have a total capacity of 722.9MW across India. The
issuance is USD561 million of six-year senior secured notes. The
proceeds will be used to refinance the existing rupee-denominated
debt and working capital loans, and for general corporate purposes.
The notes will be cross-guaranteed on a senior basis among the
restricted entities

FINANCIAL ANALYSIS

For Fitch's base case, Fitch includes the P50 energy production
assumption and a 7% production haircut to capture the 'Midrange'
volume risk assessment and the higher uncertainty of wind
resources. Fitch also applies more conservative projections for the
discom C&I tariff and open access charges for projects in Gujarat
by keeping it constant at the level for the financial year ending
March 2021 (FY21), while the tariff and charges for other projects
are adopted in line with the third-party market advisor's
forecasts, which show the net tariff declines over time and seem
prudent. Fitch's rating case assumes a one-year P90 energy yield
with portfolio benefit, 7% production haircut and 15% stress on
non-contracted operating expenses. The rating case assumes the same
projections for the discom C&I tariff and open access charges as in
the Fitch base case.

Fitch assumes that under the balloon structure, the notes will be
refinanced upon maturity by fully amortising debt across the
remaining PPA terms at a higher refinancing interest rate of 12%,
reflecting the uncertainty at the time of maturity in six years.

Fitch's base case generates an average annual DSCR of 2.06x over
the refinancing period with a minimum of 1.92x and the average
leverage, defined as net debt to EBITDA, for the bond period being
3.9x. Incorporating additional operational and refinancing stress,
Fitch's rating case generates an average annual DSCR of 1.71x over
the refinancing period, with a minimum of 1.70x, and the average
leverage for the bond period being 4.5x.

CRITERIA VARIATION

In line with other Indian renewable transactions, Fitch's view of
revenue exposure to state distribution companies is that although
the state distribution companies are not rated, they are likely to
be financially weak. Fitch accounts for this risk by applying
thresholds for merchant projects instead of thresholds for fully
contracted projects. However, in the financial model, Fitch
continues to use the contracted PPA tariff to calculate revenue.
This is a variation from Fitch's Renewable Energy Project Rating
Criteria.

ESG CONSIDERATIONS

Unless otherwise disclosed in this section, the highest level of
ESG credit relevance is a score of '3'. This means ESG issues are
credit-neutral or have only a minimal credit impact on the entity,
either due to their nature or the way in which they are being
managed by the entity.


INDIA: Likely to Resume New Bankruptcy Filings After Halt Expires
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The Economic Times of India reports that India's government is
considering resuming fresh bankruptcy filings after the current
suspension expires on March 25, people with knowledge of the matter
said.

ET relates that the lifting of the halt would come even as a
resurgence in virus cases threatens the nascent economic recovery.
It could spark a wave of new insolvencies, pent up from last year
when businesses were hurt by India's first economic contraction in
decades.

According to ET, Prime Minister Narendra Modi's government last
year halted the process of initiating most fresh insolvency
proceedings to insulate cash-strapped borrowers hit by the pandemic
for six months starting March 25, and that was extended twice
during the year.

The suspension is unlikely to be prolonged further because a return
to normality is needed, the people said, asking not to be
identified citing rules. Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman is
considering a proposal to this effect.

ET says the move closely follows a Supreme Court ruling Tuesday
that allows lenders to resume classifying bad debt. The two steps
together give investors a clearer sense of the impact of the
pandemic on the asset quality of local banks. The move also reopens
avenues for lenders to collect on soured debt from delinquent
borrowers, allowing them more tools to manage one of the world's
worst bad loan piles.


INDIAN OVERSEAS: Moody's Withdraws Ba2 Long Term Deposit Ratings
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has withdrawn the following ratings,
assessments and outlooks of Indian Overseas Bank (IOB) and Indian
Overseas Bank, Hong Kong Branch.

Indian Overseas Bank

Long-term Counterparty Risk Ratings (Foreign and Local Currency)
of Ba2

Short-term Counterparty Risk Ratings (Foreign and Local Currency)
of NP

Long-term Deposit Ratings (Foreign and Local Currency) of Ba2;
Outlook Stable

Short-term Deposit Ratings (Foreign Currency) of NP

Long-term Counterparty Risk Assessment of Ba2(cr)

Short-term Counterparty Risk Assessment of NP(cr)

Baseline Credit Assessment (BCA) and Adjusted BCA of b2

Stable Outlook

Indian Overseas Bank, Hong Kong Branch

Long-term Counterparty Risk Ratings (Foreign and Local Currency)
of Ba2

Short-term Counterparty Risk Ratings (Foreign and Local Currency)
of NP

Long-term Counterparty Risk Assessment of Ba2(cr)

Short-term Counterparty Risk Assessment of NP(cr)

Stable Outlook

RATINGS RATIONALE

Moody's has decided to withdraw the ratings for its own business
reasons.

Indian Overseas Bank is headquartered in Chennai and reported total
assets of INR2.6 trillion at December 31, 2020.

INDUSIND BANK: Moody's Affirms Ba1 Deposit Ratings, Outlook Stable
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the long-term local and
foreign currency deposit ratings of IndusInd Bank Limited (IndusInd
Bank) at Ba1.

Moody's has also affirmed its baseline credit assessment (BCA) and
adjusted BCA at ba2.

At the same time, Moody's has revised the outlook to Stable from
Negative.

RATINGS RATIONALE

The affirmation of the BCA and the deposit ratings takes into
consideration the bank's strong capital and core profitability, as
well as a relatively modest funding. The change in outlook to
stable from negative is driven by improvement in its funding and
capital, and marginal asset quality deterioration because of the
economic disruptions from the pandemic.

Despite the economic disruption asset quality deterioration was
moderate, with gross and net nonperforming loan (NPL) ratios, after
including those benefiting from the Supreme Court order on loan
classification, being at 2.93% and 0.22% respectively as of the end
of December 2020, compared with 2.18% and 1.05%, a year earlier.

The bank raised capital, resulting in a significant increase in the
core equity tier 1 ratio to around 15% from 12.1% at the end of
2019.

Profitability deteriorated because of increase in credit costs, but
pre-provision remains one of the highest within rated Indian banks.
Profitability will gradually improve as credit costs normalize in
2021.

Funding quality has been improving over the past 12 months, with
the share of retail deposits in total funding increasing to 27% at
end December 2020 from 24% at end March 2020. With management
prioritizing improving funding mix over loan growth, Moody's expect
further improvement over the next 12-18 months. However, IndusInd's
funding quality remains weaker than other large rated Indian
private sector banks.

Liquidity remains stable, with liquidity coverage ratio at end
December 2020 of 156%.

The bank's ratings benefit from one notch of systemic support,
based on Moody's expectation of a moderate level of support from
the Indian Government (Baa3 negative). This level of systemic
support is in line with its deposit market share in the banking
system.

FACTORS THAT COULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OF THE RATINGS

The BCA and ratings could be upgraded if (a) there is a significant
improvement in its funding, such that the share of sticky retail
deposits in its funding and depositor concentration becomes
comparable to that of other large rated private sector banks in
India, and (b) credit costs normalize to pre-pandemic levels.

The bank's BCA and ratings could be downgraded if there is a
deterioration in its funding or asset quality, such that either NPL
ratio or credit costs increase significantly from the current
levels.

The principal methodology used in these ratings was Banks
Methodology published in November 2019.

LIST OF AFFECTED RATINGS

Adjusted Baseline Credit Assessment, Affirmed ba2

Baseline Credit Assessment, Affirmed ba2

Short-term Counterparty Risk Assessment, Affirmed NP(cr)

Long-term Counterparty Risk Assessment, Affirmed Ba1(cr)

Short-term Counterparty Risk Rating (Foreign and Local Currency),
Affirmed NP

Long-term Counterparty Risk Rating (Foreign and Local Currency),
Affirmed Ba1

Short-term Issuer Rating (Foreign and Local Currency), Affirmed
NP

Long-term Issuer Rating (Foreign and Local Currency), Affirmed
Ba1; Outlook, Changed To Stable From Negative

Short-term Deposit Rating (Foreign and Local Currency), Affirmed
NP

Long-term Deposit Rating (Foreign and Local Currency), Affirmed
Ba1; Outlook, Changed To Stable From Negative

Long-term Senior Unsecured Medium-Term Note Program (Foreign
Currency), Affirmed (P)Ba1

Long-term Senior Unsecured Bond (Foreign Currency), Affirmed Ba1;
Outlook, Changed To Stable From Negative

Outlook, Changed To Stable From Negative


IRAA CLOTHING: CRISIL Reaffirms D Rating on INR11cr Loan
--------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings has reaffirmed its 'CRISIL D/CRISIL D' ratings on
the bank facilities of IRAA Clothing Private Limited (IRAA) and has
withdrawn its rating on the proposed long term bank loan facility
on request of company.

                      Amount
   Facilities       (INR Crore)     Ratings
   ----------       -----------     -------
   Cash Credit          10          CRISIL D (Reaffirmed)
   Letter of Credit     11          CRISIL D (Reaffirmed)
   Line of Credit        3.75       CRISIL D (Reaffirmed)
   Long Term Loan        3.84       CRISIL D (Reaffirmed)
   Proposed Long Term
   Bank Loan Facility    6.41       CRISIL D (Withdrawn)

CRISIL Ratings has taken cognizance of application made by IRAA for
restructuring of its bank facilities under Reserve Bank of India
(RBI) guidelines issued on August 6, 2020-'Resolution Framework for
COVID-19-related Stress'. However final approval for same it still
pending.

The ratings continue to reflect large working-capital requirement
and below-average debt protection metrics. These rating weaknesses
are partially offset by extensive experience of the promoters and
established relationships with customers.

Key Rating Drivers & Detailed Description

Weakness:

* Delays in debt servicing: Poor liquidity has resulted in delays
in servicing of interest on fund based working capital facilities
for over 30 days as well as in delays in servicing of term loan.


* Working capital intensive operations: Gross current assets (GCA)
have remained in range of 178-237 days over past 3 years ended
March 31, 2020 driven by large receivables and inventory. Sustained
improvement in working capital cycle remains to be seen.

