₹8.50 Cr Collateral-Light Cash Credit & BG Limit Under CGTMSE Hybrid Model in Ambernath MIDC
A precision auto-component and railway vendor in Ambernath MIDC with ₹38 crore annual turnover was stuck at a ₹3.80 crore Cash Credit limit because its MIDC factory plot alone provided only ₹4.20 crore of realisable collateral value.
Published: 23 October 2026
Deal Tombstone #BC-2026-02Working Capital & MSME
Sanctioned
₹8.50 Cr
Location
Ambernath MIDC (Thane)
Lender Category
Public Sector Bank (SME Branch)
Pricing / Rate
9.40% p.a. (Repo EBLR Linked)
Tenor & Moratorium
12 Months (Annual Review)
Key Coverage / Ratio
CGTMSE Hybrid Security (85% Cover on Unsecured Portion)
1. Borrower profile & initial credit bottleneck
The company won ₹19 crore in new PSU railway and defence sub-contracts, requiring ₹6.00 crore in fund-based Cash Credit and ₹2.50 crore in performance Bank Guarantees.
The existing bank insisted on 100% immovable property collateral for any limit enhancement above ₹4.00 crore, which the promoter did not have.
Receivables from PSU buyers stretched to 105 days, causing the existing bank's 90-day book-debt cut-off to slash monthly Drawing Power (DP) by ₹1.10 crore.
2. How the file and cash-flow waterfall were structured
Re-built the CMA data under the Tandon Committee Second Method (MPBF = 75% of Total Current Assets minus non-bank current liabilities) and separated PSU government receivables for a 120-day book-debt cover period.
Structured the ₹8.50 crore sanction under CGTMSE's Hybrid Security product (available up to ₹10 crore per MSE borrower): the ₹4.20 crore MIDC factory covered the primary portion, while the remaining ₹4.30 crore uncovered portion was guaranteed under CGTMSE.
Reduced debtor margin from 40% to 25% on PSU railway receivables and lowered BG cash margin from 25% to 10%.
3. Before vs. after sanction comparison
Comparison of initial position vs. final sanctioned terms (BC-2026-02)