* Moderate scale of operations: Company's scale of operation is
moderate indicated by revenue of INR88.98 crore in fiscal 2020.
Further, the company's performance during April to August 2020 was
severely constrained due to the impact of the lockdown imposed in
the domestic and export markets and same is expected result in fall
in revenue and operating margin. Benefits from the new rentals
associated with washing segment remains to be seen.
Strengths:

* Extensive experience of the promoters and established
relationships with large players in the denim market: IRAA benefits
from the extensive industry experience of its promoters of more
than 3 decades and their established relations with large customers
such as Reliance Retail, Raymond among others, thereby ensuring a
steady offtake of the company's products. Further, promoters have
provided need based fund support to company in form of unsecured
loan (INR11.1 crore as on March 31, 2020) which is expected to
continue over the medium term.

Liquidity: Poor

Liquidity is poor as reflected by delays in debt servicing. Company
is expected to incur cash loss in fiscal 2021. CRISIL Ratings had
taken into cognizance, moratorium being granted by the bankers
until August 31, 2020 in debt servicing (of term loan as well as
working capital facilities) & conversion of outstanding non-fund
based facility to fund based working capital limits under COVID
emergency line, as permitted by the Reserve Bank of India (RBI).
CRISIL Ratings has also taken cognizance of application made by
IRAA for restructuring of its bank facilities under Reserve Bank of
India (RBI) guidelines issued on August 06, 2020-'Resolution
Framework for COVID-19-related Stress'.

Rating Sensitivity factors

Upward factors

* Track record of timely debt servicing for 90 days or more
* Significant improvement in liquidity due to restructuring of debt
or infusion of equity or a significant improvement in operating
performance

Incorporated in 2005 as Shagun Clothing Pvt Ltd, the company was
renamed IRAA Clothing Pvt. Ltd on May 5, 2016. The unit, located in
Maharashtra, processes denim garments from fabric. Mr. Sunil Biyani
and family manage operations.


ISHWAR CABLES: CARE Withdraws D Rating on Bank Debts
----------------------------------------------------
CARE has reaffirmed and withdrawn the outstanding ratings of 'CARE
D; ISSUER NOT COOPERATING/CARE D; ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' assigned
to the bank facilities of Ishwar Cables Private Limited (ICPL) with
immediate effect. The above action has been taken at the request of
ICPL and 'No Objection Certificate' received from the bank that has
extended the facilities rated by CARE. The ratings assigned to the
bank facilities of ICPL continue to remain constrained on account
of delays in debt servicing.

Detailed description of the key rating drivers

Key Rating Weaknesses

* On-going delays in debt servicing: There were on-going delays in
debt servicing at the time of last rating.

Jaipur (Rajasthan)-based ICPL was incorporated in 2006 by Mr. Rahul
Choudhary and his family members. Subsequently, in 2014, majority
of shareholding was transferred to Mr. Arpit Choudhary and Mrs
Sunita Matoria. ICPL is engaged in manufacturing of aluminum wire
twisted, copper wire, cables and conductors as well as trading of
aluminium wire and ingot. It had installed manufacturing capacity
of 10,000 tonnes for aluminum wire twisted as on March 31, 2019.


K.S. INFRA: CARE Withdraws D Rating on Bank Debts
-------------------------------------------------
CARE has reaffirmed and withdrawn the outstanding ratings of 'CARE
D; ISSUER NOT COOPERATING/CARE D; ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' assigned
to the bank facilities of K.S. Infra Transmission Private Limited
(KSITPL) with immediate effect. The above action has been taken at
the request of KSITPL and 'No Objection Certificate' received from
the bank that has extended the facilities rated by CARE. The
ratings assigned to the bank facilities of KSITPL continue to
remain constrained on account of delays in debt servicing.

Detailed description of the key rating drivers

Key Rating Weaknesses

* On-going delays in debt servicing: There were on-going delays in
debt servicing at the time of last rating.

Jaipur (Rajasthan)-based KSITPL was incorporated in 2013 by Mr.
Rahul Chaudhary and his family members. KSITPL is engaged in
manufacturing of general fabricated items like Cross Arms, Clamps,
Lattice towers, Substation structures, and Transformer tanks which
find application in Transmission & Distribution (T&D) segment of
power industry as well barbed wires and chain-link wires. It also
manufactures line hardware made of aluminum casting and iron
casting.


KRISHAK VIKAS: CRISIL Keeps B Debt Rating in Not Cooperating
------------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings said the rating on bank facilities of Krishak Vikas
Samiti (KVS) continues to be 'CRISIL B/Stable Issuer Not
Cooperating'.

                      Amount
   Facilities       (INR Crore)     Ratings
   ----------       -----------     -------
   Proposed Long          1         CRISIL B/Stable (Issuer Not
   Term Bank                        Cooperating)
   Loan Facility          
                                    
CRISIL Ratings has been consistently following up with KVS for
obtaining information through letters and emails dated August 22,
2020 and February 16, 2021 among others, apart from telephonic
communication. However, the issuer has remained non cooperative.

'The investors, lenders and all other market participants should
exercise due caution with reference to the rating assigned/reviewed
with the suffix 'ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' as the rating is arrived
at without any management interaction and is based on best
available or limited or dated information on the company. Such non
co-operation by a rated entity may be a result of deterioration in
its credit risk profile. These ratings with 'ISSUER NOT
COOPERATING' suffix lack a forward looking component.'

Detailed Rationale

Despite repeated attempts to engage with the management, CRISIL
Ratings failed to receive any information on either the financial
performance or strategic intent of KVS, which restricts CRISIL
Ratings' ability to take a forward looking view on the entity's
credit quality. CRISIL Ratings believes that rating action on KVS
is consistent with 'Assessing Information Adequacy Risk'. Based on
the last available information, the ratings on bank facilities of
KVS continues to be 'CRISIL B/Stable Issuer Not Cooperating'.

KVS primarily promotes social welfare schemes operated by the state
and Central governments in Ghazipur and Azamgarh districts of Uttar
Pradesh. It provides educational services and skill development
programmes and runs a residential schooling scheme under Ministry
of Social Justice and Empowerment for students from the scheduled
castes and tribes. Apart from this, it also runs a school with
classes from nursery till Standard 8.


LAKSHMI NARASIMHA: CRISIL Keeps B+ Debt Rating in Not Cooperating
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings said the rating on bank facilities of Lakshmi
Narasimha Traders - Nellore (LNTN) continues to be 'CRISIL
B+/Stable Issuer Not Cooperating'.

                      Amount
   Facilities       (INR Crore)     Ratings
   ----------       -----------     -------
   Cash Credit             5        CRISIL B+/Stable (Issuer Not
                                    Cooperating)

CRISIL Ratings has been consistently following up with LNTN for
obtaining information through letters and emails dated August 22,
2020 and February 16, 2021 among others, apart from telephonic
communication. However, the issuer has remained non cooperative.

'The investors, lenders and all other market participants should
exercise due caution with reference to the rating assigned/reviewed
with the suffix 'ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' as the rating is arrived
at without any management interaction and is ⁷based on best
available or limited or dated information on the company. Such non
co-operation by a rated entity may be a result of deterioration in
its credit risk profile. These ratings with 'ISSUER NOT
COOPERATING' suffix lack a forward looking component.'

Detailed Rationale

Despite repeated attempts to engage with the management, CRISIL
Ratings failed to receive any information on either the financial
performance or strategic intent of LNTN, which restricts CRISIL
Ratings' ability to take a forward looking view on the entity's
credit quality. CRISIL Ratings believes that rating action on LNTN
is consistent with 'Assessing Information Adequacy Risk'. Based on
the last available information, the ratings on bank facilities of
LNTN continues to be 'CRISIL B+/Stable Issuer Not Cooperating'.

Set up in 2002 as a partnership firm Lakshmi Narasimha
Traders-Nellore (LNTN) is engaged in milling and processing of
paddy into rice, rice bran, broken rice and husk. It has an
installed paddy milling capacity of 3 tons per hour. Its rice mill
is located in Nellore (Andhra Pradesh). The firm is promoted by Mr.
Y Ranga Rao.


LAXMI VISHNU: CRISIL Keeps B Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating
------------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings said the ratings on bank facilities of Laxmi Vishnu
Cotton Industries (LVCI) continue to be 'CRISIL B/Stable Issuer Not
Cooperating'.

                      Amount
   Facilities       (INR Crore)     Ratings
   ----------       -----------     -------
   Cash Credit           3          CRISIL B/Stable (Issuer Not
                                    Cooperating)

   Long Term Loan        2.25       CRISIL B/Stable (Issuer Not
                                    Cooperating)

CRISIL has been consistently following up with LVCI for obtaining
information through letters and emails dated July 29, 2019 and
November 15, 2019 among others, apart from telephonic
communication. However, the issuer has remained non cooperative.

'The investors, lenders and all other market participants should
exercise due caution while using the rating assigned/reviewed with
the suffix 'ISSUER NOT COOPERATING'. These ratings lack a forward
looking component as it is arrived at without any management
interaction and is based on best available or limited or dated
information on the company.

Detailed Rationale

Despite repeated attempts to engage with the management, CRISIL
Ratings failed to receive any information on either the financial
performance or strategic intent of LVCI, which restricts CRISIL
Ratings' ability to take a forward looking view on the entity's
credit quality. CRISIL Ratings believes that rating action on LVCI
is consistent with 'Assessing Information Adequacy Risk'. Based on
the last available information, the ratings on bank facilities of
LVCI continues to be 'CRISIL B/Stable Issuer Not Cooperating'.

Established in 2014 as a partnership firm, LVCI gins and presses
cotton. Based in Bhainsa, Telangana, the firm is promoted and
managed by Mr. Vishnu Prakash Bajaj, Mr. Rohit Bajaj, Mr. Rahul
Bajaj and Ms Nikita Bajaj.

LIFE STYLE: CRISIL Keeps B Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating
----------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings said the ratings on bank facilities of Life Style
Properties Private Limited (LSP) continue to be 'CRISIL B/Stable
Issuer Not Cooperating'.

                      Amount
   Facilities       (INR Crore)     Ratings
   ----------       -----------     -------
   Cash Credit            5         CRISIL B/Stable (Issuer Not
                                    Cooperating)

   Proposed Long Term     5         CRISIL B/Stable (Issuer Not
   Bank Loan Facility               Cooperating)

CRISIL Ratings has been consistently following up with LSP for
obtaining information through letters and emails dated August 22,
2020 and February 16, 2021 among others, apart from telephonic
communication. However, the issuer has remained non cooperative.

'The investors, lenders and all other market participants should
exercise due caution with reference to the rating assigned/reviewed
with the suffix 'ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' as the rating is arrived
at without any management interaction and is based on best
available or limited or dated information on the company. Such non
co-operation by a rated entity may be a result of deterioration in
its credit risk profile. These ratings with 'ISSUER NOT
COOPERATING' suffix lack a forward looking component.'

Detailed Rationale

Despite repeated attempts to engage with the management, CRISIL
Ratings failed to receive any information on either the financial
performance or strategic intent of LSP, which restricts CRISIL
Ratings' ability to take a forward looking view on the entity's
credit quality. CRISIL Ratings believes that rating action on LSP
is consistent with 'Assessing Information Adequacy Risk'. Based on
the last available information, the ratings on bank facilities of
LSP continues to be 'CRISIL B/Stable Issuer Not Cooperating'.

LSP is promoted by Mr. Partho Biswal and Mr. Asthika Biswal and was
set up in 2009 in Bhubaneswar. The company is a real estate
developer, executing construction of residential buildings in
Odisha.


LOHR INDIA: CRISIL Keeps D Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating
----------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings said the ratings on bank facilities of Lohr India
Automotive Private Limited (LIAPL) continue to be 'CRISIL D Issuer
Not Cooperating'.

                      Amount
   Facilities       (INR Crore)     Ratings
   ----------       -----------     -------
   Cash Credit            9.5       CRISIL D (Issuer Not
                                    Cooperating)

   Proposed Long          3.5       CRISIL D (Issuer Not
   Term Bank                        Cooperating)
   Loan Facility          

CRISIL Ratings has been consistently following up with LIAPL for
obtaining information through letters and emails dated August 22,
2020 and February 16, 2021 among others, apart from telephonic
communication. However, the issuer has remained non cooperative.

'The investors, lenders and all other market participants should
exercise due caution with reference to the rating assigned/reviewed
with the suffix 'ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' as the rating is arrived
at without any management interaction and is based on best
available or limited or dated information on the company. Such non
co-operation by a rated entity may be a result of deterioration in
its credit risk profile. These ratings with 'ISSUER NOT
COOPERATING' suffix lack a forward looking component.'

Detailed Rationale

Despite repeated attempts to engage with the management, CRISIL
Ratings failed to receive any information on either the financial
performance or strategic intent of LIAPL, which restricts CRISIL
Ratings' ability to take a forward looking view on the entity's
credit quality. CRISIL Ratings believes that rating action on LIAPL
is consistent with 'Assessing Information Adequacy Risk'. Based on
the last available information, the ratings on bank facilities of
LIAPL continues to be 'CRISIL D Issuer Not Cooperating'.

The TSI group was established in 2006 and manufactures carriers
used in logistic services. It manufactures tippers and trailers
under TSIPL, car and truck carriers under LIAPL, and refrigerated
carriers under HIPL. Its promoters have industry experience of over
four decades.

M.G. ASSOCIATES: CARE Lowers Rating on INR10cr LT Loan to C
-----------------------------------------------------------
CARE Ratings revised the ratings on certain bank facilities of M.G.
Associates (MGA), as:

                       Amount
   Facilities       (INR crore)    Ratings
   ----------       -----------    -------
   Long Term Bank
   Facilities            10.00     CARE C; Rating removed from
                                   ISSUER NOT COOPERATING category

                                   and Revised from CARE B; stable

Detailed Rationale & Key Rating Drivers

The ratings assigned to the bank facilities of MGA is constrained
by stressed liquidity, weak debt coverage indicators and negative
net worth during FY20 (refers to period April 1 to March 31). The
ratings continue to be tempered by small scale of operations,
project execution risk and financial closure yet to tie-up,
cyclical nature of the industry and partnership nature of
operations with inherent risk of capital withdrawal. The rating,
however, derives its strengths from vast experience of the
promoters along with long track record of the firm, diversified
source of revenue, satisfactory profitability margins and debt
coverage indicators.

Rating Sensitivities

Positive Factors

* Improvement in the liquidity position and debt coverage
indicators.

* Positive net worth.

Negative Factors

* Withdrawal of capital

Detailed description of the key rating drivers

Key Rating Weaknesses

* Weak debt coverage metrics: On account of withdrawal of capital,
the net worth is negative by INR0.03 Cr. However, unsecured loans
of INR6.5 Cr is infused in the business to meet working capital
requirement. Further, the current ratio is below unity as on March
31, 2020.

* Small scale of operations albeit to y-o-y growth: As a result of
business diversification, the total operating income has grown at
CAGR of 135.42% during FY18-FY20. However, the TOI stood small at
INR8.48 crore in FY20 as compared to INR1.53 crore in FY18.
Further, the firm has registered TOI of INR9.00 crore for 11MFY21
(Prov.).

* Project execution risk and financial closure yet to tie-up: MGA
has 99% bookings for the Phase-1 of on-going project 'Kashi Kamal
Gruha Yojana' and firm has received occupancy for the same in
January 2020. However, the firm has booking status of 52.15% for
Phase-2 and 40% of construction is completed, which results in
project execution risk. As on January 31, 2021, the firm has
incurred total cost of INR47.57 (62.12% of total project cost).
Further, MGA has approaching the bankers for INR10.00 crore project
term loan for the construction of Tower-6.

* Cyclical nature of the industry: The firm is exposed to the
cyclicality associated with the real estate sector which has direct
linkage with the general macroeconomic scenario, interest rates and
level of disposable income available with individuals. In case of
real estate companies, the profitability is highly dependent on
property markets. A high interest rate scenario could discourage
the consumers from borrowing to finance the real estate purchases
and may depress the real estate market.

* Partnership nature of operations with inherent risk of capital
withdrawal: The partners typically make all the decisions and lead
the business operations. If they become ill or disabled, there may
not be anybody else to step in and maintain the optimum functioning
of business. A business run by nine partners also poses a risk of
heavy burden, i.e. an inherent risk of capital withdrawal, at a
time of personal contingency which can adversely affect the capital
structure of the firm. Moreover, the partnership firms have
restricted access to external borrowing which limits their growth
opportunities to some extent.

Key Rating Strengths

* Experienced partners: MGA is promoted by Mr. Raghavendra K.
Mailapur (Managing Partner) and Mr. Sanjog Rathi (Managing Partner)
along with other family members. Mr. Raghavendra has 30 years of
experience in jewellery and property development business.
Previously, he has served as the director of Ganesh Co-operative
Bank and Vice President of Hyderabad Karnataka Chamber of Commerce
& Industry (HKCCI). Mr. Sanjog Rathi, an Engineering Graduate, has
more than a decade of experience in the construction line. He has
also served as the founder secretary and president of CREDAI,
Gulbarga. The long-standing experience of promoters has aided in
establishing long term relationships with customers.

* Diversified sources of revenue: In FY2018, the firm has ventured
into hospitality business and opened Hotel Citrus, in Gulbarga. The
firm is managing its operations with the help of OTHPL from
December 2018 with profit sharing business model where repayment as
follows - 5% of commission on net profit and 4% of commission on
sales. Further, the company receives rental income from lease shops
from project Gold Hub Mall, where, the generates rental income of
INR0.30 crore from 45 lease out shops with average lease period of
5 years.

* Satisfactory profitability margins: The firm has turn around the
net losses to profit due to diversified revenue sources has
improved the absolute amount of PBILDT which resulted in absorption
of interest and depreciation cost. The PBILDT stood comfortable at
45.60% in FY20 despite of decline by 143 bps as compared to FY19.
Further, the PAT margin improved significantly by 862 bps and stood
satisfactory at 14.11% in FY20 over FY19. The debt coverage
indicators marked by the PBILDT interest coverage ratio stood
satisfactory at 3.03x in FY20 as compared to 1.83x in FY19 due to
increase in absolute amount of PBILDT, coupled with decline in
total debt levels on back of repayment.

Liquidity: Stretched

Liquidity is marked by tightly matched accruals to repayment
obligations, its working capital borrowings are utilized to the
extent of 95% for the period last 12 months ending February 28,
2021. Further, the cash and bank balances stood modest at INR0.25
crore as on March 31, 2020 and current ratio of MGA stood below
unity at 0.14x as on March 31, 2020. Furthermore, the company had
not availed moratorium extended by the RBI from March 1, 2020 to
August 31, 2020 on its debt obligations.

Kalaburagi (Karnataka) based, M.G. Associates (MGA) was established
in the year 2010 as a partnership firm by Rathi and Mailapur
family. The firm is engaged in the construction of residential
townships, apartments, shopping malls and commercial complexes.
Further, the firm has diversified its business in FY18 into
hospitality by starting hotel in the name of Citrus Hotel in
Gulbarga, Karnataka. Currently, the firm engaged in development of
residential project in Gulbarga with total investment of INR72.64
crore.


MAHENJU TEXTILES: CRISIL Keeps B+ Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings said the ratings on bank facilities of Mahenju
Textiles Private Limited (MTPL) continue to be 'CRISIL B+/Stable
Issuer Not Cooperating'.

                      Amount
   Facilities       (INR Crore)     Ratings
   ----------       -----------     -------
   Cash Credit            4         CRISIL B+/Stable (Issuer Not
                                    Cooperating)

   Proposed Long          4         CRISIL B+/Stable (Issuer Not
   Term Bank                        Cooperating)
   Loan Facility          
                                    
   Term Loan              2         CRISIL B+/Stable (Issuer Not
                                    Cooperating)

CRISIL Ratings has been consistently following up with MTPL for
obtaining information through letters and emails dated August 22,
2020 and February 16, 2021 among others, apart from telephonic
communication. However, the issuer has remained non cooperative.

'The investors, lenders and all other market participants should
exercise due caution with reference to the rating assigned/reviewed
with the suffix 'ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' as the rating is arrived
at without any management interaction and is based on best
available or limited or dated information on the company. Such non
co-operation by a rated entity may be a result of deterioration in
its credit risk profile. These ratings with 'ISSUER NOT
COOPERATING' suffix lack a forward looking component.'

Detailed Rationale

Despite repeated attempts to engage with the management, CRISIL
Ratings failed to receive any information on either the financial
performance or strategic intent of MTPL, which restricts CRISIL
Ratings' ability to take a forward looking view on the entity's
credit quality. CRISIL Ratings believes that rating action on MTPL
is consistent with 'Assessing Information Adequacy Risk'. Based on
the last available information, the ratings on bank facilities of
MTPL continues to be 'CRISIL B+/Stable Issuer Not Cooperating'.

MTPL, based out of Mumbai, incorporated in 1999, is promoted by Mr.
Suresh Jain and Mr. Gajendra Singh Rathore. The company knits yarn
used to manufacture fabric.


MAIYAS BEVERAGES: CRISIL Keeps B Debt Rating in Not Cooperating
---------------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings said the rating on bank facilities of Maiyas
Beverages and Foods Private Limited (MBFPL) continues to be 'CRISIL
B/Stable Issuer Not Cooperating'.

                      Amount
   Facilities       (INR Crore)     Ratings
   ----------       -----------     -------
   Proposed Working       20        CRISIL B/Stable (Issuer Not
   Capital Facility                 Cooperating)

CRISIL Ratings has been consistently following up with MBFPL for
obtaining information through letters and emails dated August 31,
2020 and February 27, 2021 among others, apart from telephonic
communication. However, the issuer has remained non-cooperative.

'The investors, lenders and all other market participants should
exercise due caution with reference to the rating assigned/reviewed
with the suffix 'ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' as the rating is arrived
at without any management interaction and is based on best
available or limited or dated information on the company. Such non
co-operation by a rated entity may be a result of deterioration in
its credit risk profile. These ratings with 'ISSUER NOT
COOPERATING' suffix lack a forward-looking component.'

Detailed Rationale

Despite repeated attempts to engage with the management, CRISIL
Ratings failed to receive any information on either the financial
performance or strategic intent of MBFPL, which restricts CRISIL
Ratings' ability to take a forward-looking view on the entity's
credit quality. CRISIL Ratings believes that rating action on MBFPL
is consistent with 'Assessing Information Adequacy Risk'. Based on
the last available information, the ratings on bank facilities of
MBFPL continues to be 'CRISIL B/Stable Issuer Not Cooperating'.

MBFPL is a private limited company incorporated in 2008 and
promoted by Mr. P Sadananda Maiya. Based in Bengaluru, the company
manufactures and processes various ready-to-eat food products,
pickles, beverages, spices, instant mixes, and savories; and sells
under the brand, Maiyas.


MALGANGA MILK: CRISIL Withdraws B Rating on INR14cr Loans
---------------------------------------------------------
Due to inadequate information, CRISIL Ratings, in line with SEBI
guidelines, had migrated the rating of Malganga Milk and Agro
Products Private Limited (MMAPL) to 'CRISIL B/Stable Issuer not
cooperating'. CRISIL Ratings has withdrawn its rating on bank
facility of MMAPL following a request from the company and on
receipt of a 'no dues certificate' from the banker. Consequently,
CRISIL Ratings is migrating the rating on bank facilities of MMAPL
from 'CRISIL B/Stable Issuer Not Cooperating' to 'CRISIL B/Stable'.
The rating action is in line with CRISIL Ratings' policy on
withdrawal of bank loan ratings.

                    Amount
   Facilities     (INR Crore)     Ratings
   ----------     -----------     -------
   Cash Credit          5         CRISIL B/Stable (Migrated from
                                  'CRISIL B/Stable ISSUER NOT
                                  COOPERATING; Rating Withdrawn)

   Proposed Long        3         CRISIL B/Stable (Migrated from
   Term Bank                      'CRISIL B/Stable ISSUER NOT
   Loan Facility                  COOPERATING; Rating Withdrawn)

   Term Loan            6         CRISIL B/Stable (Migrated from
                                  'CRISIL B/Stable ISSUER NOT
                                  COOPERATING; Rating Withdrawn)

CRISIL Ratings believes MMAPL will benefit over the medium term
from its promoters' extensive industry experience. The outlook may
be revised to 'Positive' in case of significant improvement in the
profitability and cash accrual and or sizable fund infusion by
promoters leading to significant improvement in capital structure.
Conversely, the outlook may be revised to 'Negative' in case of
further weakening of financial risk profile, particularly
liquidity, because of lower cash accrual or stretched working
capital cycle or any unanticipated, debt-funded capital expenditure
(capex).

PARIJAT OIL: CRISIL Keeps B Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating
-----------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings said the ratings on bank facilities of Parijat Oil
and Feeds Private Limited (POFPL) continue to be 'CRISIL B/Stable
Issuer Not Cooperating'.

                      Amount
   Facilities       (INR Crore)     Ratings
   ----------       -----------     -------
   Cash Credit           4.5        CRISIL B/Stable (Issuer Not
                                    Cooperating)

   Term Loan             8          CRISIL B/Stable (Issuer Not
                                    Cooperating)
      
CRISIL Ratings has been consistently following up with POFPL for
obtaining information through letters and emails dated August 22,
2020 and February 27, 2021 among others, apart from telephonic
communication. However, the issuer has remained non cooperative.

'The investors, lenders and all other market participants should
exercise due caution with reference to the rating assigned/reviewed
with the suffix 'ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' as the rating is arrived
at without any management interaction and is based on best
available or limited or dated information on the company. Such non
co-operation by a rated entity may be a result of deterioration in
its credit risk profile. These ratings with 'ISSUER NOT
COOPERATING' suffix lack a forward looking component.'

Detailed Rationale

Despite repeated attempts to engage with the management, CRISIL
Ratings failed to receive any information on either the financial
performance or strategic intent of POFPL, which restricts CRISIL
Ratings' ability to take a forward looking view on the entity's
credit quality. CRISIL Ratings believes that rating action on POFPL
is consistent with 'Assessing Information Adequacy Risk'. Based on
the last available information, the ratings on bank facilities of
POFPL continues to be 'CRISIL B/Stable Issuer Not Cooperating'.

Parijat Oil and Feeds Private Limited was set up in September 2016.
The company is currently setting up a plant to manufacture rice
bran oil and de-oiled rice bran. The total project cost is around
INR13.7 crore. The company has been promoted by Mr. Mohinderjit
Singh and Mr. Sachin Goel who are family friends and their family
members.


PURVI BHARAT: CRISIL Keeps B Debt Rating in Not Cooperating
-----------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings said the rating on bank facilities of Purvi Bharat
Steel Limited (PBSL) continues to be 'CRISIL B/Stable Issuer Not
Cooperating'.

                      Amount
   Facilities       (INR Crore)     Ratings
   ----------       -----------     -------
   Cash Credit            10        CRISIL B/Stable (Issuer Not
                                    Cooperating)

CRISIL Ratings has been consistently following up with PBSL for
obtaining information through letters and emails dated August 22,
2020 and February 16, 2021 among others, apart from telephonic
communication. However, the issuer has remained non-cooperative.

'The investors, lenders and all other market participants should
exercise due caution with reference to the rating assigned/reviewed
with the suffix 'ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' as the rating is arrived
at without any management interaction and is based on best
available or limited or dated information on the company. Such non
co-operation by a rated entity may be a result of deterioration in
its credit risk profile. These ratings with 'ISSUER NOT
COOPERATING' suffix lack a forward-looking component.'

Detailed Rationale

Despite repeated attempts to engage with the management, CRISIL
Ratings failed to receive any information on either the financial
performance or strategic intent of PBSL, which restricts CRISIL
Ratings' ability to take a forward looking view on the entity's
credit quality. CRISIL Ratings believes that rating action on PBSL
is consistent with 'Assessing Information Adequacy Risk'. Based on
the last available information, the ratings on bank facilities of
PBSL continues to be 'CRISIL B/Stable Issuer Not Cooperating'.

Set up in 1995, PBSL manufactures and trades in thermo-mechanically
treated (TMT) bars. The company is currently managed by Mr. Ganesh
Prasad Kandoi, Mr. Navin Kumar Kandoi, and their family members.


QUALITY HYBRID: CRISIL Lowers Rating on INR9.88cr Loans to B
------------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings has revised the ratings on bank facilities of
Quality Hybrid Seeds Company (QHSC) to 'CRISIL B/Stable Issuer Not
Cooperating' from 'CRISIL BB-/Stable Issuer Not Cooperating'.

                      Amount
   Facilities       (INR Crore)     Ratings
   ----------       -----------     -------
   Cash Credit            9         CRISIL B/Stable (ISSUER NOT
                                    COOPERATING; Revised from
                                    'CRISIL BB-/Stable ISSUER NOT
                                    COOPERATING')

   Term Loan              0.88      CRISIL B/Stable (ISSUER NOT
                                    COOPERATING; Revised from
                                    'CRISIL BB-/Stable ISSUER NOT
                                    COOPERATING')

CRISIL Ratings has been consistently following up with QHSC for
obtaining information through letters and emails dated August 22,
2020 and February 27, 2021 among others, apart from telephonic
communication. However, the issuer has remained non-cooperative.

'The investors, lenders and all other market participants should
exercise due caution with reference to the rating assigned/reviewed
with the suffix 'ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' as the rating is arrived
at without any management interaction and is based on best
available or limited or dated information on the company. Such non
co-operation by a rated entity may be a result of deterioration in
its credit risk profile. These ratings with 'ISSUER NOT
COOPERATING' suffix lack a forward-looking component.'

Detailed Rationale

Despite repeated attempts to engage with the management, CRISIL
Ratings failed to receive any information on either the financial
performance or strategic intent of QHSC, which restricts CRISIL
Ratings' ability to take a forward-looking view on the entity's
credit quality. CRISIL Ratings believes that rating action on QHSC
is consistent with 'Assessing Information Adequacy Risk'. Based on
the last available information, the ratings on bank facilities of
QHSC Revised to 'CRISIL B/Stable Issuer Not Cooperating' from
'CRISIL BB-/Stable Issuer Not Cooperating'.

Established in 2000 as a proprietorship firm by Mr. Naresh Agarwal,
QHSC processes different types of seeds at its units in Hisar,
Haryana, which have total capacity of 16 tonnes per hour.


R. PRIYA: CRISIL Keeps B Debt Rating in Not Cooperating Category
----------------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings said the ratings on bank facilities of R. Priya (RP)
continue to be 'CRISIL B/Stable Issuer Not Cooperating'.

                      Amount
   Facilities       (INR Crore)     Ratings
   ----------       -----------     -------
   Proposed Long         0.37       CRISIL B/Stable (Issuer Not
   Term Bank                        Cooperating)
   Loan Facility         
                                    
   Term Loan             1.63       CRISIL B/Stable (Issuer Not
                                    Cooperating)

CRISIL Ratings has been consistently following up with RP for
obtaining information through letters and emails dated August 22,
2020 and February 16, 2021 among others, apart from telephonic
communication. However, the issuer has remained non cooperative.

'The investors, lenders and all other market participants should
exercise due caution with reference to the rating assigned/reviewed
with the suffix 'ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' as the rating is arrived
at without any management interaction and is based on best
available or limited or dated information on the company. Such non
co-operation by a rated entity may be a result of deterioration in
its credit risk profile. These ratings with 'ISSUER NOT
COOPERATING' suffix lack a forward looking component.'

Detailed Rationale

Despite repeated attempts to engage with the management, CRISIL
Ratings failed to receive any information on either the financial
performance or strategic intent of RP, which restricts CRISIL
Ratings' ability to take a forward looking view on the entity's
credit quality. CRISIL Ratings believes that rating action on RP is
consistent with 'Assessing Information Adequacy Risk'. Based on the
last available information, the ratings on bank facilities of RP
continues to be 'CRISIL B/Stable Issuer Not Cooperating'.

RP, based in Chennai, was established in 2017 by Ms R Priya. The
firm rents out cameras and allied equipment used in the media
industry.

RELIANCE CAPITAL: CARE Reaffirms D Rating on INR15,000cr Loan
-------------------------------------------------------------
CARE Ratings reaffirmed ratings on certain bank facilities of
Reliance Capital Limited (RCL), as:

                       Amount
   Facilities       (INR crore)    Ratings
   ----------       -----------    -------
   Long Term debt       15,000     CARE D; ISSUER NOT COOPERATING
   Programme                       Reaffirmed

   Subordinated          1,500     CARE D; ISSUER NOT COOPERATING
   Debt                            Reaffirmed  

   Market Linked           500     CARE PP-MLD D; ISSUER NOT
   Debenture                       COOPERATING Reaffirmed

Detailed Rationale & Key Rating Drivers

CARE has been seeking information from RCL to monitor the rating(s)
vide e-mail communications/letters dated February 10, 2021,
February 20, 2021, March 2, 2021 and numerous phone calls. However,
despite our repeated requests, the company has not provided the
requisite information for monitoring the ratings. In line with the
extant SEBI guidelines, CARE has reviewed the rating on the basis
of the best available information which however, in CARE's opinion
is not sufficient to arrive at a fair rating. Further, RCL has not
paid the surveillance fees for the rating exercise as agreed to in
its Rating Agreement. The rating on Reliance Capital Limited's long
term debt programme and instruments continues to be denoted as CARE
D/CARE PP-MLD D; ISSUER NOT COOPERATING.

Users of this rating (including investors, lenders and the public
at large) are hence requested to exercise caution while using the
above rating(s).

The ratings take into account continuous delay in servicing of debt
obligations on account of stretched liquidity and delay in asset
monetization.

Detailed description of the key rating drivers

At the time of last rating on March 27, 2020, delay in servicing of
debt obligations and poor liquidity were the rating weaknesses.

Key Rating Weaknesses

* Delay in servicing of debt obligations: There has been continuous
delay in servicing of debt obligations on account of stretched
liquidity. The liquidity profile of the group continues to be under
stress on account of delay in raising funds from the asset
monetization plan and impending debt payments.

RCL was converted into a 'Core Investment Company' subject to
necessary approvals from RBI on September 7, 2018. Reliance Capital
has interests in life and general insurance; commercial and home
finance; equities & commodities broking; investment banking; wealth
management services; distribution of financial products; private
equity; asset reconstruction; proprietary investments and other
activities in financial services.


RM DAIRY: CRISIL Keeps D Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating
--------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings said the ratings on bank facilities of RM Dairy
Products LLP (RMDP) continue to be 'CRISIL D Issuer Not
Cooperating'.

                      Amount
   Facilities       (INR Crore)     Ratings
   ----------       -----------     -------
   Cash Credit           8          CRISIL D (Issuer Not
                                    Cooperating)

   Term Loan            14.9        CRISIL D (Issuer Not
                                    Cooperating)

CRISIL Ratings has been consistently following up with RMDP for
obtaining information through letters and emails dated August 22,
2020 and February 16, 2021 among others, apart from telephonic
communication. However, the issuer has remained non-cooperative.

'The investors, lenders and all other market participants should
exercise due caution with reference to the rating assigned/reviewed
with the suffix 'ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' as the rating is arrived
at without any management interaction and is based on best
available or limited or dated information on the company. Such non
co-operation by a rated entity may be a result of deterioration in
its credit risk profile. These ratings with 'ISSUER NOT
COOPERATING' suffix lack a forward-looking component.'

Detailed Rationale

Despite repeated attempts to engage with the management, CRISIL
Ratings failed to receive any information on either the financial
performance or strategic intent of RMDP, which restricts CRISIL
Ratings' ability to take a forward-looking view on the entity's
credit quality. CRISIL Ratings believes that rating action on RMDP
is consistent with 'Assessing Information Adequacy Risk'. Based on
the last available information, the ratings on bank facilities of
RMDP continues to be 'CRISIL D Issuer Not Cooperating'.

RMDP incorporated in April 2015 as limited liability partnership
firm by eight partners namely Mr. Ram Vinod Singh, Ms. Radha Singh,
Mr. Shishir Singh, Mr. Girish Goyal, Ms. Suman Goyal, Mr. Ravi
Singhal, Ms. Archana Singhal and Ms. Shally Singh. RMDP is
setting-up an integrated manufacturing plant of Skimmed Milk Power
(SMP), cream and Desi Ghee in Aligarh, Uttar Pradesh with an
installed capacity of around 4.0 lakh liters per day.

SAMAY COTTON: CRISIL Keeps B+ Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating
-------------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings said the ratings on bank facilities of Samay Cotton
(SC) continue to be 'CRISIL B+/Stable Issuer Not Cooperating'.

                      Amount
   Facilities       (INR Crore)     Ratings
   ----------       -----------     -------
   Cash Credit            5         CRISIL B+/Stable (Issuer Not
                                    Cooperating)

   Long Term Loan         0.87      CRISIL B+/Stable (Issuer Not
                                    Cooperating)

CRISIL Ratings has been consistently following up with SC for
obtaining information through letters and emails dated August 22,
2020 and February 16, 2021 among others, apart from telephonic
communication. However, the issuer has remained non-cooperative.

'The investors, lenders and all other market participants should
exercise due caution with reference to the rating assigned/reviewed
with the suffix 'ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' as the rating is arrived
at without any management interaction and is based on best
available or limited or dated information on the company. Such non
co-operation by a rated entity may be a result of deterioration in
its credit risk profile. These ratings with 'ISSUER NOT
COOPERATING' suffix lack a forward-looking component.'

Detailed Rationale

Despite repeated attempts to engage with the management, CRISIL
Ratings failed to receive any information on either the financial
performance or strategic intent of SC, which restricts CRISIL
Ratings' ability to take a forward-looking view on the entity's
credit quality. CRISIL Ratings believes that rating action on SC is
consistent with 'Assessing Information Adequacy Risk'. Based on the
last available information, the ratings on bank facilities of SC
continues to be 'CRISIL B+/Stable Issuer Not Cooperating'.

Established in March 2014, SC manufactures cotton oil from cotton
seeds at its unit in Wankaner, Gujarat, which has installed
capacity to manufacture 15 tonne per day. It caters to the domestic
market and its operations are managed by Mr. Ravi.

SHEWDANMAL GAJANAND: CRISIL Lowers Rating on INR9.8cr Loan to B
---------------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings has revised the rating on bank facilities of
Shewdanmal Gajanand (SG) to 'CRISIL B/Stable Issuer Not
Cooperating' from 'CRISIL BB-/Stable Issuer Not Cooperating'.

                      Amount
   Facilities       (INR Crore)    Ratings
   ----------       -----------    -------
   Cash Credit            9.8      CRISIL B/Stable (ISSUER NOT
                                   COOPERATING; Revised from
                                   'CRISIL BB-/Stable ISSUER NOT
                                   COOPERATING)

CRISIL Ratings has been consistently following up with SG for
obtaining information through letters and emails dated August 22,
2020 and February 16, 2021 among others, apart from telephonic
communication. However, the issuer has remained non-cooperative.

'The investors, lenders and all other market participants should
exercise due caution with reference to the rating assigned/reviewed
with the suffix 'ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' as the rating is arrived
at without any management interaction and is based on best
available or limited or dated information on the company. Such non
co-operation by a rated entity may be a result of deterioration in
its credit risk profile. These ratings with 'ISSUER NOT
COOPERATING' suffix lack a forward-looking component.'

Detailed Rationale

Despite repeated attempts to engage with the management, CRISIL
Ratings failed to receive any information on either the financial
performance or strategic intent of SG, which restricts CRISIL
Ratings' ability to take a forward-looking view on the entity's
credit quality. CRISIL Ratings believes that rating action on SG is
consistent with 'Assessing Information Adequacy Risk'. Based on the
last available information, the ratings on bank facilities of SG
Revised to 'CRISIL B/Stable Issuer Not Cooperating' from 'CRISIL
BB-/Stable Issuer Not Cooperating'.

SG was established in 1990 as partnership firm by Mr. Shatilal
Dhudhoria and Mrs Shanti Devi Dhudhoria in Guwahati, Assam. The
firm trades in pulses, rice, sugar, and other grocery items.


SIDDHIVINAYAK POLYTEX: CRISIL Keeps B Ratings in Not Cooperating
----------------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings said the ratings on bank facilities of Siddhivinayak
Polytex Private Limited (SPPL) continue to be 'CRISIL B/Stable
Issuer Not Cooperating'.

                      Amount
   Facilities       (INR Crore)     Ratings
   ----------       -----------     -------
   Cash Credit           7.6        CRISIL B/Stable (Issuer Not
                                    Cooperating)

   Term Loan             6.5        CRISIL B/Stable (Issuer Not
                                    Cooperating)

CRISIL Ratings has been consistently following up with SPPL for
obtaining information through letters and emails dated August 22,
2020 and February 16, 2021 among others, apart from telephonic
communication. However, the issuer has remained non-cooperative.

'The investors, lenders and all other market participants should
exercise due caution with reference to the rating assigned/reviewed
with the suffix 'ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' as the rating is arrived
at without any management interaction and is based on best
available or limited or dated information on the company. Such non
co-operation by a rated entity may be a result of deterioration in
its credit risk profile. These ratings with 'ISSUER NOT
COOPERATING' suffix lack a forward-looking component.'

Detailed Rationale

Despite repeated attempts to engage with the management, CRISIL
Ratings failed to receive any information on either the financial
performance or strategic intent of SPPL, which restricts CRISIL
Ratings' ability to take a forward-looking view on the entity's
credit quality. CRISIL Ratings believes that rating action on SPPL
is consistent with 'Assessing Information Adequacy Risk'. Based on
the last available information, the ratings on bank facilities of
SPPL continues to be 'CRISIL B/Stable Issuer Not Cooperating'.

Incorporated in 2012 and promoted by Mr. Sunil Agarwal, SPPL
manufactures PP fabric and bags, and aluminum extrusion products.

VARDHMAN SPINNERS: CRISIL Keeps B Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings said the ratings on bank facilities of Vardhman
Spinners (VS) continue to be 'CRISIL B/Stable Issuer Not
Cooperating'.

                      Amount
   Facilities       (INR Crore)     Ratings
   ----------       -----------     -------
   Cash Credit           0.7        CRISIL B/Stable (Issuer Not
                                    Cooperating)

   Proposed Cash         5.3        CRISIL B/Stable (Issuer Not
   Credit Limit                     Cooperating)

   Proposed Term Loan    6.5        CRISIL B/Stable (Issuer Not
                                    Cooperating)

CRISIL Ratings has been consistently following up with VS for
obtaining information through letters and emails dated August 22,
2020 and February 16, 2021 among others, apart from telephonic
communication. However, the issuer has remained non-cooperative.

'The investors, lenders and all other market participants should
exercise due caution with reference to the rating assigned/reviewed
with the suffix 'ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' as the rating is arrived
at without any management interaction and is based on best
available or limited or dated information on the company. Such non
co-operation by a rated entity may be a result of deterioration in
its credit risk profile. These ratings with 'ISSUER NOT
COOPERATING' suffix lack a forward-looking component.'

Detailed Rationale

Despite repeated attempts to engage with the management, CRISIL
Ratings failed to receive any information on either the financial
performance or strategic intent of VS, which restricts CRISIL
Ratings' ability to take a forward-looking view on the entity's
credit quality. CRISIL Ratings believes that rating action on VS is
consistent with 'Assessing Information Adequacy Risk'. Based on the
last available information, the ratings on bank facilities of VS
continues to be 'CRISIL B/Stable Issuer Not Cooperating'.

VS, promoted as a partnership firm in 2008, has recently set up a
facility for manufacturing blankets. The firm is promoted and
managed by its partners Mr. Ajay Kumar Jain, Mr. Hemant Jain, Ms.
Dipti Jain, and Ms. Shashi Jain.

VELATAL SPINNING: CRISIL Keeps B+ Debt Ratings in Not Cooperating
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings said the ratings on bank facilities of Velatal
Spinning Mills Private Limited (VSMPL) continue to be 'CRISIL
B+/Stable Issuer Not Cooperating'.

                      Amount
   Facilities       (INR Crore)     Ratings
   ----------       -----------     -------
   Cash Credit            6.2       CRISIL B+/Stable (Issuer Not
                                    Cooperating)

   Term Loan             33.8       CRISIL B+/Stable (Issuer Not
                                    Cooperating)

CRISIL Ratings has been consistently following up with VSMPL for
obtaining information through letters and emails dated August 22,
2020 and February 16, 2021 among others, apart from telephonic
communication. However, the issuer has remained non-cooperative.

'The investors, lenders and all other market participants should
exercise due caution with reference to the rating assigned/reviewed
with the suffix 'ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' as the rating is arrived
at without any management interaction and is based on best
available or limited or dated information on the company. Such non
co-operation by a rated entity may be a result of deterioration in
its credit risk profile. These ratings with 'ISSUER NOT
COOPERATING' suffix lack a forward-looking component.'

Detailed Rationale

Despite repeated attempts to engage with the management, CRISIL
Ratings failed to receive any information on either the financial
performance or strategic intent of VSMPL, which restricts CRISIL
Ratings' ability to take a forward-looking view on the entity's
credit quality. CRISIL Ratings believes that rating action on VSMPL
is consistent with 'Assessing Information Adequacy Risk'. Based on
the last available information, the ratings on bank facilities of
VSMPL continues to be 'CRISIL B+/Stable Issuer Not Cooperating'.

VSMPL was set up in 1981 by Mr. Selvaraj, Ms. Sudha, and Mr.
Nallammal. The company manufactures viscose yarn and also has three
windmills with total capacity of 33.5 megawatt. The manufacturing
unit is at Erode, Tamil Nadu.


VELAVAN HYPER: CRISIL Keeps B Debt Rating in Not Cooperating
------------------------------------------------------------
CRISIL Ratings said the rating on bank facilities of Velavan Hyper
Market (VHM; a part of the Velavan group) continues to be 'CRISIL
B/Stable Issuer Not Cooperating'.

                      Amount
   Facilities       (INR Crore)     Ratings
   ----------       -----------     -------
   Cash Credit            8         CRISIL B/Stable (Issuer Not
                                    Cooperating)

CRISIL Ratings has been consistently following up with VHM for
obtaining information through letters and emails dated August 22,
2020 and February 16, 2021 among others, apart from telephonic
communication. However, the issuer has remained non-cooperative.

'The investors, lenders and all other market participants should
exercise due caution with reference to the rating assigned/reviewed
with the suffix 'ISSUER NOT COOPERATING' as the rating is arrived
at without any management interaction and is based on best
available or limited or dated information on the company. Such non
co-operation by a rated entity may be a result of deterioration in
its credit risk profile. These ratings with 'ISSUER NOT
COOPERATING' suffix lack a forward-looking component.'

Detailed Rationale

Despite repeated attempts to engage with the management, CRISIL
Ratings failed to receive any information on either the financial
performance or strategic intent of VHM, which restricts CRISIL
Ratings' ability to take a forward-looking view on the entity's
credit quality. CRISIL Ratings believes that rating action on VHM
is consistent with 'Assessing Information Adequacy Risk'. Based on
the last available information, the ratings on bank facilities of
VHM continues to be 'CRISIL B/Stable Issuer Not Cooperating'.

For arriving at the rating, CRISIL has combined the business and
financial risk profiles of VHM, Velavan Stores Jewellers (VSJ), and
Velavan Stores (VS). This is because the entities, collectively
referred to as the Velavan group, are in similar lines of business
and under the same management, and have significant fungible
funds.

VHM was established in 2014 and operates a supermarket. VS,
established in 1998, is engaged in apparel retail. Set up in 2007,
VSJ is engaged in jewellery retail. The group is located in
Tuticorin and the operations are managed by Mr. T Maharajan.

VENKATESHWARA FOOD: CARE Moves D Debt Rating to Not Cooperating
---------------------------------------------------------------
CARE Ratings has migrated the rating on bank facilities of Shree
Venkateshwara Food Industries (SVFI) to Issuer Not Cooperating
category.

                       Amount
   Facilities       (INR crore)    Ratings
   ----------       -----------    -------
   Long Term Bank       5.24       CARE D; ISSUER NOT COOPERATING;
   Facilities                      Rating moved to ISSUER NOT
                                   COOPERATING category

Detailed Rationale & Key Rating Drivers

CARE has been seeking information from SVFI to monitor the rating
vide e-mail communications dated January 4, 2021, February 9, 2021,
February 17, 2021, February 25, 2021 and numerous phone calls.
However, despite our repeated requests the firm has not provided
the requisite information for monitoring the rating. In line with
the extant SEBI guidelines, CARE has reviewed the rating on the
basis of the best available information which however, in CARE's
opinion is not sufficient to arrive at a fair rating. The rating on
SVFI bank facilities will now be CARE D; ISSUER NOT COOPERATING.

Users of this rating (including investors, lenders and the public
at large) are hence requested to exercise caution while using the
above ratings.

The rating takes into account delays in repayment of debt
obligation.

Detailed Rationale & Key Rating Drivers

At the time of last rating on January 31, 2020 the following were
the rating weaknesses

Key Rating Weaknesses

* Delays in servicing of debt obligation: There were delays in the
servicing of interest on the term loan account. The delays were on
account of reported losses and lower accruals generation from
business.

Kolhapur-based, SVFI is a partnership concern established in the
year 2010 by Mr. RajendraMalu and Mr. GouravMalu. However,
operations commenced from the month of October, 2014. The firm is
engaged in the manufacturing and processing of Namkeen, salted
potato chips, kolhapuriibhadang, moong dal and salted chips under
the brand name 'Om NamoNamkeen'.



=================
I N D O N E S I A
=================

BANK NEGARA: Moody's Assigns (P)Ba2 Rating to Tier 2 Notes
----------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned a (P)Ba2 long-term foreign
currency subordinate debt rating to the Tier-2 notes component of
Bank Negara Indonesia (Persero) Tbk (P.T.)'s (BNI) euro medium-term
note program.

The rating does not apply to individual securities issued under the
program. The ratings of the individual securities will be subject
to Moody's review of their terms and conditions, as well as the
pricing supplements set forth at issuance.

The assigned rating is based on draft documents reviewed by
Moody's, which Moody's does not expect to be materially different
from those in the final documentation.

RATINGS RATIONALE

The (P)Ba2 rating is two notches below BNI's baa3 Adjusted Baseline
Credit Assessment (BCA), in line with Moody's notching guidance for
contractual non-viability subordinated debt.

The notching reflects: (1) the subordination of these securities in
liquidation; and (2) the uncertainty regarding the timing of the
write down, as they may be forced to absorb losses near (but
before) the point of non-viability as a way to avoid a bank-wide
resolution.

Moody's does not incorporate any government support uplift into the
rating, as these securities are intended to be loss-absorbing in
the event of financial stress at the bank.

Under the draft terms and conditions, the Tier-2 capital securities
will constitute direct, unsecured and subordinated obligations of
the bank, and they will rank pari passu with all other subordinated
debts classified as Tier-2 capital.

The interest payments from these securities will be deferred on a
cumulative basis, if the bank is unlikely or unable to meet
regulatory capital requirements.

The principal and interest of these securities will be written
down, partially or in full, upon the occurrence of a non-viability
event.

FACTORS THAT COULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OF THE RATING

The (P)Ba2 Tier-2 program rating will move in tandem with BNI's
baa3 Adjusted BCA.

Moody's could upgrade the BCA and Tier-2 program rating if the
bank's asset quality improves, as indicated by a material decline
in its nonperforming and restructured loans. A significant increase
in the bank's capital will also be positive for its BCA and Tier-2
program rating.

On the other hand, Moody's could downgrade the BCA and Tier-2
program rating if the bank's asset quality weakens further, or if
there is a material deterioration in the bank's capital.

PRINCIPAL METHODOLOGY

The principal methodology used in this rating was Banks Methodology
published in November 2019.

Bank Negara Indonesia (Persero) Tbk (P.T.) is headquartered in
Jakarta and reported consolidated assets of IDR891.3 trillion as of
December 31, 2020.


REJEKI ISMAN: Moody's Lowers CFR to B3, Placed on Further Review
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has downgraded Sri Rejeki Isman Tbk
(P.T.)'s (Sritex) corporate family rating to B3 from B1.

Moody's has also downgraded to B3 from B1 the ratings on: (1) the
$150 million backed senior unsecured notes due in 2024, issued by
Golden Legacy Pte. Ltd. and unconditionally and irrevocably
guaranteed by Sritex and its subsidiaries; and (2) the $225 million
senior unsecured notes due in 2025, issued by Sritex and
unconditionally and irrevocably guaranteed by all of its operating
subsidiaries.

All ratings remain under review for further downgrade.

"The downgrade reflects Sritex's persistently weak liquidity and
heightened refinancing risks given ongoing and material further
delays with its loan extension exercise," says Stephanie Cheong, a
Moody's Analyst and the Lead Analyst for Sritex.

The review for further downgrade reflects continued uncertainties
relating to its refinancing plans.

The ratings review will focus on Sritex's progress on addressing
its upcoming debt maturities. More specifically, the review will
focus on (1) the progress of Sritex's discussions with its lenders
to extend the maturity date on its syndicated loan; (2) the
progress of Sritex's discussions with lenders on new bilateral
loans; (3) Sritex's ability to renew its short-term working capital
lines that will expire through 2021; (4) Sritex's working capital
management and ability to generate cash flows; and (5) the
execution of any alternative funding plans.

Moody's expects to conclude the review within 60 days.

RATINGS RATIONALE

Sritex faces high refinancing risk given its weak liquidity
position and large amounts of debt maturing over the coming
quarters. Sritex's continued reliance on banks for its refinancing
needs leaves it vulnerable to funding conditions, which have
weakened amid negative sentiment on the textile sector in
Indonesia.

On November 2, 2020, Sritex submitted a request to its lenders for
a 2-year extension on its $350 million syndicated loan maturing in
January 2022. Its lenders had until March 1, 2021, an extension
from the first deadline of February 2, to respond to the extension
request. However, a definitive agreement for the 2-year extension
has yet to appear, which increasingly weighs on Sritex's credit
profile.

Concurrently, the company has been negotiating refinancing
arrangements with existing lenders to address any potential funding
gap. However, firm agreements are yet to be put in place.

Sritex's cash holdings of $159 million as of September 30, 2020 and
expected free cash flow of around $50 million over the next 15
months will not be sufficient to cover its upcoming debt
obligations of: (1) $350 million syndicated loan due January 2022;
(2) $65 million medium-term notes, of which $40 million has been
paid in the fourth quarter of 2020 and $25 million will be due in
Q2 2021; (3) $15 million of debt amortization payments; and (4)
$174 million outstanding under short-term working capital lines as
of September 30, 2020.

FACTORS THAT COULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OF THE RATINGS

Given the rating action, an upgrade is unlikely in the short term.
However, the ratings could be confirmed if Sritex successfully
addresses its upcoming maturities and materially improves its
liquidity and debt structure.

On the other hand, the ratings are likely to be downgraded further
if Sritex fails to put in place a concrete refinancing plan in the
near term or if Sritex's liquidity deteriorates further, either
because of (1) falling cash balances, (2) increasing short-term
working capital debt, (3) a loss in access to working capital
lines, or (4) if working capital fails to unwind over the next few
quarters.

The principal methodology used in these ratings was Manufacturing
Methodology published in March 2020.

Sri Rejeki Isman Tbk (P.T.) (Sritex), based in Central Java,
Indonesia, is a vertically integrated manufacturer of yarn, greige
(raw fabric), finished fabric and apparel, including uniforms and
retail clothing. The company's operations are spread across 25
factories, consisting of nine spinning plants, three weaving
plants, five finishing plants and eight garment plants. Net revenue
generated by the company's four divisions amounted to around $1.2
billion in 2019.

Sritex is majority owned by the Lukminto family (60.11%). Iwan
Setiawan Lukminto, the son of founder H.M Lukminto, has been the
company's president director since 2006. The family oversees the
day-to-day operations. The remaining 39.89% share of the company is
publicly traded on the Indonesian Stock Exchange.


TUNAS BARU: Moody's Assigns B1 Rating to New USD Unsecured Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned a B1 rating to Tunas Baru
Lampung Tbk (P.T.)'s (TBLA) proposed US dollar senior unsecured
notes.

The outlook is stable.

TBLA will use the net proceeds from the notes to fully repay the
outstanding $250 million senior notes due January 2023 issued by
its wholly-owned subsidiary TBLA International Pte. Ltd., its
Indonesian Rupiah denominated bonds due March 2023 (IDR1.3
trillion) and March 2025 (IDR200 billion), and a portion of its
working capital loans.

"The B1 rating on the proposed notes is in line with TBLA's B1
corporate family rating, as the presence of upstream guarantees
from major operating subsidiaries mitigates structural
subordination risk for bondholders," says Maisam Hasnain, a Moody's
Assistant Vice President and Analyst.

"We also expect TBLA will continue to demonstrate low reliance on
secured financing over the next two years, such that its secured
debt/total debt ratio will remain below 50% and therefore legal
subordination risk will not prove significant," adds Hasnain, who
is also Moody's lead analyst for TBLA.

RATINGS RATIONALE

TBLA's B1 ratings reflect the favorable long-term demand for its
dual-commodity business of palm oil and sugar. The company has an
established position as an integrated palm oil producer, with a
growing exposure to the Indonesian sugar industry.

TBLA has maintained resilient operations amid the pandemic, with
reported revenue and EBITDA in 2020 increasing around 27% and 20%
to IDR10.9 trillion and IDR2.5 trillion, respectively, from the
previous year, driven by solid demand and higher prices for its
products.

At the same time, TBLA's B1 ratings incorporate the company's small
scale of operations with volatile operating cash flows, exposure to
the cyclical nature of palm oil and sugar prices, and weak
liquidity.

Moody's estimates TBLA's cash balance and projected cash from
operations will be insufficient to meet its projected cash uses
over the next 12-15 months, primarily due to its working capital
facilities.

The company's short-term debt has increased considerably to IDR1.8
trillion in 2020 from IDR442 billion in 2019. TBLA initially drew
down on its working capital facilities during Q2 2020 to boost its
cash balance to mitigate any unforeseen operational risks arising
from the coronavirus pandemic. However, the company was unable to
pay down these facilities because of weak operating cash flow
generated during the year.

Moody's expects TBLA will maintain its track record of rolling over
its short-term debt, given its long-term relationships with major
domestic banks, which have continued to extend funding support to
TBLA even during the pandemic.

"We also expect TBLA will continue to take a proactive approach to
refinancing its large debt maturities. This expectation is embedded
in the current B1 ratings and stable outlook," adds Hasnain.

Moody's regards the company's planned US dollar notes issuance and
subsequent refinancing as a positive credit development, as it will
help extend TBLA's large debt maturities during the first quarter
of 2023.

FACTORS THAT COULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OF THE RATING

The stable outlook reflects Moody's expectation that TBLA will
effectively execute on its investment plans while growing its
earnings and rolling over its short-term debt maturities over the
next 12-18 months.

An upgrade of TBLA's ratings is unlikely over the next 12-18
months, given the recent downgrade.

Nonetheless, Moody's could change the outlook to positive if TBLA
(1) improves its liquidity such that its cash sources are
sufficient to meet its planned needs over the next 12 months, with
sufficient headroom remaining under its financial covenants; and
(2) generates positive free cash flow while improving its credit
metrics.

Specific indicators that Moody's will consider for a change in
outlook to positive include adjusted debt/EBITDA staying below 4.0x
and adjusted EBITA/interest expense above 2.75x, both on a
sustained basis.

Moody's could downgrade the ratings if (1) TBLA's liquidity
deteriorates, including any perceived delays in its refinancing of
its near-term debt maturities, a reduction in its undrawn credit
facilities, or a further reduction in headroom under its financial
covenants; (2) TBLA pursues aggressive financial policies,
including large debt-funded investments or shareholder returns; or
(3) palm oil and sugar prices or sales volumes decline, leading to
protracted weakness in TBLA's credit metrics.

Specific indicators for a downgrade include adjusted debt/EBITDA
above 5.0x or adjusted EBITA/interest expense below 2.0x, both on a
sustained basis.

The principal methodology used in this rating was Protein and
Agriculture published in May 2019.

Headquartered in Jakarta and incorporated in 1973, Tunas Baru
Lampung Tbk (P.T.) (TBLA) is a producer of palm oil and sugar
products. As of December 2020, TBLA was 28%-owned by Sungai Budi
(P.T.) and 27%-owned by Budi Delta Swakarya (P.T.). These two major
shareholders are equally owned by Mr. Widarto, who serves as
executive chairman of TBLA, and Mr. Santoso Winata, who is
president commissioner of TBLA.




=========
J A P A N
=========

TOSHIBA CORP: S&P Raises ICR to 'BB+' on Improved Earnings
----------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings has raised by one notch to 'BB+' its long-term
issuer credit ratings on Japan-based capital goods and diversified
electronics company Toshiba Corp. At the same time, S&P affirmed
its 'B' short-term issuer credit and commercial paper program
ratings. The outlook on the long-term issuer credit rating is
stable.

S&P said, "We upgraded Toshiba for three reasons. First, ongoing
cost reductions and stable profits, primarily from its
infrastructure business, will likely boost its ability to generate
earnings. Second, financial ratios will likely remain at levels
commensurate with the ratings as the company balances growth
investments, financial improvement, and shareholder returns. Third,
we believe Toshiba's management and governance have improved
somewhat in the past three years. It now has a record of
strengthening its ability to generate earnings and managing its
finances prudently."

Toshiba's drive to reduce costs and restructure its businesses will
likely improve its ability to generate earnings. The company has
lowered fixed costs and scaled down unprofitable businesses. Its
business profile is now centered on relatively stable areas, such
as infrastructure and energy. These factors have helped build
resilience to economic downturns, in S&P's view.

S&P said, "As a result, Toshiba's EBITDA will likely be about
JPY250 billion in fiscal 2020 (after our adjustments; ends March
31, 2021). The figure is down only about 10% year on year, despite
a roughly JPY90 billion dent from the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore,
we expect the EBITDA margin to remain around 8% in fiscal 2020, the
same level as in 2019. The margin is then likely to improve to
around 9% in the next one to two years, in our view.

"We believe Toshiba's financial management will remain relatively
conservative; it has curbed capital investments during the
pandemic. Even though free cash flow is likely to remain negative
due to weaker working capital in fiscal 2020, we estimate the ratio
of debt to EBITDA will be lower than our previous assumptions and
stand at about 2x, compared with 1.6x in fiscal 2019.

"We believe Toshiba's financial management, which balances growth
investments, financial soundness, and shareholder returns, will
likely mean its key financial ratios remain commensurate with the
ratings in fiscal 2021 and thereafter. The company is likely to
step up growth investments in fiscal 2021, but this will be
somewhat offset by recovery in its operating performance and cash
flow. We do not expect it to buy back shares in a manner that would
substantially hurt its credit quality. Its ratio of debt to EBITDA
is therefore likely to remain within tolerances for the rating, at
about 2.0x-2.3x, in the coming year or two.

"Improvement in management and governance over the past three years
has made Toshiba's creditworthiness more stable, in our view. The
company has increased its capability to generate earnings and
adhered to relatively conservative financial management, curbing
capital investments. We also think Toshiba's return to the Tokyo
Stock Exchange's first section in January 2021 underscores
improvement in governance and risk management. As such, we have
incorporated the improvement in our rating by raising by one notch
our assessment of its management and governance to fair from weak.

"On the other hand, we see a lingering risk that the presence of
vocal activist shareholders may negatively affect the stability of
Toshiba's management in operations and finances. Such shareholders
retain about 20% of outstanding shares. At an extraordinary
shareholders meeting on March 18, 2021, a majority voted for one of
the shareholders' proposals. We do not see this outcome directly
impacting Toshiba's operations and financial management." However,
when viewed in comparison with peers that have more stable
shareholder compositions, such confrontations could prompt
Toshiba's management to increase its risk appetite, while issues
between stakeholders, such as shareholders and creditors, could
take time to resolve.

Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors relevant to the
rating action

-- Strategy, execution, and monitoring

S&P said, "The stable outlook reflects our expectation that
Toshiba's profitability will gradually improve despite continuing
tough business conditions. It can achieve this by continuing to
reduce costs and generating stable profit from its infrastructure
and energy businesses. We think it can maintain a financial
standing commensurate with the rating by managing investments and
shareholder returns."

S&P might consider downgrading Toshiba if it sees a higher
likelihood of either of the following scenarios:

-- The EBITDA margin worsening to below 7% with no prospects for a
swift recovery despite cost cuts and business restructuring; or

-- Continued negative free operating cash flow or large
shareholder returns causing debt to EBITDA to worsen to above 3x,
with dim prospects for a swift recovery.

S&P might consider upgrading Toshiba if the proportion of activist
shareholders decreases significantly, and it believes the company
will manage its finances more prudently and further stabilize
operations. In addition, either of following scenarios would need
to occur:

-- The EBITDA margin rising and staying above 10% thanks to
increased competitiveness of its infrastructure business and cost
reductions; or

-- S&P come to expect debt to EBITDA will stay below 2x.

  Ratings Score Snapshot

  Issuer credit rating: BB+/Stable/B

  Business risk: Fair

  Country risk: Low risk
  Industry risk: Intermediate risk
  Competitive position: Fair
  Financial risk: Intermediate

  Cash flow/Leverage: Intermediate
  Anchor: bb+

  Modifiers:

  Diversification/Portfolio effect: Neutral (no impact)
  Capital structure: Neutral (no impact)
  Financial policy: Neutral (no impact)
  Liquidity: Adequate (no impact)
  Management and governance: Fair (no impact)
  Comparable rating analysis: Neutral (no impact)




=====================
N E W   Z E A L A N D
=====================

STA TRAVEL: Court to Decide Distribution of Refunds to Customers
----------------------------------------------------------------
Stuff.co.nz reports that STA Travel's liquidators are off to court
to decide how to distribute refunds to creditors owed more than
NZD10 million.

According to Stuff, Deloitte said it had secured "external funding
outside the liquidation" to cover the legal cost of applying to the
court for directions on how to distribute available money.

It was unable to say when the case might proceed or when any funds
might be available to 1000-plus creditors, some of whom were left
thousands of dollars out of pocket after the travel agency
collapsed last year, Stuff relays.

Stuff relates that Deloitte said funds received from the
International Air Travel Association (IATA) and a small number of
airlines were being held in trust until there was a court
decision.

"Various other airlines have advised that they are dealing with
affected customers directly and will not be remitting funds to the
liquidators."

Deloitte said it had previously told affected customers to go to
the airline they had a booking with to get an idea of their
position, and that advice still stood, Stuff relays.

Stuff says the delay in getting refunds resolved is frustrating for
STA Travel creditors like Heidi Myra who is owed just under
NZD10,000, and she is angry the issue was now set to go through a
lengthy legal process when Deloitte had already made it clear there
was little chance of recovering funds.

"The whole process since STA went silent in July 2020 has been an
exercise in hopelessness. Once Deloittes got involved it became
confusing and hopeless, stretched out to cause maximum stress and
anxiety."

Some customers who paid via credit card have successfully done
chargebacks to recoup outstanding money, but having paid by bank
transfer, Myra did not have that option.

"Some of us saved, and don't buy things on credit, and have been
punished for that."

                         About STA Travel

STA Travel, which originally stood for Student Travel Australia,
but was later rebranded Student Travel Association, was founded in
1971, and specialised in long-haul, adventure and student travel.

Jason Mark Tracy and Timothy Bryce Norman of Deloitte were
appointed as administrators of STA Travel Pty. Ltd., STA Travel
Academic Pty Limited, and IEP Pty Limited on Aug. 21, 2020.

On Aug. 24, 2020, David Webb and Colin Owens of Deloitte were
appointed as administrators of STA Travel (NZ) Limited, IEP New
Zealand Limited, and NNS New Zealand Limited.

In August, the Zurich-based parent company of STA Travel, which has
52 UK stores, filed for insolvency and appointed an external
administrator.

Swiss holding company STA Travel Holding AG, which is owned by
Diethelm Keller Holding (DKH), said that the COVID-19 pandemic had
"brought the travel industry to a standstill", Business Sale said.




=================
S I N G A P O R E
=================

GENTING BHD: Unit Placed Under Voluntary Liquidation
----------------------------------------------------
Chong Jin Hun at theedgemarkets.com reports that Genting Bhd's
indirect 52.7%-owned subsidiary Genting Singapore Ltd said the
latter's wholly-owned subsidiary Genting Singapore Aviation (GSA)
had been placed under voluntary liquidation.

theedgemarkets.com relates that casino and hotel operator Genting
Singapore, however, did not specify the reasons behind the
voluntary liquidation of GSA, which was incorporated in the Cayman
Islands.

"The voluntary liquidation of GSA is not expected to have any
material impact on the consolidated net tangible assets and
earnings per share (EPS) of the group (being the company [Genting
Singapore] and its subsidiaries) for the financial year ending
Dec. 31, 2021 (FY21).

"None of the directors or substantial shareholders of the company
have any interest, direct or indirect, in the above voluntary
liquidation other than through their respective shareholdings in
the company (Genting Singapore)," Genting Singapore said in a
filing on March 22 with the Singapore bourse, theedgemarkets.com
relays.

In general and in theory, a company's voluntary liquidation is a
formal winding-up process proposed by the firm's directors and
shareholders for reasons including the cessation of a company's
intended purpose to exist.

A company's voluntary liquidation does not involve the court, the
report notes.

According to theedgemarkets.com, Genting Bhd's business has been
closely watched against the development of the Covid-19 pandemic
and the outbreak's impact on the travel and tourism industry.

In notes accompanying Genting Bhd's annual audited accounts for
FY20, Genting Bhd said Genting Singapore was unable to estimate the
financial impact on Genting Singapore's results for FY21 as the
global Covid-19 situation remained very fluid.

theedgemarkets.com relates that Genting Bhd said in the annual
audited accounts filed with Bursa Malaysia on March 10, 2021 that
Covid-19 had caused major disruption to the travel and tourism
industry as the pandemic resulted in border closures and other
measures imposed by various governments.

"As part of the Singapore government's circuit breaker measures,
most of the service offerings of the Genting Singapore group's
integrated resort at Resorts World Sentosa, including attractions
and the casino, were temporarily suspended from April 7, 2020 to
June 30, 2020.

"The Covid-19 pandemic had a negative impact on the Genting
Singapore group's financial performance for 2020 as the Genting
Singapore group's integrated resort was built predominantly to
attract large-scale international demand," Genting Bhd said.

Genting Bhd, which has 3.85 billion issued shares, also owns a
49.5% stake in Genting Malaysia Bhd (GenM), the report discloses.



                           *********


S U B S C R I P T I O N   I N F O R M A T I O N

Troubled Company Reporter-Asia Pacific is a daily newsletter co-
published by Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Fairless Hills,
Pennsylvania, USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Washington, D.C., USA.
Marites O. Claro, Joy A. Agravante, Rousel Elaine T. Fernandez,
Julie Anne L. Toledo, Ivy B. Magdadaro and Peter A. Chapman,
Editors.

Copyright 2021.  All rights reserved.  ISSN: 1520-9482.

This material is copyrighted and any commercial use, resale or
publication in any form (including e-mail forwarding,
electronic re-mailing and photocopying) is strictly prohibited
without prior written permission of the publishers.
Information contained herein is obtained from sources believed
to be reliable, but is not guaranteed.

TCR-AP subscription rate is US$775 for 6 months delivered via e-
mail.  Additional e-mail subscriptions for members of the same
firm for the term of the initial subscription or balance
thereof are US$25 each.  For subscription information, contact
Peter Chapman at 215-945-7000.



                *** End of Transmission ***